Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

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

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Economic diversity among selective colleges: measuring the enrollment impact of “no-loan” programs Nick Hillman Assistant Professor Educational Leadership."— 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 1

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. 2 Origins | Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

3 Defining “no-loan” programs Replace (or significantly reduce) loans with grants in 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 3 Origins | Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

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

5 Distribution of “no-loan” programs by state 5 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) 6 Origins | Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

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

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

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

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

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 11 Origins | Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations n=19 n=27 n=16

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 12 Origins | Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations

13 Key findings 13 Origins | Characteristics | Design | Impact | Recommendations Both sectorsPublic sectorPrivate sector # of casesBoth sectorsPublic sectorPrivate sector No-loan Comparison632934

14 Recommendations Target eligibility to Pell-eligible students Actively publicize the 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 14 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 15

16 Additional material: Characteristics of no-loan institutions and their comparison groups 16 Public and private sectors, combinedNo-loan collegesComparison colleges Percent of undergraduates receiving Pell15.6%20.3% Endowment assets per undergraduate$489,556.7$142,578.1 Published tuition and fees$23,839.0$20,365.4 Institutional grant aid per undergraduate$12,366.0$8,919.1 Percent of undergraduates who are non-white35.3%30.7% Median combined (verbal and math) SAT score1,396.71,318.5 Percent of applicants rejected (selectivity)57.6%45.9% Total undergraduate enrollment11, ,457.4 Number of institutions in analysis5263 Private four-year sectorNo-loan collegesComparison colleges Percent of undergraduates receiving Pell12.4%17.8% Endowment assets per undergraduate$767,109.2$244,071.7 Published tuition and fees$34,160.8$32,234.9 Institutional grant aid per undergraduate$18,226.3$14,499.8 Percent of undergraduates who are non-white39.7%35.5% Median combined (verbal and math) SAT score1,474.31,386.9 Percent of applicants rejected (selectivity)71.5%61.3% Total undergraduate enrollment4,570.64,469.3 Number of institutions in analysis3534 Public four-year sectorNo-loan collegesComparison colleges Percent of undergraduates receiving Pell20.8%23.3% Endowment assets per undergraduate$38,534.0$24,023.0 Published tuition and fees$7,066.0$6,449.5 Institutional grant aid per undergraduate$2,793.0$2,400.3 Percent of undergraduates who are non-white28.3%25.1% Median combined (verbal and math) SAT score1,270.51,238.3 Percent of applicants rejected (selectivity)35.0%27.8% Total undergraduate enrollment21, ,620.3 Number of institutions in analysis1729

17 17 No-loan institutions by state StatePublicPrivate ArizonaArizona State University, University of Arizona California California Institute of Technology, Claremont McKenna College, Pomona College, Stanford University Connecticut Fairfield University, Sacred Heard University, Wesleyan University, Yale University Florida*University of Florida Georgia*Georgia Institute of TechnologyEmory University IowaGrinnell College IllinoisNorthern Illinois University, University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign)Northwestern University, University of Chicago IndianaIndiana University (Bloomington) Kentucky*University of Louisville Massachusetts* Amherst College, Boston University, Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Tufts University, Wellesley College, Williams College MarylandUniversity of Maryland (College Park) MaineBowdoin College Michigan*University of Michigan, Michigan State University MinnesotaCarleton College North Carolina Appalachian State University, North Carolina State University (Raleigh), University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) Davidson College, Duke University New HampshireDartmouth College New JerseyPrinceton University New YorkColumbia University, Cornell University, Vassar College OhioMiami UniversityOberlin College Pennsylvania Haverford College, Lafayette College, Lehigh University, Swarthmore College, University of Pennsylvania Rhode IslandBrown University Tennessee*University of Tennessee (Knoxville)Bryan College, Vanderbilt University Texas Lamar University, Texas A&M University, Texas State University (San Marcos) Rice University VirginiaCollege of William and Mary, University of VirginiaWashington and Lee University VermontUniversity of Vermont WashingtonUniversity of Washington (Seattle) Note: States with broad-based state merit aid programs are denoted with an asterisk Source: Adapted from Kantrowitz (2011), Lips (2011), and Project on Student Debt (2011), Zhang and Ness (2010)


Download ppt "Economic diversity among selective colleges: measuring the enrollment impact of “no-loan” programs Nick Hillman Assistant Professor Educational Leadership."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google