Search

For 15 years, Sallie Mae has surveyed college students and parents of undergraduate students about their attitudes toward higher education and how they're paying for it. "How America Pays for College" explores education funding sources--from family income and savings to scholarships, grants, and borrowed funds--and evaluates trends in payment strategies over time. The report also identifies attitudes related to the value of a higher education and the steps students and parents take to make it more affordable. In addition to these themes, "How America Pays for College 2022" considers the college experience in an evolving post-COVID-19 world. It explores the expanding role of online learning, and how students prefer to learn. Sallie Mae has again partnered with Ipsos, a global independent insights and analytics company, to conduct this study. How America Pays for College 2022 reflects the results of an online survey, in English, with: (1) 953 parents of undergraduate students, ages 18 to 24; and (2) 952 undergraduate students, ages 18 to 24. The research was conducted between April 5, 2022 and May 4, 2022. [For the 2021 report, see ED615412.]

Private school choice policies have been enacted and expanded across the United States since the 1990s. By January 2021, 30 states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico hosted 67 distinct private school choice policies. Why have some states adopted and expanded this education reform while others have demurred? Which states are more likely to adopt specific types of private school choice initiatives in the coming years? We present the results of an exploratory empirical analysis examining which state-level political, economic, and educational factors predict past policy decisions regarding the enactment and expansion of private school choice in 49 states from 2000 to 2016. The results from our most preferred statistical model further predict which states are more and less likely to take action towards such policies in subsequent years. The political factors involving Republican control of the governorship and legislature, prevalence of minority students in the K-12 population, and share of private school enrollment in the state prove to be highly predictive factors in school choice adoption. The economic factor of a comparatively low state per-capita GDP also consistently predicts school choice policy adoption in our models.

Microschools, small schools that educate five to 15 students, have been among the most interesting recent developments in the K-12 reform world. Neither homeschooling nor traditional schooling, they exist in a hard-to-classify space between formal and informal learning environments. One of the most prominent microschooling networks, Prenda, was founded in 2018 in Mesa, Arizona's third largest city. It has experienced dramatic growth largely because of the way it attracts parents like those interviewed for this paper. It is no coincidence that Prenda's emergence and expansion took place in Arizona, which has been a national leader in education innovation for a generation. Arizona's cultural and policy environment foster and promote experimentation, diversification, and parental choice. The state's thriving charter-school sector students in charters--has developed an expansive, varied set of choice-based public schools. This paper explores microschooling in the Grand Canyon State through parent interviews, a review of decades of public-policy reform and K-12 political battles, and an assessment of student performance data. [For the main report, "Microschooling and Policy," see ED618730.]

School choice critics argue that choice programs drain resources from public schools and therefore harm students who remain in them. Because policymakers are tasked with balancing their states' budgets and ensuring that their public schools meet educational provisions in their states' constitutions, they are concerned with the fiscal effects of these programs. More than two dozen studies have examined educational choice programs' effects on students enrolling in nearby public schools. Researchers have conducted a handful of systematic reviews of competitive effects research and, more recently, a meta-analysis of this body of research. In each of these reviews, researchers conclude that students who remain in district schools after exposure to educational choice programs tend to experience modest educational benefits. But the question remains whether educational choice programs lead to higher costs for taxpayers or fewer resources for students who remain in public schools. This report summarizes the fiscal effects of educational choice programs across the United States from an analysis of 40 private educational choice programs in 19 states plus D.C. The programs in the analysis include three education savings accounts programs, 19 school voucher programs, and 18 tax-credit scholarship programs. The report also provides context by presenting basic facts about the size and scope of each program, in terms of participation and funding, relative to each state's public school system. It presents the facts on taxpayer funding disparities between students using the choice programs and their peers in public schools.

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), previously named the Veterans Administration, has been providing veterans educational assistance benefits, including GI Bill benefits, since 1944. The benefits have been intended, at various times, to compensate for compulsory service, encourage voluntary service, prevent unemployment, provide equitable benefits to all who served, and promote military retention. In general, the benefits provide grant aid to eligible individuals enrolled in approved educational and training programs. The newest GI Bill was enacted on June 30, 2008, as the Post-9/11 Veterans' Educational Assistance Act of 2008 (Post-9/11 GI Bill), Title V of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252). This report provides a detailed description of the Post-9/11 GI Bill. The first section describes participant eligibility criteria. The second section indicates a participant's entitlement to benefits and the period during which the benefits must be used. The third section describes the eligible programs of education. The subsequent section explains the eligible benefit payments. The final sections illustrate key links to other programs administered by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and current data on obligations and participation.

This First Look report presents selected findings about student financial aid during the 2017--18 academic year. These findings are based on data from the 2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC). NPSAS:18-AC is a national study of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled any time between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018 in institutions that can participate in federal financial aid programs. It is also a special Administrative Collection that was conducted in 2017-18 in which only administrative data from the U.S. Department of Education's data systems, institution student records, and other national administrative data sources were compiled to yield state representative data. Data were collected between July 2018 and September 2019. The main purpose of NPSAS:18-AC is to measure how students and their families pay for postsecondary education. Specific focus is placed on federal student aid given through Title IV of the Higher Education Act. Data used in this report are from about 245,600 undergraduate and 21,300 graduate students attending 1,900 institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The sample represents about 16.6 million undergraduate and 3.6 million graduate students enrolled at Title IV eligible institutions at any time between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018. [For the Summary, see ED614852.]

This Summary presents selected findings from "2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC): First Look at Student Financial Aid Estimates for 2017-18. NCES 2021-476." The full report is about student financial aid during the 2017-18 academic year. These findings are based on data from the 2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC). NPSAS:18-AC is a national study of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled any time between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018 in institutions that can participate in federal financial aid programs. [For the full report, see ED614851.]

EdChoice and Braun Research conducted its annual survey to gauge the opinions of the American public (N = 1,209) and school parents (N = 1,238) on topics like the state of K-12 education, their schooling preferences, choice reforms and the current pandemic--to name a few. Both survey samples are nationally representative of those respective populations. [For the 2019 report, "2019 Schooling in America: Public Opinion on K-12 Education, Busing, Technology, and School Choice," see ED600665.]

The "Professional Development Incentives for Oregon's Early Childhood Education Workforce: A Randomized Study" examined whether professional development incentives for the Oregon early childhood education (ECE) workforce members increased career lattice sign-up and increased education and training levels or workplace retention. The study found that sending emails encouraging career lattice sign-up had no detectable impact on career lattice sign-up or workplace retention. Sending emails about automatic enrollment in a scholarship program had no detectable impact on scholarship use, career lattice movement, college credit hours earned, or workplace retention. The findings suggest that low-touch interventions such as emails have promise for increasing training hours but are not sufficient to induce changes in career lattice sign-up, continuing postsecondary education, or workplace retention for Oregon ECE workforce members. The results have implications for future research, in addition to demonstrating how better messaging and supports can mitigate barriers to further education and training and how email campaigns can be leveraged for workforce communication efforts. This document presents the following three appendixes that accompany the study: (1) About the study; (2) Methods; and (3) Supporting analysis. [For the full report, see ED614624. For the Study Snapshot, see ED614625.]

Many states seek to increase the education levels of their early childhood education (ECE) workforce to improve the quality of care for children. Oregon encourages all ECE workforce members to sign up for a career lattice, a career pathway system that helps them determine goals related to increasing their education. The state also offers incentives for reaching specific steps in the career lattice and scholarships for college credit and community-based training. This study used two randomized controlled trials in 2018 and 2019 to test whether sending emails and offering different financial incentives to Oregon ECE workforce members increased career lattice sign-up and increased education and training levels or workplace retention. The study found that sending emails encouraging career lattice sign-up had no detectable impact on career lattice sign-up or workplace retention. Sending emails offering a monetary incentive at an earlier-than-usual step on the career lattice had a positive impact on training hours recorded but no detectable impact on career lattice movement, college credit hours earned, or workplace retention. Sending emails about automatic enrollment in a scholarship program had no detectable impact on scholarship use, career lattice movement, college credit hours earned, or workplace retention. Lastly, after participants were randomly assigned to study groups, the email campaigns were implemented as planned, reaching all intended participants, although the interventions ended sooner than planned because of a state policy change. The findings suggest that low-touch interventions such as emails have promise for increasing training hours but are not sufficient to induce changes in career lattice sign-up, continuing postsecondary education, or workplace retention for Oregon ECE workforce members. These results have implications for future research, in addition to demonstrating how better messaging and supports can mitigate barriers to further education and training and how email campaigns can be leveraged for workforce communication efforts. This information is particularly relevant for state agencies and education and training providers. [For the Study Snapshot, see ED614625. For the appendixes, see ED614626.]

Since the onset of the COVID-19 crisis, public colleges and universities have prioritized the health and safety of students, faculty, staff and visitors while continuing to offer an exceptional, affordable learning environment. Public higher education has been agile and responsive. In March 2020, the state system institutions transitioned more than 173,000 students from in-person instruction to alternative or online instruction, with limited exceptions for certain labs and practicums. These institutions added over 4,800 more nurses, doctors and other credentialed allied health professionals to the state's health care workforce during the COVID-19 crisis in spring 2020. This annual report reflects significant progress as a state system, continued commitment to excellence and innovation, and strong partnerships with common education, CareerTech, and the business community to meet Oklahoma's workforce needs. No other entity in state government drives economic growth and strengthens workforce development as directly and comprehensively as public higher education. There is no better investment to move Oklahoma forward in this dynamic, global economy. The following contents are included in this annual report: (1) Role of the State Regents; (2) Higher Education Update; (3) Strategic Direction; (4) Higher Education in Oklahoma; (5) Academics; (6) Financial Aid; (7) Student Preparation; (8) Economic Development; (9) Fiscal; (10) Institutional Highlights; and (11) Administrative Organization. [For the 2019 report, see ED609065.]

We provide experimental evidence on the intergenerational impacts of secondary education subsidies in a low-income context, leveraging a randomized controlled trial and 15-year longitudinal follow-up. For young women, receiving a scholarship for secondary school delays childbearing and marriage, and reduces unwanted pregnancies. Female scholarship recipients are more likely to marry a partner with tertiary education and their children have better early childhood development outcomes. In particular, we document a 45% reduction in under-three mortality as well as cognitive development gains of 0.25 standard deviations of test scores once children are of school age. The primary mechanism seems to be that more-educated caregivers have the knowledge and skills to safeguard their children's health and stimulate their cognitive development. In contrast, we find no evidence of a positive impact for the children of male scholarship recipients, who tend to marry less educated partners. Together, these results suggest a key role for maternal education in child outcomes. We also estimate the cost-benefit ratio for secondary school scholarships and find that the impact on child survival alone is sufficient to make them a highly cost-effective investment. [Additional funding for this study was provided by the JPAL Post-Primary Education Initiative and USAID-DIV.]

The early care and education (ECE) sector in New Hampshire (NH) is a complex ecosystem that must account for families' needs and resources, the capacity and availability of the workforce, and the costs of providing services. This ecosystem is also bolstered (and constrained) by local, state, and federal policy. This series of primers, titled the "Granite Guide to Early Childhood," synthesizes the widely disaggregated scholarship on child care in New Hampshire and compiles this work into an unprecedented accessible collection. These primers aim to provide a vital understanding of key factors involved in developing a high-quality, affordable, and equitable ECE system.

While research has documented outcomes for students served by promise programs, few studies have considered the behavior of institutions themselves in the promise era. A new source of revenue combined with larger and more diverse cohorts is likely to motivate changes in spending and staffing--decisions instrumental to student access and success. We employ complementary difference-in-differences and synthetic control strategies to estimate impacts of the first statewide promise program on these two outcomes. Findings suggest institutions diverted expenditures away from instruction, academic support, and institutional support toward greater institutional grant awards. We find no meaningful impact on staffing levels. While some institutional actions may further support the access and success goals of promise programs, the diversity of programs across the nation suggests not all may follow suit. This study should inform policymakers considering the full extent of outcomes of free-college programs and invigorate further research on institutional responses. [This paper was published in "AERA Open."]

In this study, I examined several ecological factors at play when students make use of test preparation. I first looked at students' usage of test preparation and followed that with an examination of the relationship between family income and test preparation use. Finally, I examined familial support in preparing for admissions exams. Many students use test preparation to increase their chances of admissions and scholarship eligibility. Compared to students from higher income families, students from lower income families reported notably lower rates of agreement that their parents or guardians had the financial means to purchase test preparation. This manifested in the rates of using private tutors, where higher income students reported using private tutors more than lower income students. This study also showed that students' perceived levels of support from their families increases as family income increases and that minority students from traditionally underserved backgrounds perceived less support than White students. As family income increased, greater numbers of students reported that their parents made them prepare for standardized tests. Additionally, minority students reported lower rates of being made to prepare than White students. Highest parental education was positively related to both the percentage of students reporting their parent provides the support they need to prepare for admissions tests as well as students reporting that their parents made them prepare for the standardized admissions test.

For 35 years, the mission of the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU) has been to Champion Hispanic Success in Higher Education. HACU fulfills its mission by: promoting the development of member colleges and universities; improving access to and the quality of postsecondary educational opportunities for Hispanic students; and meeting the needs of business, industry and government through the development and sharing of resources, information and expertise. HACU is the only organization that represents existing and emerging Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs). HSIs today represent 17 percent of all institutions of higher education that enroll 66 percent of Hispanic undergraduates. HACU serves its membership through advocacy, conferences, partnerships and educational programs, and offers scholarships and internship opportunities for students. HACU is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) association with a membership of more than 500 colleges and universities in the United States, Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico, Latin America, Spain, and includes U.S. school districts. HACU's headquarters are located in San Antonio with regional offices in Washington, D.C., and Sacramento, California. Following a message from HACO's President/CEO and Chair of the Governing Board, this report provides a status report on Hispanics in higher education and the institutions that serve them. Topics discussed in this 2020 annual report include: (1) Opening Doors to a Diverse Workforce/HACU National Internship Program; (2) Investing in College Students; (3) Preparing the Next Generation of Higher Education Leaders; (4) National Capitol Forum on Hispanic Higher Education; (5) Annual Conference; (6) Pre/Post Events, Special Events; (7) Sponsors and Partners; (8) Honoring Champions of Hispanic Higher Education Success/HACU Awards; (9) La HACHE de HACU/Donors; and (10) Financials. [For the 2019 report, see ED609565.]

The federal government provides financial assistance to individuals for higher education expenses in two major ways: tax benefits and traditional student aid (loans, grants, and work-study assistance). Since 1997, education tax benefits have become an increasingly important component of federal higher education policy. In 2021, 11 higher education-related tax benefits are available. The available tax benefits are a mixture of credits, deductions, exclusions, and other incentives. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimates higher education-related tax benefits will cost an average of $25 billion per year over the FY2020-FY2024 budgetary window. These tax benefits can be divided into three groups: (1) incentives for current-year expenses; (2) incentives related to the preferential tax treatment of student loan expenses; and (3) incentives for saving for college. This report provides a brief overview of the higher education tax benefits that are currently available to students and their families.

America's regional public universities provide the opportunity for upward social mobility, or the generational movement of wealth, education, employment status, social adjustment, democratic participation, and general well-being. A college degree is generally thought of as the ticket to social mobility for individuals, and collectively, higher education contributes to the nation's economic growth. AASCU institutions play an important role in social mobility as access points to education for low-income students, first-generation students, and students of color--historically underserved populations. This brief identifies institutional practices that appear to facilitate upward social mobility for historically underserved students. Several measures of mobility were assessed to select eight institutions for inclusion in this study. Each of the mobility measures has an access component, or the extent to which students of color and low-income students of color are represented, and a productivity component, or the rate at which these students graduate, attain degrees in high-mobility majors, or work in high-paying jobs (see the Appendix for the full methodology). Scans were then conducted using institutional and state websites, relevant publications, and policy reports to identify institutional policies and practices that affect social mobility. The scans relied on publicly available information. While this may be seen as a potential limitation, it is important that institutions make information about programs and policies transparent and easy to access. Where possible, follow-up interviews with directors of the identified programs and practices supplemented the scans to provide additional details unavailable through public documentation.

The Postsecondary Pathways for Former Foster Care Youth (PP-FFCY) study is a research project that focuses on the transitions of foster care alumni to and through postsecondary institutions. Through the Office of Community College Research and Leadership (OCCRL), the PP-FFCY project team is conducting a comprehensive needs assessment report that: (1) provides a descriptive profile of Illinois foster care alumni; (2) examines postsecondary access, opportunities, and supports for Illinois foster youth; and (3) addresses disparities in career and technical education (CTE) programs. This research brief provides an overview of programs and services that helps strengthen postsecondary pathways for current and former foster youth in Illinois. The report outlines a comprehensive review of the general and foster youth demographic profiles in Illinois, followed by an overview of various forms of student aid (e.g., national-, state-, and campus-level aid) available for foster care alumni, as well as a synopsis of the CTE program in Illinois.

In this impact study, Institute of International Education's (IIE's) evaluation team looked into the achievements and impact of IIE's trustees Scholar Rescue Fund (IIE-SRF) scholars following the completion of their fellowships. In doing so, the evaluation team explored scholars' post-fellowship impact through four lenses: (1) the IIE-SRF fellowship's effect on the scholars' skills and careers, including the professional relationships they established; (2) scholars' contributions to their professional fields through knowledge products and teaching; (3) scholars' efforts to rebuild the higher education systems in their home countries through teaching, publishing, contributing to public policy, improving institutions, and engaging their communities; and, finally (4) the impact that scholars who did not return home had through these activities on the countries where they live. To learn about the scholars' post-fellowship experiences and achievements, the evaluation team conducted an online survey with IIE-SRF alumni who completed their fellowships between 2003 and 2019. The evaluation team assessed how representative the survey population was of the overall IIE-SRF alumni population based on home country, year of fellowship completion, and gender. The evaluation team analyzed the quantitative data using SPSS quantitative data analysis software, primarily using descriptive statistics (e.g., means and frequencies) and some inferential statistics (chi-square test of independence, correlations, independent sample t-tests, etc.). Qualitative data was reviewed to identify salient themes across open-ended responses.

This interactive resource provides information on state private school choice policies specific to vouchers, education savings accounts and scholarship tax credits. It highlights the various ways in which states approach specific private school choice policies. It is worth noting that some states have more than one private school choice program. Hyperlinked data tables for 50-State Comparisons for each of the data points are provided. All data elements for a single state can be viewed by going to the individual state profile page.

This report provides detailed analysis of Nebraska's progress toward increasing its educational attainment. It provides the Nebraska Legislature with comparative statistics to monitor and evaluate progress toward achieving three key priorities for Nebraska's postsecondary education system: (1) Increase the number of students who enter postsecondary education in Nebraska; (2) Increase the percentage of students who persist and successfully complete a degree; and (3) Reduce, eliminate, and then reverse the net out-migration of Nebraskans with high levels of educational attainment. This summary highlights the comparative analysis used to measure and evaluate performance with respect to each priority. Throughout this analysis, the latest available statistics are analyzed in the context of 10-year trends. [For the "2020 Nebraska Higher Education Progress Report," see ED604667.]

Postsecondary education is widely seen as a necessity in the modern economy. Yet students at community colleges often face steep odds when it comes to completing a degree. Community colleges serve many low-income and first-generation students as well as students of color, all of whom must contend with many obstacles to success. At the same time, two-year colleges are severely underfunded, and therefore are unable to provide the level of personal support that many students require. MDRC and the Detroit Regional Chamber partnered in 2016 to create the Detroit Promise Path (DPP), an evidence-based student services program designed to help more Detroit high school graduates--among the nation's most underserved students--enroll and persist in college, accumulate credits, graduate, and potentially transfer to a four-year program. DPP builds on an existing scholarship program called the Detroit Promise, launched in 2013, which covers community college tuition and fees for up to three years of attendance. At the heart of DPP are campus coaches who help students acclimate to college, proactively reach out to them with help and reminders about tasks and deadlines, and offer a sympathetic ear to young people who may be grappling with personal challenges--all with the goal of keeping them in school and on track to graduate. This executive summary presents an overview of findings from MDRC's randomized controlled trial evaluation of DPP at five Detroit community colleges. [Additional funding for this report was provided by the Michigan Education Excellence Foundation. For the full report, see ED611769.]

Leaders at the Indiana Commission for Higher Education and the Indiana Department of Education are concerned about teacher shortages and want a better understanding of the teacher pipeline for the state's K-12 public schools. This study tracked 11,080 students who first enrolled in an Indiana public college or university in 2010/11, 2011/12, or 2012/13 and pursued a bachelor's degree in education at any point in college. Among those entrants 41 percent completed a bachelor's degree in education by 2017/18. Of those degree completers 55 percent earned an initial instructional license, and of those licensed, 69 percent entered teaching in an Indiana public school. Compared with the initial group of students entering education programs, students who completed a bachelor's degree, those who earned an initial instructional license, and those who entered teaching in an Indiana public school were less likely to be from a racial/ethnic minority group or to have been eligible for the national school lunch program in high school. Students who entered an education program in their third year of college or later were less likely to complete a bachelor's degree in education than students who entered in their first year, after other differences in student characteristics and the characteristics of the first college they attended were adjusted for. Students who received an Indiana 21st Century Scholarship in their first year of college or who received financial aid beyond their first year were more likely to complete a bachelor's degree in education, while students who received a Pell Grant were less likely. Finally, students who started at a two-year college and transferred to a four-year college were more likely to complete a bachelor's degree in education than students who started at a four-year college. [For the study brief, see ED610910; for the study snapshot, see ED610911; and for the appendixes, see ED610912.]