Many schools focus on recruiting a diverse student body. But, once the students arrive on campus, not every institution spends a significant amount of time on retention. Neglecting retention strategies means that fewer students ultimately graduate from the college and that shortcoming disproportionately affects minority students.
If colleges and universities want to see higher graduation rates amongst their minority students, then support after enrollment is the key. And here’s how it can be improved.
Changing the Student Population
Often, minority students can have trouble fitting in when a student body doesn’t contain a large number of minority students. While many institutions have diversity initiatives in place, they aren’t always functional when financial capacity are also a factor. One method for increasing the diversity of the population as a whole is to need-blind approach during the admissions process; an approach that had significant success at Vassar.
By eliminating financial status as a consideration, low-income, minority applicants may have increased opportunities for admittance as the school doesn’t limit the number of students admitted based on factors like the receipt of funds from the Federal Pell Grant. As the minority population rises, other minority students will see the college or university as having a policy of inclusion.
Student Support Services
Onsite student support services can be a major factor in overall retention. This includes access to no-cost tutoring programs, work-study opportunities, and even financial aid assistance.
Many students dedicate less time to securing scholarships after they begin their college experience. And educational institutions should consider this a shortcoming in their financial aid services. If costs can be controlled for lower income students through the acquisition of more financial assistance as they progress, retention rates can be improved.
By helping students find funding, they are less likely to have to work significant hours to help pay expenses. Most colleges and universities recommend students work no more than 10 to 15 hours per week while attending school full-time. However, low-income students may not have that luxury. As more hours are required, less time can be dedicated to their education. And, if the student ultimately has to change from a full-time class schedule to a part-time one, their chances of graduating degrade significantly.
Colleges and universities that fail to support the students they admit will see low-income, minority students disproportionately affected by the lack of options. But, by creating support programs that are directed specifically to the needs of these students can increase graduation rates significantly.
Bringing it Together
Educational institutions should consider it their responsibility to level the playing field during and after admissions. By removing the financial component from admissions, and adding services to help lower-income, minority students, colleges and universities can see graduation rates rise across the board. And, once a reputation for providing support is earned, the level of diversity in applicants will rise, helping meet any diversity initiatives that may be present. Ultimately this creates a win for students and for the institution, and many would consider that an ideal outcome.
It’s a well-known fact that a college education is becoming necessary for many jobs. Companies are listing bachelor’s degrees as requirements on vacancy announcements, automatically screening out anyone who doesn’t have the needed education. And as technology replaces the work of employees in certain traditionally unskilled labor positions, the number of opportunities for those with just a high school diploma only seems to shrink.
But going to college isn’t an automatic choice for many. In fact, what they are taught in high school about the college experience has a major impact on a student’s decision. So, what should we be teaching minority high school students about college? Here are some places to start.
How to Pay for It
One of the most intimidating things about going to college is the cost. Stories about graduates drowning in student loan debt are plentiful, making many hesitant to take loans even if they are offered. And, for students from particularly low-income families, just seeing the number associated with a school’s annual tuition may be more than they can manage mentally.
It is critical that minority students have a thorough understanding of all of the options for paying tuition. This includes everything from need-based government grants, such as the Federal Pell Grant, to merit-based institutional scholarships to private scholarship opportunities offered by industry organizations and charities.
Taking the time to teach minority students about what is available, as well as how to apply for these funds, can make the financial burden more manageable, or even non-existent. As financial barriers are removed, more high school students may be able to take advantage of the opportunities provided by a college education.
The Range of Options
Going to college doesn’t mean you have to pursue a traditional four-year degree. Currently, there is a looming shortage of skilled tradespeople like welders, electricians, machinists, plumbers, and carpenters. And that shortage means there are significant opportunities for those interested in exploring these careers.
Often, obtaining education focused on a skilled trade is less expensive than a traditional university education, and many programs can be completed in just a couple of years. In some cases, those attending classes can gain experience through apprenticeships, allowing them to work on their education while earning wages.
Additionally, many programs focused on skilled trades don’t require the same general education requirements as a four-year degree. That means that, if a student struggled in classes like history or literature, it is a non-issue for completing many trade-oriented programs.
Helping high school students understand that these options are available can encourage those who may think that a college education isn’t for them to reconsider.
There is Help for Struggling Students
Colleges and universities often have departments and services created to help students succeed. This includes access to tutors and study groups. Additionally, some college instructors are available outside of their classroom hours to assist students who want to learn but are having trouble grasping a particular topic.
Institutions of higher learning want their students to succeed, so there are mechanisms in place to help make the dream of obtaining a degree a reality. But students need to know that they are there when assistance is needed.
With the right information, more minority students may feel comfortable pursuing more education once they graduate from high school. By managing concerns about tuition costs, educational requirements, available programs, and the availability of assistance, the college experience may feel more accessible to everyone.
Talk about the need to make a college-level education more accessible is common. Everyone understands that a college education is valuable and that many jobs list a degree as a requirement for applying, so those without a college degree are missing out on opportunities. So, what does it take to make higher education accessible to a larger portion of the population? Affordability.
Understanding Affordability
There are numerous programs designed to help students pay for college. Some options, like grants and scholarships, allow students to access funds that do not need to be repaid under most circumstances. But these funds don’t make the college experience more affordable, just cheaper.
If something is affordable, it is considered within one’s financial means. And for many, the cost of tuition today just isn’t affordable.
The Affordability of Applying
A surprising barrier for many low-income students applying to college are the fees associated with the application process. For example, SAT, ACT, and AP exam fees can be substantial. Then, once suitable scores are earned, an additional fee is required for every educational institution to which they apply.
While many of these fees are waived for those meeting certain income-based criteria, the income requirements are often quite strict. Students whose families are slightly above the cutoff will find these costs challenging. That can mean that low-income households may only be able to afford for the student to take one exam, a single time. Additionally, they will be limited to the number of colleges to which they can apply.
By lowering, or eliminating, some of these costs, higher education can be more accessible to lower income households. They will have more opportunities to to college entrance exams, giving them chances to improve their scores over time, as well as the option of applying to more schools.
Improving Tuition Affordability
The costs of higher education have risen dramatically; at one point tripling over the course of three decades. However, the average rise in household income is comparably negligible. And that means that a college education has become less affordable over time, even though it is now considered to be a necessity.
Lower-income students who don’t find sufficient grants or scholarships to manage the majority of the cost will likely determine a degree to be outside of their reach. Even if loans are available, the amounts required may be too intimidating to students who are part of a household whose annual income falls well below the amount charged as tuition.
Even if tuition amounts can’t be lowered, the affordability for low-income students can be improved by providing resources to help them obtain as much financial assistance. Providing education about available opportunities and assistance in meeting application requirements will help student access more funding sources, and possibly eliminate out-of-pocket expenses.
Cost is the Barrier
Often, the primary barrier to any student and a college education is the cost. While tuition and fees can’t be eliminated from the paradigm, resources are available to help those most in need navigate these expenses more efficiently. Additionally, widen the requirements for free or low-cost testing and application fees to improve the chances that low-income students will receive suitable scores and be accepted into high-quality schools.
Earning a college education is something that is a double-edged sword for the nation’s youngest adults and for some of their parents too. Society dictates that some form of secondary education is an absolute must for lifetime success but the cost associated with earning those credentials is debilitating. The Washington Post reports that the average college student will graduate with $25,000 in debt. With over $1 trillion in outstanding loans, student debt outweighs credit card debt and is exempt from bankruptcy protection.
Some may say this is just the cost of doing business and that a few years (or decades) of repaying student loans is worth the cost in the long run. If a person truly values his future, repaying loans and interest rates are just part of proving his dedication. To each his own, and other related monikers.
But what if that mentality were flipped? What if there was no cost to obtain a college education and it was viewed as a basic right, much like the K-12 public school system? It seems that the knee-jerk response is to claim that the nation can’t afford it. The trillion-dollar college education industry, coupled with the lending companies that “help” finance these endeavors, would feasibly go under if students did not have to find, earn or borrow the tens of thousands necessary to prove they care about their career.
Perhaps that’s true. But how would the economy as a whole look if college student debt disappeared? Instead of taking the first, low-paying job that came along in order to desperately find the cash to start repaying loans, maybe students would hold out for the perfect job where their talents and education could be best utilized. Instead of the nearly 22 million young adults living at home with their parents, maybe those kids would invest in their own housing and start contributing to that industry faster. Parents who save every penny in order to pay for college would feasibly have more cash to put back into other aspects of the economy, strengthening whatever industries they touched.
When the facts are really examined, it seems that the only ones truly benefitting from the current higher education model are the institutions themselves and the companies that support lending. In the second quarter of this year, private lender Sallie Mae reported $543 million in net income. In 2013 alone, Sallie Mae has spent over $1.2 million lobbying against legislation meant to relieve some of the college debt strain. Much like the skyrocketing healthcare industry costs over the past two decades, colleges and lenders have been left to their own devices with improper regulations.
While an economy hindrance, the high price tag of a college education has very little resistance when observing the nation’s population as a whole. Colleges and lending companies have, for the most part, gotten “a pass” because the pursuit of knowledge is deemed a worthy one where price should never be considered an issue. Under the guise of a better-educated workforce, colleges and lenders have been able to get away with more than any other industry providing a basic, American service. What would the reaction be if utility costs rose that quickly, or the price of a gallon of milk?
For a college education to really have the intended impact on the individual and society as a whole, it needs to be affordable – or completely free. It is a basic American right.
Do you think a free college education system would have a positive impact on the economy?
There are not enough academic jobs vacant in Australia each year to employ all our PhD graduates.
This imbalance risks training an increasing numbers of doctoral students on a promise that cannot be fulfilled: that is future academic employment.
We need to accept a hard truth that Australia needs to rethink the design of the PhD and the expectations around it, or radically reduce intake to doctoral programs.
In 2015, Australia graduated over 10,000 postgraduate research students – the vast majority of these were doctoral students. There were over 65,000 research higher degree students enrolled at Australian universities last year with most full or part time PhD students.
The number of PhDs in Australia will continue to grow. Enrolments in higher degrees have increased by almost half since 2001, and although much of this has been through more international doctoral students, domestic student numbers continue to grow year on year.
Most of these PhD graduates do not end up in a career of teaching or research at a university, or even teaching or research somewhere else.
There are currently over 50,000 staff employed in full-time or fixed-term academic roles in Australian universities. The number of positions vacant each year is nowhere near enough to accommodate even a small proportion of new Australia PhD graduates, let alone those who completed in prior years.
If the majority of PhD students, then, do not end up in ongoing academic employment, are designs for doctoral program right? Are student expectations realistic if they enter the degree with aspirations for a teaching and research career as many, perhaps most, do?
The Australian government recently accepted the excellent report from ACOLA on doctoral training. This looks at many of these challenges. There are broad issues related to research training and the academic workforce that the sector must now face.
Rethinking the PhD
There is a real need to think about the prospect of academic employment for PhD graduates. Much of the teaching in Australian higher education is delivered by sessional staff at universities.
Australian universities now depend on sessional teachers, short-contract researchers and other casualised and fixed-term staff to operate.
Many universities wouldn’t be viable without these staff. But for most academics, sessional employment is not a replacement for an ongoing position, offering little in the way of development of career progression.
Sessional work itself is not a problem unless it shows that many doctoral graduates find this as their only option. Or if it shows that students are being set up with unrealistic expectations of their future prospects for permanent academic employment.
We risk an unsustainable academic Ponzi scheme. This is not just an Australian trend, the US faces a similar challenge for large numbers of sessional staff.
But thinking through doctoral programs is more than just about managing PhD candidate expectations.
It is about doctoral training in a mode which combines the apprenticeship model, learning how to research, with more formal components of the other areas of learning that work in non-academic environments.
They need to be able to leverage the broad range of skills acquired through doctoral training, such as project management and strong writing skills.
Many students contribute as junior researchers to projects. This is critical to student research training and the overall research effort. However, to ensure they finish their degree with the right skills set will likely require a more diverse set of experiences and training. We need to avoid at worst viewing PhD students as a cheap research workforce.
Redesigning the PhD in Australia is a big task. It requires an ongoing discussion about enrolling such a large cohort of doctoral students who will not work in academia.
In an age of the innovation economy and government focus on thinking past the mining boom, there is much to be said for doctoral trained workers.
They are a great national resource to be celebrated, where time spent in PhD research is recognised for the skills developed beyond an area of deep expertise.
But the decisions we make now about how we train PhDs will be with Australia for a long time. If we don’t change, we need to consider training fewer of them.
At Bridgewater State University, we have transformed how we report IT achievements to our board and stakeholders—resulting in more support for technology and improved staff morale.
By Ray Lefebvre
A few years ago, the annual IT report at Bridgewater State University looked like the reports you see on most college campuses: It was heavy on facts, figures, and charts detailing the number of tech support tickets we fulfilled and the number of file servers we installed.
It didn’t really communicate the impact we were having on academics, research, or campus life. It didn’t breathe life into the IT division’s accomplishments. It didn’t inspire anyone.
When I became Chief Information Officer and Vice President of IT, I decided to try something different. For our 2015 IT Outcomes publication, we picked a dozen examples of IT projects that had a profound impact on our campus community that year. We highlighted these success stories in a narrative format, focusing on the people these projects had affected and the improvements they made possible. This simple change has made a big impact.
We divided the publication into three sections: “Enriched Student Learning,” “Enhanced Communication,” and “Increased Efficiencies.” As an example of the impact our IT division had on student learning, for instance, we described how we had built and equipped a new Business Trading Room for our Louis M. Ricciardi College of Business, allowing business students to track and analyze stock performance and simulate trades. Our Business Trading Room, which includes a live stock ticker, 32 computer terminals, one 50-inch monitor at the front of the lab, and two 40-inch monitors toward the back, makes BSU one of only 120 colleges and universities nationwide to have such a space—and the only one in southeastern Massachusetts.
We also produced a companion video for those who would rather watch a story than read the information in text format. We distributed hard copies of the publication to our board of trustees, our president, our senior administration, and our IT staff, and we sent out a digital version (along with a link to the video) for our students, faculty, and administrators.
The response we got back was tremendous. By making IT success stories less about the technology itself, and more about the outcomes that technology enabled, we were able to put a human face on the work that we do as a division. The publication connected very powerfully with key stakeholder groups, who easily could see the significance of IT’s accomplishments on all aspects of our campus community. That, in turn, has resulted in more support for our IT division.
Reimagining our annual IT report proved so successful that we followed that up with a similar IT Outcomes publication in 2016, and I’m already thinking ahead to what we will include in our 2017 version.
When I travel to higher-education technology conferences, I bring copies of the IT Outcomes publication along with my business cards. And when I share the publication with my colleagues at other institutions, they all immediately see the benefits of reporting IT outcomes this way. Yet, no one I have met so far is doing anything similar at their own college or university. That concerns me, because I think campus IT leaders are missing a key opportunity to communicate the value they bring to their organizations more effectively.
By conveying the impact our work is having on the university in a more humanizing and compelling way, our IT division is building credibility with our president and board of trustees. When I share the publication at our cabinet meeting in December, I am not asked the questions I typically get about how we are spending our IT budget and why. What’s more, if I ask for additional IT resources, our board and president are confident they will see a return on this investment—and that whatever project I have in mind will be the subject of a future IT Outcomes profile.
I have found that our IT Outcomes publication also boosts the morale of our IT staff. It makes them feel connected to a greater sense of purpose. They get to see how they are making a huge difference on our campus.
Producing the publication is not a heavy lift. Because we take advantage of internal resources, we have been able to keep the cost to around $5,000—which is a small investment to make for something that has such a big impact. My hope is that people can see what is possible with limited resources. We’re a state university with limited money, but that hasn’t stopped us from being innovative.
We begin the process of compiling the publication each spring. Around March, I send an email to everyone in our IT division and ask them if they have any success stories in their department they would like to share. What accomplishments are they most proud of? I compare the feedback I get from our IT staff with information about successfully completed projects that I can view within our highly detailed Project Portfolio Management platform from TeamDynamix, and I identify 12-15 possible storylines.
We use a freelance writer to help us write the copy. I give her the storylines, along with the key people she should contact. I try to make sure that a faculty member, a student, and an IT employee are all interviewed for every story, so that each of these perspectives is represented.
Writing, reviewing, and editing the stories takes us into August. By then, we have started on the design for the publication. For the design process, we hire a student intern in our graphic design program for a paid internship that results in college credit as well. To produce the companion video, we rely on our Student Affairs division. The whole process takes 9-10 months. We try to go to press around November, so we can produce the first deliverables in time for our cabinet meeting in early December.
Focusing on the people and outcomes supported by technology, instead of a laundry list of tech upgrades, has been the main key to our success. But here are a few other lessons we have learned about communicating IT’s value to stakeholders more effectively:
Use multiple modalities. Make sure you offer several different methods of delivery. We print the IT Outcomes publication, we create a video, and we also produce a digital flipbook version that can be read on tablets, smart phones, and other mobile devices.
Make sure all stakeholder groups are represented. When you are communicating the value of IT, make sure you include success stories from students, faculty, and administrators. Every key constituency needs to see itself reflected in the successful IT outcomes for the year. That’s very important.
Looking ahead, we are trying to transition Bridgewater State University into a true IT service organization, where our IT division is focused not just on providing support but on offering an exceptional, technology-driven experience for every member of the campus community. Shifting that mindset involves communicating the value of IT beyond just the nuts and bolts of making the technology work—and our IT Outcomes publications are helping to lay the groundwork for this transition.
The number of servers installed or tickets fulfilled in a given year is meaningless. It’s the learning outcomes that people want to see—and the story of how technology has enabled these is what we should be telling. Communicating IT’s value more effectively, in a way that looks beyond the technology to the outcomes it supports, will help us get to where we want to be as an institution—and it can do the same for yours.
Ray Lefebvre is Vice President of Information Technology and Chief Information Officer for Bridgewater State University in Massachusetts. Before joining Bridgewater State in 2012, he was the Director of Applications Development and Enterprise Reporting for the University of Massachusetts Medical School. He also has more than two decades of IT experience in the private sector.
Malia Obama recently announced that she will take a gap year before attending Harvard University. Historically, American high school graduates have been less likely to take a gap year as compared to their European and Australian counterparts.
A study of “The American Freshman,” for example, indicates that only up to three percent of U.S. students are taking a gap year before starting college. By contrast, as far back as 2004, over 11 percent of Australian students were doing so.
As researchers at Florida State and Temple universities, we have individually and collaboratively researched the impact of gap year experiences for several years. Gap years are now growing in popularity in the U.S.
Should we encourage more students to take gap years? What’s the evidence?
Student distress on campus
First consider this distressing – and relevant – trend on mental health of college students.
Studies have shown that there is a “mental health crisis” on college campuses in the U.S. Students are flooding college counseling centers at record numbers.
At any given time, approximately one third of college-aged students across all campuses are suffering from a diagnosable mental illness, such as anxiety or depression.
College itself can add new emotional, financial and personal stresses, leading to increases in psychological distress among students. This is evidenced by a growing number of students seeking counseling services on college campuses.
The implications of these mental issues cannot be overstated. According to the Center for Collegiate Mental Health in a 2014 report, of the students seeking counseling services, more than 30 percent reported that they “seriously considered attempting suicide” at some point in their lives. This number is up from nearly 24 percent in 2010.
At the same time, faculty and staff are reporting that today’s students lack coping skills such as resilience and the ability to succeed independently despite adversity.
These observations are not just anecdotal. Evidence of students’ difficulty in finding independent success can be found in a recent study conducted by the National Student Clearing House Research Center. The study shows that only 52.9 percent of students who start a four-year degree program graduate within six years.
What does research say about gap years?
So, how can students take steps in order to better prepare themselves mentally and emotionally for starting college?
Research shows that a gap year – a year between high school and college – can
provide students the opportunity to gain personal skills such as independence, resilience, confidence and focus. A combination of activities during this year that involve volunteering, interning or working, either domestically or internationally, can provide meaningful experiences that challenge students outside their comfort zones. These experience can help students reevaluate how they understand themselves and the world.
Several peer-reviewed studies focusing on students in the U.K. and Australia have shown that students who took a gap year experienced a host of personal benefits, such as higher levels of motivation and higher academic performance in college.
Over 90 percent of all respondents indicated that their gap year provided important time for personal reflection, aided in personal development, increased maturity and self-confidence, and fostered the development of interpersonal communication skills.
Specifically related to college, 73 percent of respondents reported that their gap year helped them increase their readiness for college, 59 percent said it increased their interest in attending college and 57 percent said it helped them figure out what they wanted to study in college.
Students need more than cognitive ability
Gap year experiences have been shown to equip students to approach college from a place of increased mental stability. Research by one of us (Joe O’Shea) shows that gap years promote qualities such as resilience, tenacity and grit.
Another 2014 research conducted by the co-author here (Nina Hoe) that analyzed in-depth interviews with gap year participants also came up with similar findings. Thirty-seven of the 42 study participants reported gaining noncognitive skills such as sense of self, adaptability, confidence, gratefulness, patience, open-mindedness, maturity and grit.
Rigorous academic research has proven that qualities such as grit, self-control, growth mindset, gratitude, emotional intelligence, social belonging, curiosity and openmindedness are associated with all forms of success including academic, personal, financial and physical.
These qualities can help students weather the storms of higher education and make it less likely that they will encounter mental health issues.
In a study measuring the same personal and noncognitive qualities listed above, such as grit and self-control, researchers Angela Duckworth at the University of Pennsylvania and Charles Yeager at the University of Texas at Austin concluded that, “there is a scientific consensus in the behavioral sciences that success in school and beyond depends critically on many attributes other than cognitive ability.”
Not any gap year
However, one thing to remember is that not all types of delay or gap year experiences yield the same impact.
Gap years need to be properly designed so they can challenge students with new roles and perspectives that accelerate their growth as thinkers and citizens. Experiences that push students out of their comfort zones and allow them to explore new cultures and people from different backgrounds can create an impactful experience. They provide students an opportunity to reflect on a number of challenges and also allow for critical self-reflection that can root part of their identity in contributions to others.
Gap years need to challenge students and bring new perspectives. Global Citizen Year.
For example, as gap year students shared in O’Shea’s research, they get an opportunity to ask questions such as,
“Why didn’t I know my neighbors growing up, but the sense of community here is so much more intimate?” “Teachers here are using corporal punishment in classes; should I?” “Why are many girls not going to school here?”
In an ideal gap year experience, students get to develop actual relationships with people who are different from them. And when that happens, students can begin to see the world from different perspectives and learn about the complexity of social challenges.
What’s also clear is that a gap year can help better prepare students, emotionally and mentally, for both personal and academic success in college. Analysis of nationally representative data from the National Center for Education Statistics, for example, shows that overall, students who delayed college had overall higher GPAs in college as compared to those who did not delay.
With new understandings of the transformative power of gap years, we need to take steps to ensure all students can benefit from them. Expanding gap year education will help more high school graduates arrive at college equipped with skills they need to achieve both personal and academic success.
Gary Robinson, director of counseling services at Hartwich College, contributed to the piece.
Across the U.S., many soon-to-be high school graduates are excited to begin college. Over the past decades, rates of college enrollment have increased. In 1950, only 16 percent of young people had at least some college exposure. By 2012, this figure rose to 63 percent.
Such trends should be seen as a positive but for the fact that too many students who begin college don’t finish. Among a recent cohort of students enrolled in four-year degree programs, only three in five completed their bachelor’s degree within six years.
Further, socioeconomic gaps in college completion are large. Among students from high-income backgrounds who recently started college, three-quarters earned a degree. In contrast, under half of low-income students who matriculated earned any kind of postsecondary credential. Of particular concern is the fact that gaps in degree attainment have widened over time.
To address some of these concerns, Democratic presidential candidates have proposed improving college access and success for the most disadvantaged students including making public colleges and universities debt-free or tuition-free.
In our own research, we have investigated the many barriers students can face in accessing and succeeding in college. So, what does rigorous evidence tell us about potential solutions? Is a free college tuition policy sufficient for improving college access and success in the U.S.?
Over the two-decade period from 1995 to 2015, the average net cost of college attendance, inclusive of room and board, at public four-year institutions has risen from US$8,450 to just over $14,000. For families in the bottom fifth of the income distribution, this implies that sending a child to a public four-year institution would require over 40 percent of the annual household budget.
Providing financial assistance to low-income students does improve college success. Studies that have rigorously examined the impact of lowering college costs have indicated benefits. For example, the Florida Student Assistance Grant, which provides low-income students with an additional $1,300 grant on top of Pell Grant funds, increased six-year bachelor’s degree attainment rates from 21 to 26 percent. The Wisconsin Scholars program, which provides a $3,500 annual grant for low-income students to attend a Wisconsin public university, similarly increased on-time graduation for recipients from 16 to 21 percent.
However, at least one recent analysis should give policymakers and advocates pause about turning to universal free tuition as a strategy for improving college success. Matthew Chingos of the Urban Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, found that such a plan could yield disproportionate benefits to higher-income rather than lower-income students and families across the country.
Therefore, while such a policy may improve outcomes for low-income students, it would also be providing a substantial benefit to students who already have a high likelihood of accessing and succeeding in college.
Understanding challenges to college success
An important point to recognize from the Florida and Wisconsin studies is that, even among students who received additional grant funds, college completion rates remained low. How, then, can we improve rates of college success, particularly for those students at greatest risk of attrition?
To answer this question, we must understand the nuanced challenges that students can face, beyond issues directly related to college affordability.
Consider the challenges faced by one student, let’s call her Veronika, in starting her college career. We learned about her experience through ongoing research investigating the factors that contribute to college success. A very strong high school student, Veronika was a mother of two when she was admitted to her state’s prestigious public flagship university.
Although thrilled at the prospect of college, Veronika struggled to identify affordable childcare in the vicinity of the university. She wasn’t sure if she would be able to attend school while also caring for her children. She needed financial aid but also additional guidance.
Fortunately, Veronika received this support through a college success program with which she was affiliated. The program not only helped her locate affordable childcare near campus, but also counseled her to petition for an increase of financial aid to cover the cost. Her initial aid package had not considered child care expenses.
Another student, Marcus, transitioned successfully to college but retained responsibility for supporting his family financially. The dual demands of being a full-time student and working to provide for his family became too much. Marcus stumbled academically, was placed on probation, and lost his financial aid.
The same college success organization stepped in to provide just-in-time financial assistance in addition to guiding him to develop a plan that struck a manageable balance between school and work.
Low-income students need more than free college
How much of a difference does it make when students are provided more comprehensive support, including personalized counseling, and not just financial aid?
The Dell Scholars program aims to support low-income and first-generation college students by providing a combination of scholarship aid and “…ongoing support and assistance to address all of the emotional, lifestyle, and financial challenges that may prevent scholars from completing college.”
This support includes prematriculation counseling sessions as well as regular tracking of student progress and follow up, as needed, to guide and support students throughout their post-secondary career. We studied 1,800 Dell Scholars selected from nearly 40,000 applicants over six cohorts and attending hundreds of colleges and universities throughout the U.S.
We found the program led to substantial improvements in bachelor’s degree attainment. For example, for the cohort we could track for a full six years, the program increased bachelor’s degree attainment from 61 to 75 percent.
Experience from other scholarship programs
Other studies also point to evidence of college success through comprehensive college supports.
The program began in 2004 exclusively to provide need-based financial aid. By 2007, however, the program also provided students with additional counseling and support services.
The researchers found that the program improved the four-year degree completion rate for qualifying students by eight percentage points but only for those cohorts who were provided not just financial, but also non-financial support.
Similarly, at the City University of New York, the Accelerated Study in Associates Program (ASAP) which works with low-income community college students, provides support that includes financial aid, special classes, additional advising and career services, free public transportation and free use of textbooks.
Critics may argue that ASAP is too expensive, given that it results in substantially higher per student investment. Researchers Henry Levin and Emma Garcia have shown, however, that because the program so effectively improved degree attainment, it led to lower costs on a per-graduate basis.
Taken together, this work points to looking beyond blanket solutions such as free college tuition for all. Many students, and particularly those from low-income backgrounds, face challenges that go beyond simply meeting tuition.
Awarding such students with packages that include financial aid bundled with counseling and other support is likely to yield more success in improving overall degree attainment rates. In contrast, universal free tuition would invest fewer resources where they are needed and more where they are not.
Colleges and universities are supposed to be places where freedom of expression flourishes. Sadly, that is not the case. At a recent debate on the Yale University campus, 66 percent of the attendees supported a proposition that “free speech is threatened.”
Places of higher learning seem more interested in “safe spaces” rather than in freedom of expression. Several incidents across campuses illustrate this. Recently, at Emory, students complained after they found chalk messages scrawled around campus voicing support for Donald J. Trump.
Last year at the University of Ottawa, a yoga class designed for handicapped people was suspended because the student federation thought it was a form of “cultural appropriation.” And at Smith College a student sit-in blocked media from entering unless reporters agreed to explicitly state support for the movement in their coverage.
Illustrating how contentious the debates have become, two of the most respected American comedians, Chris Rock and Jerry Seinfeld, said that colleges are eager “not to offend anybody.” Some students at a private Ivy League school even signed a petition to repeal the First Amendment.
Ideally, colleges and universities would foster an exchange of competing and controversial ideas. The reality is much different. Some colleges and universities limit discourse by silencing speech that might offend others through so-called speech codes and free speech zones.
In studying free expression issues for more than 20 years, I strongly believe such polices have led to a chilling effect on speech. They also have led to a mentality where students do not wish or want to face an opposing viewpoint.
So, what are these policies?
Combating hateful speech
First, let’s look at speech codes on campuses. A speech code refers to a set of provisions or regulations that limit certain types of offensive or harassing speech.
Colleges and universities usually don’t call their regulations speech codes. Instead, they refer to them as anti-harassment policies.
It was in the 1980s and 1990s that more than 300 colleges passed these policies to combat hateful speech. Schools tried to address harassment of gays and lesbians, women and members of other ethnic groups. The policies were further enforced when white students wore blackface for sorority and fraternity parties. Many schools were trying to achieve more diversity in their student bodies.
The intent was good. Many of these policies sought to prohibit speech or conduct that created an intimidating or harassing environment on the basis of race, sex, religion, or other criteria.
However, the results were not good for the First Amendment and freedom of speech.
Policies at the University of Michigan and the University of Wisconsin were invalidated on First Amendment free speech grounds.
At the University of Wisconsin, speech codes were adopted following racial incidents. JanetandPhil, CC BY-NC-ND
At the University of Wisconsin, for example, university officials adopted the speech code after several racially insensitive displays at fraternities. For example, one fraternity held a “slave auction.” A student newspaper and several others challenged the policy on the ground that the policies infringed on academic freedom and stifled some legitimate speech. In UWM Post v. Board of Regents of University of Wisconsin (1991), a federal district court struck down the policy, writing:
The suppression of speech, even where the speech’s content appears to have little value and great costs, amounts to governmental thought control.
Similar problems occurred at Michigan, which had its share of disturbing racially charged incidents. At Michigan, a student disc jockey allowed racist jokes to be aired. University officials reacted with a speech code. The problem was that officials applied the policy to chill the speech of students engaged in classroom discussion or academic research.
A federal district court judge invalidated the policy in Doe v. University of Michigan (1989), writing:
While the Court is sympathetic to the University’s obligation to ensure equal educational opportunities for all of its students, such efforts must not be at the expense of free speech.
The problem was that these codes were not drafted with sufficient precision. Courts ruled that these polices were either too broad or too vague.
Overbreadth and vagueness problems
A policy is too broad if it prohibits speech that ought to be protected in addition to speech that can be prohibited. In legal terms, this is called “overbreadth”. For example, a policy that prohibits “offensive and annoying” speech sweeps too broadly and prohibits lawful expression.
A policy is too vague if a person has to guess at its meaning. Vagueness is rooted in the notion that it is fundamentally unfair to punish someone when they did not know that their speech violated the policy.
For example, the University of Michigan had a policy that prohibited “stigmatizing or victimizing” individuals or groups on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, sex, sexual orientation, creed, national origin, ancestry, age, marital status, handicap or Vietnam-era veteran status.
Students of common understanding were necessarily forced to guess at whether a comment about a controversial issue would later be found to be sanctionable under the Policy.
In its annual report, the group contends that nearly half of the speech codes at 440 colleges infringe on First Amendment free speech rights. FIRE contends in its report that “any speech code in force at a public university is extremely vulnerable to a constitutional challenge.”
Restricting where students can have free speech
In addition, many colleges and universities have free speech zones. Under these policies, people can speak at places of higher learning in only certain, specific locations or zones.
Free speech zones limit expression to a few places on campus. Penn State, CC BY-NC
While there are remnants of these policies from the 1960s, they grew in number in the late 1990s and early 2000s as a way for administrators to deal with controversial expression.
These policies may have a seductive appeal for administrators, as they claim to advance the cause of free speech. But, free speech zones often limit speech by relegating expression to just a few locations. For example, some colleges began by having only two or three free speech zones on campus.
The idea of zoning speech is not unique to colleges and universities. Government officials have sought to diminish the impact of different types of expression by zoning adult-oriented expression, antiabortion protestors and political demonstrators outside political conventions.
In a particularly egregious example, a student at Modesto Junior College in California named Robert Van Tuinen was prohibited from handing out copies of the United States Constitution on September 17, 2013 – the anniversary of the signing of the Constitution.
Van Tuinen was informed that he could get permission to distribute the Constitution if he preregistered for time in the “free speech zone.” But later,
Van Tuinen was told by an administrator that he would have to wait, possibly until the next month.
In the words of First Amendment expert Charles Haynes, “the entire campus should be a free speech zone.” In other words, the default position of school administrators should be to allow speech, not limit it.
Zoning speech is troubling, particularly when it reduces the overall amount of speech on campus. And many free speech experts view the idea of a free speech zone as “moronic and oxymoronic.”
College or university campuses should be a place where free speech not only survives but thrives.
Millions of Americans are struggling to pay for college. Nearly 10 million students and their families took out almost US$100 billion in student loans from the federal government in the 2014-15 academic year, pushing outstanding student loan debt to more than $1.2 trillion by the end of 2015.
The traditional way to repay student loans is to make the same monthly payment each month for 10-20 years, similar to how mortgages work. But this isn’t always the best setup for students, particularly as college doesn’t always pay off immediately in terms of increased earnings.
Newly released government data show that many students are having difficulty repaying their loans after leaving college. About 40 percent of students had not been able to pay any part of the principal within three years of entering repayment.
A new idea in paying for college in the United States is Income Share Agreements (ISAs), in which students agree to pay a percentage of their future income to a private company or lender in exchange for additional money to cover college expenses.
What is an income share agreement and is it a viable option for students?
ISA and past efforts
ISAs function similarly to certain types of federal loans, which allow students to tie their student loan payments to their income.
However, the amount that undergraduates can borrow under income-based repayment plans isn’t always enough to pay for college. The typical college student straight out of high school can borrow only $31,000 from the federal government for college with a current interest rate of 4.29 percent. This means many students may need to turn to expensive private loans as an alternative.
And here is where an ISA can help. Technically, ISAs are not loans since students don’t have to pay any money back if their earnings are not adequate. This means that if students don’t make money, they could pay back less than what they took out in loans. Instead of interest rates, lenders offer students contracts with the percentage of future earnings paid to the ISA provider and the time period based on a student’s major, year in school and amount borrowed.
ISAs have been in use in Latin America for more than a decade with providers such as Lumni financing the college educations of thousands of students. In the United States, there have been a few small efforts to introduce ISAs, but they have largely been unsuccessful.
In 2014, Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida) and Congressman Tom Petri (R-Wisconsin) introduced legislation for an income share repayment option, with a similar bill introduced in 2015 by Representatives Todd Young (R-Indiana) and Jared Polis (D-Colorado). Lawmakers in Oregon too have been pushing a similar program called Pay it Forward. However, none of these attempts worked.
Purdue plan
More recently, in a first-of-its-kind development, Purdue University launched an Income Share Agreement plan “Back a Boiler” (originally “Bet on a Boiler”) program to help juniors and seniors pay for college. This name plays on Purdue’s mascot of the Boilermaker, a vehicle outfitted to look like the 19th-century steam engines that boilermakers built throughout the country, which fits the STEM-heavy university well.
Under the Purdue plan, students would be offered a contract that would specify, based on their major, what percentage of their earnings would be paid and for how many years. Students can receive money to cover any remaining financial need after grants and scholarships, with payment terms based on the total amount of money needed.
For example, a student majoring in biological engineering and expecting to graduate in 2018 would pay 3.32 percent of her income to Purdue for 96 months after graduation in exchange for $10,000 today, while an elementary education major would pay 4.97 percent of his income back for 116 months after graduation.
Students who make less than $20,000 per year will not need to pay anything back. Their maximum lifetime payment is capped at 2.5 times the initial amount of money provided.
One size does not fit all
Although some students could benefit from ISAs, they certainly aren’t for everyone.
So, who should consider income share agreements?
In my view, income share agreements make the most sense for three groups of students.
First, students in need of additional funds beyond federal loans should consider ISAs as a potential option. Second, since ISAs are technically not loans, they may appeal to students who are particularly averse to taking on debt to pay for college. Loan aversion is particularly common among minority and first-generation students. So a product that doesn’t come with fixed payments might benefit these students.
Finally, not all students can access federal loans. About one million students attend community colleges that do not participate in the federal student loan program. Federal loans also aren’t available for educational opportunities such as bar exam prep for law students or “boot camp” courses designed to teach students particular skills outside the traditional college setting.
ISAs might be particularly well-suited to these types of programs that are closely tied to employment.
Not for high-income earners
Who might not be the right fit?
Students who don’t need to borrow beyond the $31,000 in federal loans for a bachelor’s degree are better off with federal loans.
This is particularly true for students who plan to work in public service fields and could benefit from the federal government’s Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, that can forgive debt not repaid after 10 years. The terms for ISAs likely aren’t as favorable, as private lenders may offer students contracts of longer than 10 years in order to at least break even. The 40 percent of students unable to pay down the principal on their loans are unlikely to get terms as good as with federal loans.
Students who think they’ll make a lot of money after college may not want to consider the ISAs either. ISAs require students to pay a fixed percentage of their income. So, they can be an expensive proposition for students who do really well even if the terms are better than for other majors.
These students would be better off taking on federal and private loans and then consider joining the growing number of students who are getting their loans refinanced by a new generation of private lenders, who are willing to give borrowers with successful careers loans on lower interest.
In theory, ISAs have a market, but whether students take up this new product will determine its success.
