Your search found 7293 results.

Descriptors:
Academic Persistence; Student Financial Aid; Community Colleges; Two Year College Students; College Freshmen; Part Time Students; Graduation; School Holding Power; Higher Education; Financial Aid Applicants; Need Analysis (Student Financial Aid); Paying for College; Predictor Variables; Demography; Cultural Capital; Social Capital; Multivariate Analysis; Regression (Statistics)

Abstract:
In 2007-2008, approximately 42% of community college students who were eligible to receive Pell grant funding did not file the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). Using data from the Beginning Postsecondary Student Study, this study examined the relationship between FAFSA filing status and persistence from the fall to spring semesters among first-year community college students. Results indicate that when controlling for other relevant predictors of persistence, filing a FAFSA was associated with higher odds of within-year persistence among all students and was particularly strong for the restricted sample of students enrolled part time. The implications of these findings are discussed in light of the national completion agenda and recent calls to improve the utilization of financial aid among community college students. (Contains 2 tables, 1 figure and 1 note.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Higher Education; Student Financial Aid; Accountability; Federal Aid; Costs; Educational Policy; Debt (Financial); Accreditation (Institutions); Futures (of Society); Performance Based Assessment; Presidents

Abstract:
For 40 years, federal money has sustained higher education while enabling its worst tendencies. That is about to change. The end may have come on February 12, 2013, when President Barack Obama delivered his State of the Union address. "Skyrocketing costs," the president said, "price way too many young people out of a higher education, or saddle them with unsustainable debt." In a policy document released after the speech, the president proposed the most sweeping change in federal aid since the great debates of the early 1970s. In addition to value-driven accountability measures for colleges, he called for "establishing a new, alternative system of accreditation that would provide pathways for higher-education models and colleges to receive federal student aid based on performance and results." Against a backdrop of a growing number of reports on reforming financial aid, in a handful of words, the president had proposed nothing less than a postinstitutional future of higher education--one in which "colleges," as defined by other colleges, as defined by higher education itself, would no longer have a monopoly over the receipt of public funds. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
College Graduates; Private Colleges; College Students; Public Colleges; Debt (Financial); Masters Programs; Marital Status; Outcomes of Education; Career Choice; Life Style; Student Financial Aid; Salaries; Ownership; Real Estate

Abstract:
This paper examines how college educational debt affects various post-baccalaureate decisions of bachelor's degree recipients. I employ the Baccalaureate and Beyond 93/97 survey data. Using college-aid policies as instrumental variables to correct for the endogeneity of student college debt level, I find that for public college graduates, college debt has a negative and significant effect on graduate school attendance. This negative effect is concentrated on more costly programs associated with doctoral, MBA, and first professional (FP) degrees, and debt has no effect on the choice of a master's program. For private college students, debt does not have an effect on the overall graduate school attendance, but this absence of effect conceals the differential effects of debt on different graduate programs--debt has a positive and significant effect on the choice of an MBA or an FP program, and a zero effect on other programs. For both public and private college students, debt has no effects on early career choices such as salary, sector of occupation, marital status, and homeownership. (Contains 7 tables and 21 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Educational Policy; Access to Education; Higher Education; Student Financial Aid; African Americans; Federal Aid; Low Income; Race; Social Class; Costs

Abstract:
This article reviews the history of financial aid policy from the Higher Education Act of 1965 to its reauthorisation in 1992 and the subsequent ramifications upon African-American students. It considers issues of race and class with regard to college access. This work concludes with a look at contemporary aid, as well as offers race- and class-conscious financial aid by increasing college affordability to low-income students, as potential solutions to broadening educational access to Black Americans. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Student Financial Aid; Income; College Freshmen; Paying for College; Public Colleges; Selective Admission; Private Colleges; Costs

Abstract:
We examine college affordability under the existing pricing and financial aid system that awards both non need-based and need-based aid. Using data of freshmen attending a large number of selective private and public colleges in the USA, we find that the prices students actually pay for college have increased over time. Need-based grant aid has not kept pace with the substantial increases in non need-based aid. Most importantly, although low-income students received more subsidies than higher-income students, the existing financial aid system does not provide enough affordability to needy students. Nonetheless, the deficiency cannot be attributed to the increases in non need-based aid. (Contains 5 tables, 4 figures and 21 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Student Financial Aid; Paying for College; Federal Government; Costs; Internet; Tuition; Information Sources; Educational Attainment; Information Needs; Family Needs

Abstract:
Families flummoxed about what college will cost them have more information at their disposal than ever before. The Internet offers tuition data, advice on saving and borrowing, and explanations of financial aid. New online calculators let families estimate their bottom-line price at any college. But not all the information out there is easy to make sense of, and some of it's no good. A big push from the federal government to provide better consumer information has not created better-informed consumers. Families have more information than ever before, but no more clarity about the eventual cost of a diploma. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Higher Education; College Athletics; Athletes; Nonprofit Organizations; Intercollegiate Cooperation; Team Sports; Student Financial Aid; Resource Allocation; Accountability; Motor Vehicles; Facilities; Health Insurance; Expenditures

Abstract:
Amid a national debate about paying college athletes, the NCAA likes to tout its often-overlooked Student Assistance Fund, whose goal is to provide direct financial support to players. The fund--which draws from the association's multibillion-dollar media-rights deals--will distribute some $75-million this year to Division I athletes. The money has helped colleges reimburse players for such things as clothing, health insurance, summer school, and many other costs that their scholarships do not cover. But not all of the dollars directly help students. According to a Big Ten Conference document obtained by "The Chronicle," the University of Iowa used part of its money last year to pay shredding fees, cover administrator-travel costs, and purchase displays for an arena. Other Big Ten universities have used their distribution in part to pay for lightning-detection software, "team-building" activities, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in parking permits--money that, in the end, often goes right into the universities' pockets. Other institutions spent a share of their allocation on team massages and yoga, chair rental, "welcome back events," and a battery of reading and learning tests. When distributing the money, many institutions give priority to recipients of Pell Grants, the federal assistance program for needy students that in recent years has helped at least 16 percent of Division I athletes. But the possible use of some of those NCAA dollars to meet staff or team objectives, rather than to directly benefit low-income students, concerns people who study policies and practices affecting college success. Officials in the Big Ten defend their use of the dollars, saying the NCAA allows institutions wide latitude in how they spend the money. They emphasize that the document, which was obtained through a public-records request, shows only a small fraction of the fund's usage. The report describes many payments flowing more directly to students. For example, the University of Nebraska dedicated $24,876 toward players' utility bills. The University of Minnesota spent $23,418 in part to send members of its football team to a funeral for a former teammate. And Penn State contributed $14,956 toward parents' travel costs when 14 of its students had surgery. Other institutions paid child-care costs, housing and travel expenses for study abroad, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical expenses and dental work. The Big Ten is one of the biggest beneficiaries of the NCAA money. Last year its universities received more than $5-million from the program, and used about $4.7-million of the money, according to the league document. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Higher Education; Campuses; Veterans; War; Federal Programs; Females; Disproportionate Representation; Enrollment; Institutions; Reputation; Selective Admission; Institutional Characteristics; Educational Attitudes; Access to Education; Federal Legislation; Educational Opportunities; Student Financial Aid

Abstract:
About 16 percent of veterans use the GI Bill to attend private institutions, roughly the same proportion as students generally. But at the most highly selective colleges, veterans using the Post-9/11 GI Bill barely fill a single classroom--38 at Penn, 22 at Cornell, and at Princeton, just one. The sparse numbers do not go unnoticed, veterans say. Leaders of such institutions, meantime, are wrestling with how actively they should or could recruit veterans to their campuses. After World War II, roughly two million veterans went to college on the original GI Bill, which was credited with democratizing higher education in the United States. More than half of them attended private institutions. On some campuses, veterans accounted for the majority of students. Of course, times were different then: A far broader portion of the population had served in the military, and enrollment in higher education was considerably lower. Now veterans are a much smaller slice of the student demographic, representing about 3 percent of undergraduates. Decades ago, some educators wondered about veterans' place at elite colleges. In the 1940s, the president of Harvard, James Bryant Conant--who himself had served in World War I--warned that the GI Bill might result in "the least capable among the war generation ... flooding the facilities for advanced education." He later recanted and spoke glowingly of the federal program. But even now the question lingers: In the collegiate landscape, where do veterans belong? James Wright, president emeritus of Dartmouth College and author of "Those Who Have Borne the Battle: A History of America's Wars and Those Who Fought Them," is disappointed that the Ivy League in particular has not taken a stronger lead in recruiting veterans. Elite colleges, he argues, should view veterans no differently than they do prospective students from other underrepresented groups. The GI Bill and the Yellow Ribbon Program are meant to give veterans the financial means to go to the best institutions they can get into. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Community Colleges; Enrollment; Enrollment Trends; College Credits; Student Characteristics; Two Year College Students; Online Courses; Dual Enrollment; High School Students; Academic Degrees; College Programs; Adult Literacy; Labor Force Development; Apprenticeships; Graduation Rate; Transfer Rates (College); Education Work Relationship; Outcomes of Education; Income; Adult Basic Education; Tuition; Fees; Student Financial Aid; Educational Finance; Expenditure per Student; Human Resources; School Personnel; College Faculty; College Administration; Salaries; Part Time Students; Full Time Students

Abstract:
Each fall, the Iowa Department of Education collects enrollment data from Iowa's community colleges on the tenth business day of the semester. The fall data pertain to the 2012-13 academic year (fiscal year 2013). This report is the only report on fiscal year 2013 until next year's "Annual Condition of Iowa's Community Colleges." Fall enrollment for 2012 was 100,519 students, a 5.2 percent decline from fall 2011. Since 2008, community college enrollment has grown rapidly, likely a result of the recession of 2008 and 2009. Table 2-1 displays enrollment figures for the latest five years. Enrollment fell at 12 of the 15 community colleges. More students were enrolled part-time (less than 12 semester credit hours) than were enrolled full-time. Students enrolled part-time accounted for 53.9 percent of total fall enrollment, compared to 51.8 percent last fall. The fall enrollment of full-time students fell from 51,107 (48.2 percent of total enrollment) to 46,354 (46.1 percent of total enrollment), a 9.3 percent decline, while the fall enrollment of part-time students dropped slightly (-1.3 percent) from 54,868 students in 2011 to 54,165 students in 2012. Although overall fall enrollment has increased more than tenfold since 1965, the number of full-time students as a percentage of total fall enrollment has steadily declined from 90.8 percent in 1965 to 46.1 percent in 2012. (Contains 272 tables and 105 figures.) [This data for this paper was compiled with the assistance of Geoffrey Jones.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (3859K)

Descriptors:
Student Financial Aid; Federal Government; Higher Education; Incentives; Eligibility; Educational Change; Tax Credits; Tuition; Student Loan Programs; Credentials; Grants; Low Income Groups; Outreach Programs

Abstract:
The federal financial aid system is no longer up to today's demands. Built in a different era, its haphazard evolution over the decades has made it inefficient, poorly targeted, and overly complicated. With the need for higher education never greater and college growing increasingly unaffordable, students deserve a streamlined aid system that is more understandable, effective, and fair. Policymakers can achieve such reforms at no additional cost to taxpayers--by rebalancing existing resources and better aligning incentives for students and institutions of higher education. Ultimately, those reforms will increase access to high-quality credentials and boost student success in higher education and the workforce. In "Rebalancing Resources and Incentives in Federal Student Aid," the authors offer more than 30 specific policy recommendations that are designed to create such a system. Nothing is off-limits. They recommend specific changes to federal grants, loans, tax benefits, college outreach programs and federal regulations to provide more direct aid to the lowest-income students, while strengthening accountability for institutions of higher education to ensure that more students are able to earn affordable, high-quality credentials. Taken together, the package of proposals in their report is "budget-neutral" over the 10-year period from federal fiscal years 2013-2022. Pell Grant Funding Sources are appended. (Contains 1 figure, 3 tables, and 120 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (1095K)