236. Unstack the Odds--Access Programs, Part 1

Unstack the Odds: Help All Kids Access College—and Graduate!

by

Joe Rottenborn

Executive Director, Mahoning Valley College Access Program (MVCAP)

16. Access Programs, Part 1

As Susan Choy stated in her 2002 study, “To make it to a four-year college, students must complete five steps, usually in this order:

• Aspire to college.

• Be academically prepared.

• Take the necessary entrance exams (such as the SAT or ACT).

• Apply to college.

• Enroll.

Students leave the path at each step along the way, but the greatest numbers are lost because they do not aspire to attend a four year college or because they fail to prepare academically.” (Susan P. Choy, Access & Persistence: Findings from 10 Years of Longitudinal Research on Students, American Council on Education, 2002, pp. 11-12.) http://inpathways.net/access.pdf

To assist at-risk students, access programs have been established throughout the United States. By definition, “College preparation programs are aimed at enhancing and supplementing a school’s regular activities to assist primarily low-income, minority youth who might otherwise not be able to attend college.” (William G. Tierney, Zoe B. Corwin, and Julia E. Colyar, editors, Preparing for College: Nine Elements of Effective Outreach, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2005, p. 3.) http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=a9PFfxOPXgcC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Corwin,+Colyar,+%26+Tierney,+2005&ots=9Eqbm32W11&sig=fWcIE3txtb3xuE1kjaE5dbmcczs#v=onepage&q&f=false

However, there seems to be no consensus on what constitutes the essential elements of such programs. In a 2005 book of readings analyzing different components of access programs, the editors stated the following: “All activities are not equal and some activities will be more effective than others. Unfortunately, there is very little evaluative data on what works in college preparation programs.” (William G. Tierney, Zoe B. Corwin, and Julia E. Colyar, editors, Preparing for College: Nine Elements of Effective Outreach, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2005, p. 2.) http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=a9PFfxOPXgcC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Corwin,+Colyar,+%26+Tierney,+2005&ots=9Eqbm32W11&sig=fWcIE3txtb3xuE1kjaE5dbmcczs#v=onepage&q&f=false

Furthermore, in their review of college access initiatives, Watson Scott Swail and Laura W. Perna concluded “The results of this descriptive study suggest that early intervention programs do not necessarily follow any particular model, but still gravitate to many similar strategies, services, and concepts.” (Watson Scott Swail and Laura W. Perna, “Pre-College Outreach Programs: A National Perspective,” in William G. Tierney and Linda Serra Hagedorn, editors, Increasing Access to College: Extending Possibilities for All Students, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2002, p. 29) http://www.sunypress.edu/pdf/60559.pdf

Jennifer Lee Schultz and Dan Mueller of Wilder Research examined several programs that sought to assist at-risk students in accessing college. Their 2006 review of literature suggested “key features of effective programs.” As they indicated, “. . . the key features discussed here were frequently found in other literature reviews, program evaluations, and studies designed to measure the impacts of contributing factors. Programs with the best evidence for effectiveness, based on this review, contain many of the features highlighted in this section.” (Jennifer Lee Schultz and Dan Mueller, Effectiveness of programs to improve postsecondary education enrollment and success of underrepresented youth: A literature review, NorthStar Education Finance, November 2006. p. 9.) http://www.mncollegeaccess.org/sites/b862decd-72ee-44b5-80f8-4f0ac42e8716/uploads/NorthstarLitReviewWithoutRICFSum_11-06.pdf

It comes as no surprise that the first program feature scrutinized by Schultz and Mueller was that they “Prepare students academically” [emphasis in original]. As the authors noted: “Multiple research studies have concluded that access to a college preparatory curriculum while in high school is the most critical variable for helping students gain access to postsecondary education (Corwin, Colyar, & Tierney, 2005; Cabrera & La Nasa, 2001; Perna, 2000).” (Jennifer Lee Schultz and Dan Mueller, Effectiveness of programs to improve postsecondary education enrollment and success of underrepresented youth: A literature review, NorthStar Education Finance, November 2006. p. 9.) http://www.mncollegeaccess.org/sites/b862decd-72ee-44b5-80f8-4f0ac42e8716/uploads/NorthstarLitReviewWithoutRICFSum_11-06.pdf Indeed, Corwin, Colyar, and Tierney stated that “. . . academic preparation [emphasis added] is crucial to preparing students for college.” (William G. Tierney, Zoe B. Corwin, and Julia E. Colyar, editors, Preparing for College: Nine Elements of Effective Outreach, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2005, p. 8.) http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=a9PFfxOPXgcC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Corwin,+Colyar,+%26+Tierney,+2005&ots=9Eqbm32W11&sig=fWcIE3txtb3xuE1kjaE5dbmcczs#v=onepage&q&f=false

Schultz and Mueller also indicated that “It is especially important that students take rigorous mathematics courses during high school, as this was found to be the single greatest predictor of successful college completion (Adelman, 1999). Programs should address teachers’ biases and instill high expectations among school staff as well as among students (Martinez & Klopott, 2002). Additional strategies include providing academic counseling, enrichment, and remediation; teaching study skills; and creating personalized learning environments.” (Jennifer Lee Schultz and Dan Mueller, Effectiveness of programs to improve postsecondary education enrollment and success of underrepresented youth: A literature review, NorthStar Education Finance, November 2006. p. 9.) http://www.mncollegeaccess.org/sites/b862decd-72ee-44b5-80f8-4f0ac42e8716/uploads/NorthstarLitReviewWithoutRICFSum_11-06.pdf

235. Unstack the Odds--To Beat the Odds, Part 5

Unstack the Odds: Help All Kids Access College—and Graduate!

by

Joe Rottenborn

Executive Director, Mahoning Valley College Access Program (MVCAP)

15. To Beat the Odds, Part 5

An important obstacle, of course, in accessing college and achieving success is the cost of a higher education. As Susan Choy stated, “The price of attending college is still a significant obstacle for students from low- and middle-income families, but financial aid is an equalizer, to some degree. Low-income students enroll at the same rate as middle-income students if they take all the necessary steps toward enrollment.” (Susan P. Choy, Access & Persistence: Findings from 10 Years of Longitudinal Research on Students, American Council on Education, 2002, p. 5.) http://inpathways.net/access.pdf

Others agree that financial aid—and a student’s conception of affordability--can help improve access and success. The authors of Reclaiming the American Dream stated the following in their report: “Both applying for financial aid and applying for college loans improve the likelihood a student will obtain a bachelor’s degree. So does a student’s or parent’s attendance at an information session on financial aid benefits. Likewise, students who believe affordability does not affect their choice of college have an improved chance of attaining bachelor’s degrees.” (William Bedsworth, Susan Colby, and Joe Doctor, Reclaiming the American Dream, The Bridgespan Group, October 2006, p. 12.) http://www.nhscholars.org/Documents/ReclaimingAmericanDream.pdf

Unfortunately, many at-risk students don’t access financial aid. According to the 2006 report for The Bridgespan Group, “Half to three-quarters of low-income students don’t apply for aid; they don’t apply for loans; and/or they don’t attend information sessions on postsecondary aid and its availability.” (William Bedsworth, Susan Colby, and Joe Doctor, Reclaiming the American Dream, The Bridgespan Group, October 2006, p. 15.) http://www.nhscholars.org/Documents/ReclaimingAmericanDream.pdf

Often, underrepresented students and their parents may figure college is out of reach for them because they can’t afford it. Sadly, though understandably, this belief can reduce their access and success in college. According to the writers of Reclaiming the American Dream, “factors that affect the perception of affordability also have an effect on rates of matriculation and completion. Low-income students who attended financial aid information sessions and subsequently applied for financial aid were much more likely to attend and complete college, presumably because they understood both the true cost of college and the types of aid available to them. The simple fact is that in order to make college affordable, low-income students need more financial aid.” (William Bedsworth, Susan Colby, and Joe Doctor, Reclaiming the American Dream, The Bridgespan Group, October 2006, p. 22.) http://www.nhscholars.org/Documents/ReclaimingAmericanDream.pdf

Alberto Cabrera and the researchers at Penn State summarized the varying correlation financial aid—and the types of aid—seemed to have with success in college. They concluded the following: “Research into the effect financial aid plays on degree completion is contradictory. Nora (1990), Voorhees (1987), and St. John (1990) found all forms of federal support equally effective in preventing students from dropping out. However, Stampen and Cabrera (1986, 1988) found persistence rates were highest when student aid packages included work-study programs. More recently, Adelman (1999) reported grant-in-aid and loans had a small but positive contribution to the probability of securing a college degree. On the other hand, Astin (1975) found grants and work-study programs had positive effects on persistence, while loans had negative effects when directed to low-income students. St. John's (1991) comprehensive review of 25 years of research on the effect of financial aid led him to conclude reception of financial aid has a positive effect on persistence to graduation regardless of the type of financial aid. He also noted inconstancies could be attributed to methodological problems in terms of analytical models followed, the use of institutional databases versus national databases and levels of controls.” (Alberto F. Cabrera, Kurt R. Burkum and Steven M. La Nasa, Pathways to a Four-Year Degree: Determinants of Degree Completion Among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 25.) http://www.sheeo.org/access/On%20the%20Right%20Path.pdf

The PSU research team also quantified the correlation of various types (e.g., grants, loans) of financial aid and SES with degree completion; they found this: “For all students, receiving grants-in-aid and loans increases chances of completing a 4-year degree. Recipients of grants-in-aid are 7% more likely to earn a degree, while loan recipients are 12%. SES also moderates the impact of financial aid, particularly for loan recipients. Lowest-SES and Middle Low-SES students receiving loans increase their degree completion chances by 16% and 26%, respectively.” (Alberto F. Cabrera, Kurt R. Burkum and Steven M. La Nasa, Pathways to a Four-Year Degree: Determinants of Degree Completion Among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 35.) http://www.sheeo.org/access/On%20the%20Right%20Path.pdf

234. Unstack the Odds--To Beat the Odds, Part 4

Unstack the Odds: Help All Kids Access College—and Graduate!

by

Joe Rottenborn

Executive Director, Mahoning Valley College Access Program (MVCAP)

15. To Beat the Odds, Part 4

Another correlate of at-risk students who beat the odds to access college and succeed is often the support they receive—from parents, high school staff, and friends. Alberto Cabrera and the Penn State researchers noted this in their 2003 study. As they explained: “Development of degree aspirations as early as the 8th grade, securing high school academic qualifications, applying for college, and successful adjustment to college are related to the extent to which the student receives encouragement from parents, high school personal [sic], and important high school friends (e.g., Cabrera, Nora & Castaneda, 1992; Cabrera & La Nasa, 2001; Flint, 1992; Hossler, Schmitt & Vesper, 1999). This type of encouragement takes different forms, including from motivational support, saving for college, and being involved in school activities (Cabrera & La Nasa, 2001). Encouragement is key for subsequent college enrollment. Perna (2000), for instance, noted that parental involvement in school activities predicts whether the student would enroll at a 4-year college or university following high school graduation.” (Alberto F. Cabrera, Kurt R. Burkum and Steven M. La Nasa, Pathways to a Four-Year Degree: Determinants of Degree Completion Among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 19.) http://www.sheeo.org/access/On%20the%20Right%20Path.pdf

Cabrera, et. al. quantified the correlation of support by parents or friends to a student’s success in college. As they summarized: “Encouragement matters in a student’s chances of getting a college degree. Irrespective of SES, students who received encouragement from parents and friends to pursue a college degree while in high school were more likely to complete this goal. Compared with students whose parents did not encourage them to pursue a college degree, those who did receive parental encouragement increased their chance of degree completion by 5%. The impact of high school peer encouragement is similar, increasing degree completion chances by 6%. (Alberto F. Cabrera, Kurt R. Burkum and Steven M. La Nasa, Pathways to a Four-Year Degree: Determinants of Degree Completion Among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 20.) http://www.sheeo.org/access/On%20the%20Right%20Path.pdf

Importantly, whether a student’s friends were headed for college seemed to correlate with their own matriculation. According to the authors of the 2006 report Reclaiming the American Dream, “In the general category of culture and social supports, the factor most likely to bump up a student’s odds of completing college was having a significant portion of friends who were also planning to attend college. [emphasis added] Having friends who “value learning” also improves the odds, although the effects are less pronounced. These findings reinforce the views of the American Council on Education, which reports that students are four times more likely to enroll in college if a majority of their friends also plan to attend than if their friends do not. Put simply, cohorts of students matter.” (William Bedsworth, Susan Colby, and Joe Doctor, Reclaiming the American Dream, The Bridgespan Group, October 2006, p. 11.) http://www.nhscholars.org/Documents/ReclaimingAmericanDream.pdf As Susan Choy concluded in that ACE report of 2002, “More at-risk students apply to college if their friends plan to go.” (Susan P. Choy, Access & Persistence: Findings from 10 Years of Longitudinal Research on Students, American Council on Education, 2002, p. 5.) http://inpathways.net/access.pdf

The Penn State researchers also linked and quantified support with a student’s SES; they noted: “Our analysis of the 1982 High School Class reveals that a student’s likelihood to receive encouragement to secure a college degree from parents, high school personnel, and high school friends was related to his/her socioeconomic background. As a whole, Highest-SES students received more encouragement, while the reverse is true for Lowest-SES students. [emphasis added] This encouragement-SES association ranged from .13 to .248. Ninety three percent of Highest-SES students reported their parents encouraged them to pursue a college degree. In contrast, 69% of Lowest-SES students were similarly encouraged. While 77% of Highest-SES students reported encouragement from high school professionals, only 61% of Lowest-SES students reported receiving this sort of encouragement. The SES-based encouragement gap is even more pronounced when encouragement originates from high school friends. Less than 50% of Lowest-SES students were encouraged by their high school friends to earn a college degree, whereas over three-fourths of Highest-SES students were encouraged by their friends to become a college graduate. Given the connection between encouragement and success in college, this SES-encouragement association is troublesome.” (Alberto F. Cabrera, Kurt R. Burkum and Steven M. La Nasa, Pathways to a Four-Year Degree: Determinants of Degree Completion Among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 20.) http://www.sheeo.org/access/On%20the%20Right%20Path.pdf

Interestingly, as for parental supports, the correlational evidence was less strong. Indeed, according to Reclaiming the American Dream, “By contrast, only one of four parental supports was statistically significant: the parent and student visiting at least one college together. [emphasis added] Unlike other forms of parental support, such as checking homework, encouraging students to take the SAT or ACT, and discussing college applications, campus visits appear to make college and its accessibility much more tangible.” (William Bedsworth, Susan Colby, and Joe Doctor, Reclaiming the American Dream, The Bridgespan Group, October 2006, p. 11.) http://www.nhscholars.org/Documents/ReclaimingAmericanDream.pdf

One demographic fact not supportive of a student’s matriculation and graduation involved their own parental responsibility. Simply put, if they were a parent, their chances of access and success were reduced. As Clifford Adelman had stated in his report: “Socioeconomic status had a modest and diminishing association with bachelor’s degree attainment. Minority status had a modest negative association until performance (first-year performance and continuing performance) was taken into account, at which point it had no effect Gender had no effect at any stage of the model. The only demographic variable to have a strong (and in this case, negative) association with degree completion was becoming a parent by age 20.” (Clifford Adelman, The Toolbox Revisited: Paths to Degree Completion From High School Through College, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2006. p. 6.) http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/toolboxrevisit/toolbox.pdf

The researchers at Penn State University quantified the correlation of being a parent on a student’s likelihood of transferring from a 2-year program to a 4-year school as follows: “For all students, having children before completing a college degree reduces their chances to transfer to a 4-year institution by 19%. Among Lowest-SES students, this effect is about 14%.” (Alberto F. Cabrera, Kurt R. Burkum and Steven M. La Nasa, Pathways to a Four-Year Degree: Determinants of Degree Completion Among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 16.) http://www.sheeo.org/access/On%20the%20Right%20Path.pdf

Cabrera and the PSU researchers also quantified a student’s SES with becoming a parent while seeking a college degree. As they stated: “Having children while attending college has been identified out as another risk factor for persisting in college to degree completion. Nora, Cabrera, Hagedorn, and Pascarella (1996) reported family responsibilities had the effect of competing with the academic and social components of the institution, thereby lessening a student’s engagement in the college experience, intellectual development, and subsequent persistence. Adelman (1999) adds that having children while attending college lessens one’s chances of completing a college degree within ten years upon high school graduation. While the above findings are true for all students, the extent to which this atrisk behavior is present among Lowest-SES students has not been examined. For our student population, we find Lowest-SES are indeed more prone to having children while attending college. Twenty four percent of Lowest-SES students reported having at least one child by age 23. This number is 18%, 11%, and 5% greater than the ones reported by Highest-SES, Middle-High SES, and Middle-Low SES students, respectively.” (Alberto F. Cabrera, Kurt R. Burkum and Steven M. La Nasa, Pathways to a Four-Year Degree: Determinants of Degree Completion Among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 26.) http://www.sheeo.org/access/On%20the%20Right%20Path.pdf

Finally, the Penn State research team examined the correlation of becoming a parent and degree completion. They quantified that correlation with graduation for students of various SES designations, as follows: “Incurring parental responsibilities while pursuing a college degree hampers ones chances of degree completion by 23%. This negative effect is felt most by Highest-SES students for whom having children by age 23 decreases their degree completion chances by 48%. (Alberto F. Cabrera, Kurt R. Burkum and Steven M. La Nasa, Pathways to a Four-Year Degree: Determinants of Degree Completion Among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 31.) http://www.sheeo.org/access/On%20the%20Right%20Path.pdf