1 / 17

Nick Hillman Assistant Professor Educational Leadership & Policy University of Utah

Economic diversity among selective colleges: measuring the enrollment impact of “ no-loan” programs. Nick Hillman Assistant Professor Educational Leadership & Policy University of Utah. Purpose.

halima
Télécharger la présentation

Nick Hillman Assistant Professor Educational Leadership & Policy University of Utah

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Economic diversity among selective colleges: measuring the enrollment impact of “no-loan” programs Nick Hillman Assistant Professor Educational Leadership & Policy University of Utah

  2. Purpose Given the mismatch between low-income students’ academic achievement and their educational destinations, I wondered if no-loan programs might be a promising solution (or part of the problem) of reducing socio-economic stratification in highly-selective postsecondary education. Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  3. Defining “no-loan” programs • Replace (or significantly reduce) loans with grantsin students financial aid packages • Institutional grant aid, could be funded or unfunded • Loan Replacement Grants (Lips, 2011) • No-loan vs. loan cap • Institutional discretion over how they allocate these resources Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  4. Number of institutions adopting “no-loan” programs 69 total: 44 private four-year 25 public four-year Senate hearings on endowment spending (5% payout) Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  5. Distribution of “no-loan” programs by state Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  6. Common attributes • No-loan institutions tend to be characterized as follows: • Low socio-economic diversity • Highly selective admissions standards • High SAT scores • High tuition, high aid pricing models • Extremely wealthy (privates in particular) Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  7. Low Pell enrollments, high selectivity Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  8. Low Pell enrollments, high SAT scores Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  9. High tuition, high aid pricing models $- $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 All public $6,268 Average tuition four-year Average institutional colleges and $1,379 grant aid per universities undergraduate Public no-loan $8,203 colleges and $3,178 universities All private $23,251 four-year colleges and $7,876 universities Private no-loan $37,509 colleges and $22,491 universities Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  10. Extremely wealthy (Total endowment values, $billions, 2008) Public no - loan institutions, $21.2 n=25 All other public four year colleges, Private n=461 no-loan $42.4 institutions, $138.0 n=44 All other private four year colleges, n=889 $78.2 Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  11. Design and implementation of no-loan programs • No all institutions target to “low-income” students • All publics target to “low” and “low to moderate” income groups • See Lips (2011) for more details n=16 n=19 n=27 Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

  12. Research design • Data sources • IPEDS • Pell enrollment files • 2002 to 2009 • Analytical technique • Fixed effects regression • Difference-in-differences • Comparison groups • 50% selectivity • $100,000/FTE endow. • Public flagship • Outcome variable • Percent of undergraduates receiving Pell Grants • Controls • Endowment per FTE, tuition, minority enrollment, SAT scores, undergraduate enrollment, duration of no-loan program Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact| Recommendations

  13. Key findings Both sectors Public sector Private sector Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact| Recommendations

  14. Recommendations • Targeteligibility to Pell-eligible students • Actively publicizethe programs and reach out to low-income students • Avoid “skimming” to increase socio-economic diversity • Federal/state incentive to encourage more colleges to adopt similar programs Origins| Characteristics | Design | Impact| Recommendations

  15. Thank you! Copies, data sources, and additional information available by request. Look for forthcoming Institute for Higher Education Policy report. Nick Hillman nick.hillman@utah.edu

  16. Additional material:Characteristics of no-loan institutions and their comparison groups

More Related