Search

Like the federal Pell Grant program, need-based state grant programs are designed to increase access to higher education among low- and moderate-income students. A growing body of research indicates that adequate funding is a necessary but not sufficient condition for successfully achieving this goal. Aid programs that are easy to understand and to apply for are more effective than the same dollars devoted to more complex, less predictable programs. Consistent with this evidence, the federal government has taken steps to simplify the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and to make it easier for students and families to provide the required information. With support from Lumina Foundation for Education and assistance from researchers at the University of Michigan, the College Board undertook this study on the implications of simplification of the FAFSA for state grant programs. The goal is to quantify the potential impact of removing data elements from the Federal Methodology, including the assets that remain in the formula and all financial information not included on federal income tax forms. This study also explores possible strategies for counteracting the effects of these changes if states and/or institutions should find that necessary. The importance of a simpler application process led the Rethinking Student Aid Study Group, sponsored by the College Board and funded by the Lumina, Mellon and Spencer foundations, to recommend in 2008 that the federal government eliminate the existing form for applying for federal student aid and instead have the IRS provide the needed information to determine Pell Grant awards. Appended are: (1) Authors, Researchers, Advisory Committee Members; (2) The Study Population--Excerpts from State Reports; (3) Impact of Formula Changes on Applicants with Incomes of $75,000 or More; and (4) Tuition Trends. (Contains 3 figures, 26 tables, and 56 footnotes.)

Widespread concern about the high and rising price of college makes timely data on tuition increases in historical context particularly important. The increase in average published tuition and fees at public four-year colleges and universities for the 2012-13 academic year is smaller than it has been in recent years--and below the average growth rate for the decade from 2002-03 to 2012-13. But the news about what students actually pay is less encouraging. From 2008-09 to 2010-11, grant aid and tax benefits increased rapidly enough to cause the average net prices to decline, even in the face of tuition increases. Through unusually large increases in Pell Grants, grants for veterans, and federal tax credits, the federal government increased its role in financing higher education, relieving the burden on students. In contrast, the average net price paid by full-time students enrolled in public four-year colleges increased measurably in 2012-13 for the second consecutive year. Average net price also increased for public two-year and private nonprofit four-year students in 2011-12 and 2012-13, after three years of decline. Average published tuition and fees for in-state students at public four-year colleges and universities increased from $8,256 in 2011-12 to $8,655 in 2012-13. The 4.8% ($399) increase in tuition and fees was accompanied by a $325 (3.7%) increase in room and board charges for students living on campus. At $9,205, room and board charges account for more than half of the total charges for these students. Half of all full-time students at public and private nonprofit four-year colleges attend institutions charging tuition and fees of $10,282 or less; half attend institutions with higher published prices. In 2012-13, full-time undergraduates at public four-year institutions receive an estimated average of $5,750 in grant aid from all sources and federal tax benefits to help them pay the average $8,665 published tuition and fees. The students pay average net price of just over $2,900. State appropriations per full-time equivalent (FTE) student declined by 10% in 2011-12, leaving this source of funding 25% below its level five years earlier, after adjusting for inflation. Over the decade from 1999-2000 to 2009-10, the percentage of all associate degrees awarded by for-profit institutions increased from 12% to 19%. The percentage of all bachelor's degrees awarded by this sector increased from 2% to 6%, and its percentage of all graduate degrees awarded increased from 2% to 9%. Over the entire income distribution in the United States, real average family incomes in 2011 were lower than they were a decade earlier. The largest declines were for the families in the lowest 20% of the population. (Contains 14 tables and 52 figures.) [This paper was written with assistance from Charles Kurose.]

The recent focus on student debt makes reliable data about how much students are borrowing, how borrowing patterns differ among students across different types of institutions and at different levels of enrollment, and about changes over time particularly important. While total student borrowing has grown rapidly over the past decade, the rate of growth has decreased in recent years. The total volume of education loans disbursed doubled from $55.7 billion (in 2011 dollars) to $113.4 billion between 2001-02 and 2011-12. Over these years, the number of Stafford Loan borrowers almost doubled, while the average amount borrowed from subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford Loans combined increased by 8%, from $7,627 (in 2011 dollars) to $8,230. The growth rate in education loans from 2001-02 to 2011-12 was "slower" than over the previous decade, when the total grew 150%, from $22.3 billion (in 2011 dollars) to $55.7 billion. Moreover, the total volume of education loans disbursed increased by 64% in inflation-adjusted dollars between 2001-02 and 2006-07, and the growth rate slowed to 24% over the next five years. In 2011-12, undergraduate students received an average of $13,218 per full-time equivalent (FTE) student in financial aid, including $6,932 in grant aid from all sources, and $5,056 in federal loans. Federal grant aid almost tripled in constant dollars between 2001-02 and 2011-12, increasing from 20% to 26% of the total $185.1 billion in undergraduate aid. The number of students receiving Pell Grants, the central federal grant program providing funding for low- and moderate-income students, increased from 2.7 million in 1981-82 and 3.8 million in 1991-92 to 4.3 million in 2001-02 and to 9.4 million (37% of all undergraduates) in 2011-12. The composition of student aid is very different for undergraduates than for graduate students. In 2011-12, the estimated 25.5 million undergraduates received 51% of their aid in the form of grants, 40% as loans, and 9% in a combination of tax credits or deductions and Work-Study. For the 3.9 million graduate students, these percentages were 29%, 68%, and 3%, respectively. Total education borrowing, including federal student and parent loans, as well as nonfederal loans, declined by 4% in real terms between 2010-11 and 2011-12--the first decline in at least 20 years. However, the 2011-12 total of $113.4 billion was 24% higher than five years earlier. Only 2% of students who first enrolled in 2003-04 had borrowed more than $50,000 from federal and nonfederal sources combined by 2009. Over 40% did not borrow and another 25% borrowed $10,000 or less. (Contains 21 tables and 57 figures.) [This paper was written with the assistance from Charles Kurose.]

Essential to tracking student success at community colleges is the availability of solid data and commonly defined metrics that go beyond measuring the traditional (and limited) enrollment and graduation rates that these colleges report to the federal government. In particular, what is needed are metrics that illuminate what happens to students between the starting and the ending points: Where do they make progress? Where do they falter? Do they achieve interim milestones? These types of metrics can help community colleges and states more quickly evaluate whether specific programs and policies are leading to successful interim outcomes and also to determine where interventions may be necessary to aid students who lose momentum or show signs of failure. Prominent initiatives, researchers and associations have made it their prerogative to define and report such metrics as well as to redefine completion to include more types of students who attend community colleges--part-time students; those who first enroll in winter, spring and summer; and students who do not start in a certificate or degree program. Some of the key organizations leading the data reform effort include Achieving the Dream (ATD), Complete College America (CCA), Community College Research Center (CCRC) and Voluntary Framework of Accountability (VFA). "The Completion Arch: Measuring Community College Student Success" was conceived by MPR Associates and the College Board to consolidate the efforts of these initiatives by compiling a set of common metrics and summarizing the statistics in the form of national-, state- and initiative-level indicators of student progress and success. The indicators in "The Completion Arch" help fill the need for useful, reliable and centrally organized statistics on the academic progress of community college students. The indicators present publicly available and commonly defined metrics of the progress and success of community college students from the time they first enroll until they enter the workforce after college. In synthesizing hundreds of indicators from 50 states and dozens of sources--and collecting these data in a single place--"The Completion Arch" aims to be a comprehensive resource for a wide audience of college officials, state policymakers, researchers and philanthropic organizations as these groups strive to improve community college education. Appended are: (1) Primary Data Sources; (2) Availability of Indicators by State; and (3) Glossary. (Contains 25 figures and 2 footnotes.)

The College Board, NASSP and ASCA believe that the principal-counselor relationship is a dynamic and organic relationship that evolves over time in response to the ever-changing needs of a school. The goal of an effective principal-counselor relationship is to use the strength of the relationship to collaboratively lead school reform efforts to increase achievement for all students. The desired outcome of an effective principal-counselor relationship is to raise achievement levels for all students and ensure equity in educational outcomes. The tools provided in this toolkit are designed to help school counselors and school principals analyze and enhance key areas of their working relationship with the overall goal of increasing student achievement. The toolkit is organized in four sections: (1) Communications; (2) Trust/Respect; (3) Leadership; and (4) Collaborative Planning. These tools allow principals, school counselors and teams to: (1) Analyze the current status of key aspects of the principal-counselor relationship for each individual and school; (2) Develop ways of more effectively and closely working together as a team in an atmosphere in which all team members feel able to participate in open and honest communication; and (3) Improve student achievement by eliminating barriers among staff members that inhibit their effectiveness.

When the Commission on Access, Admissions and Success in Higher Education (subsequently referred to as the commission) convened in fall 2008, the educational landscape was facing a number of issues that the commission's members recognized as formidable challenges to those students who aspire to enroll and succeed in college. Summarizing the commission's 2008 report, "Coming to Our Senses: Education and the American Future," college and high school completion rates had dropped dramatically; the proportion of adults with postsecondary credentials was not keeping pace with other industrialized nations; and significant disparities existed for low-income and minority students. As such, the commission was faced with two key questions: What must be done to improve the nation's educational system, and how will individuals know if the changes that are made are successful? Echoing the findings of other key educational policymakers, the commission declared that it is critical--and thus should be a primary goal--that 55 percent of the nation's young adults attain an associate degree or higher. The commission further offered a 10-part action plan in the form of 10 recommendations. The commission noted that these recommendations are so important they must be measured on a regular basis to help us understand the state of the educational landscape in the nation and how it changes over time. This report is designed to illustrate the degree to which the nation is moving toward--or away from--taking the necessary steps for ensuring an educated and enlightened citizenry. Data Book is appended. (Contains 218 figures and 68 footnotes.) [For "The College Completion Agenda: 2010 Progress Report," see ED522548.]

State public policy has been an important tool for improving the educational preparation and opportunity for many communities. However, without concerted statewide efforts it will continue to be difficult to substantially expand opportunities to accelerate higher education attainment and workforce preparation. Over the next 15 years, the states will experience a profound demographic shift as the baby boomer generation retires. In many states, this process has already begun. Following in their footsteps in the workplace will be today's young people, an increasing number of whom are Hispanic. To ensure the high caliber of tomorrow's workforce and civic leadership, all states must act today to address the educational achievement of the fastest growing community in the United States--Latinos. The College Board, the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) and Excelencia in Education have come together to create "The College Completion Agenda State Policy Guide: Latino Edition." The guide is framed by the 10 recommendations made by the Commission on Access, Admissions and Success in Higher Education convened by the College Board and is intended to help policymakers generate solutions to the challenges facing Latino youth and their families so that they can prepare, access and complete college in greater numbers. The guide provides background, research and issues for legislators to be aware of, and promising state policy efforts to increase the number of Latinos in the U.S. who earn a postsecondary degree. Individual section contain notes and references. [For related report, "The College Completion Agenda: 2011 Progress Report. Latino Edition," see ED524574.]

When the Commission on Access, Admissions and Success in Higher Education (subsequently referred to as the commission) convened in fall 2008, the educational landscape was facing a number of issues that the commission's members recognized as formidable challenges to those students who aspire to enroll and succeed in college. Summarizing the commission's 2008 report, "Coming to Our Senses: Education and the American Future," college and high school completion rates had dropped dramatically; the number of adults with postsecondary credentials was not keeping pace with other industrialized nations; and significant disparities existed for low-income and minority students. As such, the commission was faced with two key questions: What must be done to improve the nation's educational system, and how will individuals know if the changes that are made are successful? Echoing the findings of other key educational policymakers, the commission declared that it is critical--and thus should be a primary goal--that 55 percent of the nation's young adults attain an associate degree or higher. The commission further offered a 10-part action plan in the form of 10 recommendations. The commission noted that these recommendations are so important they must be measured on a regular basis to help individuals understand the state of the educational landscape in the nation and how it changes over time. The commission also noted the importance of erasing disparities to reaching the nation's college completion goal. Latinos are now the largest minority group in the United States and the fastest growing population in the country. However, only 19.2 percent of Latinos ages 25 to 34 years old have obtained an associate degree or higher. The nation cannot reach its college completion goal without increasing college completion for this important group. This report is designed to illustrate the degree to which Latinos are moving toward--or away from--taking the necessary steps for ensuring an educated Latino community. Data Book is appended. (Contains 101 figures and 127 footnotes.) [For related report, "The College Completion Agenda: State Policy Guide. Latino Edition," see ED524570.]

This policy brief provides data on enrollments, prices, student characteristics, student aid, and completion rates at for-profit postsecondary institutions. The evidence provided in this paper is intended to inform discussions of the rapid growth of the sector in recent years. (Contains 4 tables, 5 figures and 3 endnotes.)

The published prices on which the analysis in "Trends in College Pricing" is based come from data reported by institutions on the College Board's Annual Survey of Colleges. This survey, which is distributed to nearly 4,000 postsecondary institutions across the country, collects a wealth of data on enrollment, admission, degrees and majors, tuition, financial aid, and other aspects of undergraduate education. "Trends in College Pricing 2011" presents detailed data on public two-year and four-year and private nonprofit four-year institutions for the 2011-12 academic year. Increases in college prices for the 2011-12 academic year reflect the influence of a weak economy and state funding that has not kept up with the growth in college enrollments. For the fifth consecutive year, the percentage increase in average tuition and fees at public four-year institutions was higher than the percentage increase at private nonprofit institutions. Substantial variation across states in pricing patterns makes national averages particularly difficult to interpret this year. California's 2011-12 tuition and fee increases of 21% at public four-year universities and 37% at public two-year colleges raised the national averages markedly. The increase for the public four-year sector was 7.0% excluding California, and 8.3% including it. The increase for public two-year institutions was 7.4% excluding California, and 8.7% including it. Half of all full-time students at public and private nonprofit four-year colleges attend institutions charging tuition and fees of $9,936 or less, and half attend institutions with published prices of $9,936 or more. In 2011-12, full-time undergraduates receive an estimated average of about $5,750 in grant aid from all sources and federal tax benefits at public four-year institutions, $15,530 at private nonprofit four-year institutions, and $3,770 at public two-year colleges. In 2010, average income was lower at all levels of the income distribution than it had been a decade earlier. Declines ranged from 16% in inflation-adjusted dollars for the bottom 20% of families, and 11% for the top 5%, to 3% for families in the 60th to 80th percentiles. State appropriations per full-time equivalent (FTE) student declined by 9% in constant dollars in 2008-09, by another 6% in 2009-10, and by 4% in 2010-11. In 2008, only 2.2% of four-year degree-granting colleges and universities in the U.S. (53 out of 2,401) accepted less than 25% of their applicants. Almost half of all four-year degree-granting institutions (1,144 out of 2,401) were open admission or accepted at least 75% of their applicants. (Contains 35 figures and 2 tables.) [This paper was written with the assistance from Michael Hurwitz, Kathleen Little, Kathleen Payea, and Anne Sturtevant. For related reports, see "Education Pays, 2010: The Benefits of Higher Education for Individuals and Society. Trends in Higher Education Series" (ED526357) and "Trends in Student Aid, 2011. Trends in Higher Education Series" (ED526356).]

"Trends in Student Aid," an annual College Board publication since 1983, is a compendium of detailed, up-to-date information on the funding that is available to help students pay for college. This report sorts aid into grants, loans, tax benefits, and Federal Work-Study assistance. It documents funding from federal and state governments, colleges and universities, employers, and other private sources. It examines changes in funding levels over time, reports on the distribution of aid across students with different incomes and attending different types of institutions, and tracks the debt students incur as they pursue the educational opportunities that can increase their earnings, open doors to new experiences, and improve their ability to adapt to an ever-changing society. This report presents the trends in student aid for 2011. In 2010-11, undergraduate students received an average of $12,455 per full-time equivalent (FTE) student in financial aid, including $6,539 in grant aid, $4,907 in federal loans, and $1,009 in a combination of tax credits and deductions and Federal Work-Study (FWS). In 2010-11, 46% of all grant aid (and 51% of undergraduate grant aid) came from the federal government. Ten years earlier, only 29% of all grant aid (and 34% of undergraduate grant aid) was federal. The distribution of subsidies from federal education tax benefits changed considerably with the introduction of the American Opportunity Tax Credit in 2009. The percentage of savings from credits and deductions going to taxpayers with incomes below $25,000 increased from 5% in 2008 to 17% in 2009. The percentage of savings going to those with incomes above $100,000 increased from 18% in 2008 to 26% in 2009. Total education borrowing, including federal student and parent loans, as well as nonfederal loans, increased by about 2% from 2009-10 to 2010-11. Borrowing per FTE student declined by about 2% overall, after adjusting for inflation. Lists sources. (Contains 1 table and 30 figures.) [This paper was written with the assistance from Michael Hurwitz, Kathleen Little, Jennifer Ma, and Anne Sturtevant. For related reports, see "Education Pays, 2010: The Benefits of Higher Education for Individuals and Society. Trends in Higher Education Series" (ED526357) and "Trends in College Pricing, 2011. Trends in Higher Education Series" (ED526358).]

In September 2007, the College Board formed the Task Force on Admissions in the 21st Century in response to a request from the Guidance and Admission Assembly Council (GAA Council) to more closely examine the high-school-to-college transition process. Each spring, at the conclusion of the college admission cycle, there is much discussion in the media and professional circles about the problems experienced by all involved in the transition. Students and parents complained about the lack of transparency in the process; the confusing nature of the application process; how difficult it was to secure good information about college choice and how the outcomes were unpredictable and sometimes appeared to defy logic. School counselors expressed similar concerns regarding process and outcomes, and they empathized with their students. Colleges and universities lamented the increased pressure to review a growing number of applications from students who appeared to be filing larger numbers of applications. The students also seemed to be driven to a higher level of self-promotion beyond what was required in the application process, as a response to exert more control over what they (the students) perceived to be an increasingly complex, unpredictable and opaque process. The GAA Council was concerned that these conditions were a potential threat to access to higher education for all students. The intent of this study is to determine which part or parts of the application process are complex and cause the most significant levels of confusion and anxiety for students. The intent is also to determine if outcomes vary across subgroups of the college-bound population. For 18 months, the Task Force on Admissions in the 21st Century examined many factors and influences that make up the secondary-school-to-college transition. The outcome of the task force was an overarching framework for the profession to approach solutions as a profession "at its best." It held that the school-to-college transition should be seen as a learning opportunity, "At its best, admission is about "fit" between student and institution." Anything that interfered with that process, including unnecessary complexity, was undesirable and a barrier to access. The task force also set forth seven action commitments, including the need to create professional development materials that addressed 10 core areas of concern, among them "complexity in the admission and financial aid process." A research design was developed to explore the basic elements of the actual college application process (as distinct from financial aid, which was being explored by a separate and simultaneous quantitative research effort). The focus of the research, described in detail herein, was to measure student and parent perceptions of the complexity of the process and to segment the research group by geography, level of family experience with postsecondary education, race/ethnicity and income. This report contains the finding of this first phase of the research. The results of the research will be used to inform the profession--principally admission officers and school counselors--and help shape the responses to the needs of students and their parents with a clearer understanding of their experience with the school-to-college transition process. The findings provide a better understanding of which student and parent subgroups find the process the most complex and why, and how it can be made less complex to remove potential barriers to access to higher education for all students. (Contains 18 tables and 26 figures.) [This report was commissioned by the Task Force on Admissions in the 21st Century.]

There are formidable challenges at every level of the system that confront students who aspire to enroll and succeed in college. In 2007, the College Board formed the Commission on Access, Admissions and Success in Higher Education to study the educational pipeline as a single continuum and identify solutions to increase the number of students who graduate from college and are prepared to succeed in the 21st century. The commission found that a "torrent of American talent and human potential entering the educational pipeline is reduced to a trickle 16 years later as it moves through the K-16 system." In short, too many students fall through the cracks at each point of the P-16 pipeline. Led by William "Brit" Kirwan, chancellor of the University System of Maryland, the commission established 10 interdependent recommendations to reach its goal of ensuring that at least 55 percent of Americans hold a postsecondary degree by 2025. The College Board and the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) joined together to produce a practical policy guide for state legislators to pursue each of the commission's recommendations. The guide acts as a road map toward increasing the number of Americans who attain a postsecondary degree and empowering legislators to be an even more positive and active force. The College Board and NCSL have identified coauthors in their respective organizations with policy and practice expertise in each recommendation area to create the individual chapters of this State Policy Guide. Each chapter of this guide includes: (1) Brief background information on the topic; (2) A list of questions that state legislators need to ask about conditions in their own states; (3) An overview of current and relevant research; (4) Specific strategies for dealing with the problems; (5) The cost implications of the policy strategies (including low- , medium- and high-cost options); (6) Examples of policies that are currently being implemented in the states; and (7) Short- , medium- and long-term action steps state legislators can take. Individual sections contain figures, notes and references.

When the Commission on Access, Admissions and Success in Higher Education (subsequently referred to as the commission) convened in the fall of 2008, the educational landscape included a number of issues that the commission's members recognized as formidable challenges to those students who aspire to enroll and succeed in college. The Commission's 2008 report, "Coming to Our Senses: Education and the American Future," painted a disheartening portrait of recent trends in education: college and high school completion ranking had dropped dramatically; the proportion of adults with postsecondary credentials was not keeping pace with growth in other industrialized nations; and significant disparities existed for low-income and minority students. As such, the commission faced two key questions: What must be done to improve the nation's education system, and how will individuals know if the changes that are made are successful? Echoing the findings of other key educational policymakers, the commission declared that it is critical--and thus should be a primary goal--that 55 percent of the nation's young adults attain an associate degree or higher. The commission offered a 10-part action plan in the form of 10 recommendations. The purpose of this document is to measure or demonstrate the need to establish an appropriate measure of the commission's goal and recommendations. The measures identified in this report are meant to give some indication of the current status and future changes that impact the goal and recommendations. Data book is appended. (Contains 128 figures and 59 footnotes.)

Students who attend institutions of higher education obtain a wide range of personal, financial, and other lifelong benefits; likewise, taxpayers and society as a whole derive a multitude of direct and indirect benefits when citizens have access to postsecondary education. Accordingly, uneven rates of participation in higher education across different segments of U.S. society should be a matter of urgent concern not only to the individuals directly affected, but also to public policymakers at the federal, state, and local levels. This report presents detailed evidence of the private and public benefits of higher education. It also sheds light on the distribution of these benefits by examining both the increases and the persistent disparities in college participation and completion. (Contains 48 figures.) [For related reports, see "Trends in Student Aid, 2011. Trends in Higher Education Series" (ED526356) and "Trends in College Pricing, 2011. Trends in Higher Education Series" (ED526358).]