A Review of Early Intervention Programs to Promote Access to Postsecondary Education
A Forum — May 14, 1999
The more years of formal education one has, the more, on average, one earns. More importantly, the earnings advantage or "premium" paid to the most highly educated workers increased during the 1980s and 1990s. And such trends have become conventional wisdom. People understand: who goes to college, and often which college and which courses of study, determines more than ever who has entrée to the best jobs and the best life chances.
According to Larry Gladieux and Scott Swail of the Policy Analysis Division of the College Board, the issue for education policymakers is how to equalize opportunities for postsecondary education. The most important message to policymakers and postsecondary leaders is to focus on student success, not just access – persistence in completing the degree, not just getting students in the door.
Gladieux and Swail present various statistics showing the disparity in college success both by income and by ethnicity, based on the chapter they wrote for The Forgotten Half Revisited. Low-income (below $22,000) 18-to-24 year olds attend college at much lower rates than those with high incomes, and participation gaps are about as wide today as they were in 1972. In the most recent cohort of high school seniors studied by the National Educational Longitudinal Study (1992), only one of five students from the lowest socio-economic quartile enrolled in a four-year institution, compared to two of three from the highest quartile. Meanwhile, the most disadvantaged students are more likely to enroll in two-year colleges. Thus, not only do students from disadvantaged backgrounds enroll in higher education at rates less than those of other groups, but their enrollment also appears to be concentrating at two-year institutions.
Postsecondary enrollments have soared during the past quarter century, yet the proportion of college students completing degrees of any kind has remained flat. There are wide disparities by socio-economic status and race in who actually receives a degree. Of students who began postsecondary study in the 1989-90 academic year, half received some type of degree by 1994, and about one-quarter received a bachelor’s degree or higher. More than 40 percent of the most advantaged students (highest SES quartile) received a bachelor’s degree or higher within five years, compared to only six percent from the least advantaged group (lowest SES quartile). And white students were considerably more likely to receive a bachelor’s degree within five years of high school graduation (27%) than black (17%) or Hispanic (18%) students.
Gladieux and Swail say that student aid is a necessary but not sufficient condition for success in postsecondary education and we have probably expected too much out of student aid. The ability to pay for postsecondary education has been the primary focus of federal policy, but there are more fundamental strategies needed to increase degree completion. First, education reform efforts aimed at increasing student achievement are essential so that students come to college with better academic preparation. In addition, postsecondary educational institutions need to be concerned about what happens to youth outside of school. For many students, a personal connection with an adult who cares and sets high expectations for achievement and college success is what makes the difference. Programs like "I Have a Dream," which promise college tuition to sixth graders, have been very effective, but reach only a small number of students.
The challenge is for public policy to leverage programs that work to a vastly larger scale. Upward Bound, Talent Search and other TRIO programs have been a companion to federal student aid policy since the Higher Education Act was first enacted in 1965, providing information, outreach, counseling, encouragement and academic support for students from the lowest socio-economic levels. However, these programs are estimated to serve less than ten percent of the eligible student population. And only a small proportion of TRIO services are dedicated to intervening with kids and their families at middle school or earlier. The new GEAR UP (Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs) initiative, included in the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act of 1998, is aimed at raising the educational expectations of students in high-poverty elementary, middle, and secondary schools and give them the skills and encouragement they need to successfully pursue postsecondary education.
Just as we need to reach kids earlier, we need to do a better job helping students once they have enrolled in college to persist and complete their degrees, Gladieux and Swail state. Again, the TRIO programs provide support here. But public policy, federal in particular, has focused too narrowly on access to the system. More attention and incentives should be directed at persistence among students who are economically and academically at-risk. Postsecondary education institutions must look at persistence as a critical issue and find ways to help students complete their degrees.
The College Board is planning on conducting a number of activities aimed at increasing awareness of the need for better preparation for college and outreach to students at earlier grade levels as well as the need for support programs for students once in college. The College Board will conduct a national survey of pre-college outreach programs and post a directory of programs online.* This survey will be used as a basis for a conference on emerging, innovative, and best practices in this field to be held January 9-12, 2000 in San Diego, CA.
* Some Things DO Make a Difference for Youth, AYPF, 1997, describes 10 programs to improve college access (pp 135-165).
This information is from an American Youth Policy Forum held on May 14, 1999 on Capitol Hill.
The events of the Forum are made possible by the support of a consortium of philanthropic foundations: Pew Charitable Trusts, Charles S. Mott Foundation, and the General Electric Fund.