Making Higher Education More Affordable

Over the past couple weeks, affordable education, and the Obama administration’s related policy proposal, has been a highly publicized area of interest. In the new economy, higher education is an important investment for students working to ensure opportunities and success for their future.  A good example of this can be seen through the unemployment rate—it is a clear indicator of the benefits of higher education—showing considerable variation based on education status. For individuals with just a high school diploma, the unemployment rate in 2012 was 8.3%, as opposed to individuals with a bachelor’s degree at just 4.5%. Median weekly earnings also jumped to $1,066 for those with a bachelor’s degree, compared to $652 for those with only a high school diploma. The new job market is transitioning into a higher skilled workforce, and anything less than a college degree is frequently insufficient to maintain a position within the middle class.

However, the costs of higher education limit who can access these benefits, often leaving low-income families far behind. Many families are forced to choose between a heavy student debt load or skipping college altogether.  College is too important a benefit to professional success and financial security for this to be a decision that families have to make.

According to the White House Fact Sheet on the President’s Plan to make college more affordable:

• The average tuition at a public four-year college has increased by more than 250% over the past three decades, while incomes for typical families grew by only 16%.
• Declining state funding has forced students to shoulder a bigger proportion of college costs; tuition has almost doubled as a share of public college revenues over the past 25 years from 25% to 47%.
• The average borrower is now graduating with over $26,000 in debt.
• Only 58% of full-time students who began college in 2004 earned a four-year degree within 6 years.
• Loan default rates are rising, and too many young adults are burdened with debt as they seek to start a family, buy a home, launch a business, or save for retirement.

As part of the Obama Administration’s plan for a Better Bargain for the Middle Class, there have been three alternatives proposed to make college more affordable: pay for performance, promote innovation and competition, and ensure that student debt remains affordable. Paying for performance includes tying financial aid to student outcomes instead of enrollment rates, in addition to identifying colleges that do the most to assist students from disadvantaged backgrounds as well as colleges that are improving their performance.This information will be available on a college “scorecard.” The administration plans to spark innovation and competition by highlighting colleges where innovations are enabling students to achieve good results. Lastly, the “Pay as You Earn” plan caps federal student loan payments at 10% of discretionary income, so students have more flexibility in managing their debt.

Although these alternatives offer some promise and developing new solutions is a step in the right direction, more policies and programs to increase affordability for college are necessary for students, especially those who are first-generation, those who come from disadvantaged circumstances, students with disabilities, and many others who come from non-traditional backgrounds.  

For results-focused state strategies aimed at increasing college completion, visit PolicyforResults.org

Pathways to Opportunities for Ex-Offenders

When formerly incarcerated individuals reintegrate into the community, they face a number of barriers to employment, education, and access to services. If current trends continue, over half of released inmates are bound to return to prison within three years. To combat this issue, it is essential to reduce and avoid the possibility of recidivism.  One important way to do that is through workforce development and education programs for inmates while in prison.

Research has shown that higher education is directly linked to reducing recidivism rates; however, inmates have extremely limited access to programs that provide education and training. Education increases human capital and improves general cognitive functioning while providing specific skills, and for inmates, it can help to obtain and maintain employment while also deterring criminal activity. Education and training provides ex-offenders with marketable skills essential for employment and dramatically improves their outcomes, so making quality education programs accessible to inmates can minimize the obstacles for ex-offenders during their reintegration – which ultimately leads to safer communities for all of us.

This commentary from Spotlight on Poverty and Opportunity highlights the drastic limitations of incarcerated students, especially after their Pell Grant eligibility was removed in 1994—since then, higher education programs dropped from 350 to 8 for inmates nationwide. Up to that point, Pell Grants had been the primary source of funding for higher education programs in correctional facilities. Though some states have been able to provide funding streams to fill the gap, many of the effects are still present and impacting thousands of people who will return to the community.

The removal of Pell Grant eligibility and the deep cuts in education programs increased the already disparate outcome of educational attainment among the incarcerated population. The number of incarcerated individuals receiving postsecondary education in prison dropped by 44%. Only 17% of state and federal prisoners had some level of postsecondary education compared to 51% of the population outside of prison, and only 65% of state and federal prisoners had diplomas or GEDs, compared to 82% of the population. Additionally, 7 out of 10 prisoners who had a GED reported obtaining it while in prison, which demonstrates just how important these programs can be in helping inmates obtain their education.

Another important consideration is that inmates are not the only ones that are affected—the multiple barriers ex-offenders face affect their innocent children and entire families. An important statistic to keep in mind is that 1 in every 28 children in the United States has a parent behind bars, and failed reintegration harm both ex-offenders and their children. Policies to support employment for reintegrating ex-offenders support the well-being and economic success of both generations, as well as do much more to ensure community-wide safety and economic growth.

To read the commentary on Spotlight on Poverty and Opportunity, click here.

For more information on Promoting Workforce Strategies for Reintegrating Ex-Offenders – including providing the needed supports and services that help their families thrive - click here and here.

University of Pennsylvania Report on Black Male Achievement in Higher Education

What Works: “Messaging. Mentoring. Monitoring. Ministering. Money.” – Dr. Robert M. Franklin, President of Morehouse College

The University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education’s Center for the Study of Race and Equity in Education released a report highlighting the success stories of 219 black youth from 42 campuses who graduated from colleges and universities. It is worth noting that out of the 221 nominees, only two declined participating in the interviews conducted for the study, showing the high interest in and the need for encouraging future minority student enrollment. The paper focuses not on the already widely discussed disparities of educational achievements between Black male students compared to  other students but on how these successful participants gained admission into competitive institutions and became actively involved on their campuses.

The interviews address pre-college experiences and the influences that family members, peers, and significant others had on the developing college aspirations of the participants interviewed. The study then questions which interventions and support mechanisms aided these aspirations and what compelled the students to become engaged both academically and extracurricularly once on campus. While pre-college socioeconomic factors often contribute to disparities in college enrollment and campus involvement, 56.7% of the participants came from low-income and working class families, providing a large sample of success stories that are important to consider in relationship to  the dominant discourse on Black male disengagement. Additionally, the study navigates how these participants became successful in “environments that were sometimes racist and often culturally unresponsive” on college campuses that were predominantly White, revealing valuable lessons that, if changes are made, could impact future students both on and off campus.   

The report briefly cites compelling statistics that speak both to cultural and economic barriers; demonstrating the need for studies examining the success of Black males rather than only focusing on demographic failures. According to the U.S. Department of Education, in comparison to Black female students, Black male students consistently had lower graduation rates at all higher educational levels. A publication entitled “They (Don’t) Care about Education: A Counternarrative on Black Male Students’ Responses to Inequitable Schooling” found that Black male students have the lowest college completion rate among both the sexes and all racial groups in higher education, with only 33.3% of students graduating baccalaureate degree programs at public colleges and universities within six years against 48.1% of students graduating overall. And rates of college enrollment for Black males have remained stagnant since 1976 at 4.3%, found in another report analyzing trends in Black make status in flagship public universities in all 50 states. These statistics both prove the noteworthy nature of the successes of the participants interviewed and the critical need for reforms aimed at supporting Black male achievements.

The study found that all the participants had strong family support systems with the assumption that, even in families with no background of higher education, there was never question of whether or not to go to college. Instead, the question was where to go. Other key findings suggested that parental knowledge of the college process was a key factor for college entry, including how to enroll students in college preparatory programs, how to select colleges and how to apply for scholarships. Secondary and postsecondary school teachers and guidance counselors were often found to maintain practices that negatively affected Black male students’ opportunities, and so, the study recommends professional development programs that will help those counselors focus energies on alleviating educational disparities and learn how to better work with minority students.    

Other recommendations included connecting teens to effective college preparatory experiences, removing financial barriers to college enrollment, building summer programs to facilitate the high school to college transition, assuming institutional responsibility for black male achievement, supporting ethnic student organizations, developing peer support venues, addressing campus racial issues, solving masculinity and gender relationship misperceptions within the Black male student population,  and creating affirming spaces for gay, bisexual, and questioning Black students, if not just improving LGBT programs overall. The recommendations in this report suggest there is a strong role for policymakers.  Lifting barriers and creating opportunities through policy is an essential role in ensuring equitable outcomes and supporting black male students on their path to success.

For more information on how to reduce disparities in education, see our Policy for Results reports on Increasing College Completion, Increasing High School Completion, and Improving Early Grade-Level Reading.