Postsecondary Education in the United States

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Postsecondary Education in the United States Postsecondary Education www.futureofchildren.org The Future of Children Postsecondary Education in the United States VOLUME 23 NUMBER 1 SPRING 2013 3 Postsecondary Education in the United States: Introducing the Issue 17 An Overview of American Higher Education 41 Making College Worth It: A Review of the Returns to Higher Education 67 Financial Aid Policy: Lessons from Research Volume 23 Number 1 Spring 2013 93 Student Supports: Developmental Education and Other Academic Programs 117 Transitions from High School to College 137 For-Profit Colleges 165 E-Learning in Postsecondary Education 187 Access and Success with Less: Improving Productivity in Broad- Access Postsecondary Institutions A COLLABORATION OF THE WOODROW WILSON SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AT A COLLABORATION OF THE WOODROW WILSON SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AT PRINCETON UNIVERSITY AND THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION PRINCETON UNIVERSITY AND THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION The Future of Children promotes effective policies and programs for children by providing timely, objective information based on the best available research. Senior Editorial Staff Journal Staff Sara McLanahan Kris McDonald Editor-in-Chief Associate Editor Princeton University Princeton University Director, Center for Research on Child Wellbeing, and William S. Tod Jon Wallace Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs Managing Editor Princeton University Janet M. Currie Senior Editor Brenda Szittya Princeton University Managing Editor Director, Center for Health and Wellbeing, Princeton University and Henry Putnam Professor of Economics Martha Gottron and Public Affairs Managing Editor Ron Haskins Princeton University Senior Editor Lisa Markman-Pithers Brookings Institution Outreach Director Senior Fellow and Co-Director, Center on Princeton University Children and Families Acting Director, Education Cecilia Elena Rouse Research Section Senior Editor Reid Quade Princeton University Outreach Coordinator Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public Brookings Institution and International Affairs, Katzman-Ernst Professor in the Economics of Education, Regina Leidy and Professor of Economics and Public Affairs Communications Coordinator Princeton University The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the views of the Woodrow Isabel Sawhill Wilson School at Princeton University or the Brookings Institution. Senior Editor Tracy Merone Brookings Institution Administrator Copyright © 2013 by The Trustees of Princeton University Senior Fellow, Cabot Family Chair, and Princeton University Co-Director, Center on Children and Families This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0. Authorization to reproduce articles is allowed with proper attribution: “From The Future of Children, a collaboration of the The Future of Children would like to thank the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation for their generous support. Brookings Institution.” To purchase a print copy, download free electronic copies, or sign up for our e-newsletter, go ISSN: 1054-8289 to our website, www.futureofchildren.org. If you would like additional information about the ISBN: 978-0-9857863-0-4 journal, please send questions to [email protected]. VOLUME 23 NUMBER 1 SPRING 2013 Postsecondary Education in the United States 3 Postsecondary Education in the United States: Introducing the Issue by Lisa Barrow, Thomas Brock, and Cecilia Elena Rouse 17 An Overview of American Higher Education by Sandy Baum, Charles Kurose, and Michael McPherson 41 Making College Worth It: A Review of the Returns to Higher Education by Philip Oreopoulos and Uros Petronijevic 67 Financial Aid Policy: Lessons from Research by Susan Dynarski and Judith Scott-Clayton 93 Student Supports: Developmental Education and Other Academic Programs by Eric P. Bettinger, Angela Boatman, and Bridget Terry Long 117 Transitions from High School to College by Andrea Venezia and Laura Jaeger 137 For-Profit Collegesby David Deming, Claudia Goldin, and Lawrence Katz 165 E-Learning in Postsecondary Education by Bradford S. Bell and Jessica E. Federman 187 Access and Success with Less: Improving Productivity in Broad-Access Postsecondary Institutions by Davis Jenkins and Olga Rodríguez www.futureofchildren.org Postsecondary Education in the United States: Introducing the Issue Postsecondary Education in the United States: Introducing the Issue Lisa Barrow, Thomas Brock, and Cecilia Elena Rouse ince the introduction of the GI preparation but also those who were not Bill in 1944, college has been well served in the nation’s elementary and part of the American dream, in secondary school system and need a second large part because it is viewed chance. This range is reflected in the differ- as a ticket to economic secu- ing degrees of “college readiness” among Srity. Currently, about 21 million individuals entering postsecondary students and in attend a postsecondary institution, and the the increasing proportion of students who vast majority of high school students aspire are “nontraditional” in that they are older, to earn a bachelor’s degree or higher.1 While from less advantaged families, financially the popular image of college may be domi- independent of their parents, parents them- nated by Ivy League schools, flagship state selves, or working while going to school. universities, and elite liberal arts colleges, in fact only a minority of students attend As enrollments in postsecondary education such institutions. Many go to less-selective have increased, so have private and public regional four-year colleges and universities investments in education. Federal, state, and vocational institutions, and nationwide and local governments combined contrib- close to 40 percent are enrolled in open- ute about 1 percent of the nation’s gross access community colleges. A small but grow- domestic product ($160.9 billion in 2011) to ing number of students are working toward postsecondary education, largely predicated college degrees mostly or entirely online. on the belief that it addresses long-standing economic inequalities and leads to economic Students pursue postsecondary education growth.2 Namely, investment in education for a variety of reasons. Some are look- benefits the individual in many forms, includ- ing for a broad liberal arts education, while ing higher lifetime income, and benefits others are more career focused. Still others society by increasing labor force productiv- enroll to take only a class or two to keep up ity, which in turn generates faster economic their skills or simply for the joy of learning. growth. Growing evidence backs these claims. U.S. postsecondary institutions serve not For example, individuals with a bachelor’s only those students with the best academic degree earn 50 percent more during their Lisa Barrow is a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Thomas Brock is director of Young Adults and Postsecond- ary Education Policy at MDRC. Cecilia Elena Rouse is dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and the Lawrence and Shirley Katzman and Lewis and Anna Ernst Professor in the Economics of Education, Princeton University. VOL. 23 / NO. 1 / SPRING 2013 3 Lisa Barrow, Thomas Brock, and Cecilia Elena Rouse lifetime than individuals with no more than a Others agree that postsecondary educa- high school diploma, and their unemployment tion may not be worth it, but their reasons rate is less than half as high.3 Research also primarily concern the relationship between suggests that college graduates have higher the high price of postsecondary schooling job satisfaction and better health outcomes and the future return, especially in the form than those without a college degree. Finally, of employment and income. For example, economists such as Enrico Moretti have based on the Consumer Price Index, overall documented significant benefits to the prices increased by an annual average of broader society: workers earn more in cities 2.4 percent between 2001 and 2011, while with higher proportions of college graduates, college tuition and fees grew by an annual suggesting that more educated workers gener- average of 6.8 percent—the highest among ate positive “spillovers” to other workers. all major expenditure categories, includ- In fact, he documents that cities with more ing energy (6.6 percent) and medical care highly educated populations are hubs of inno- services (4.3 percent).7 Many critics argue vation and experience faster economic growth that much of the increased cost of post- than those with less educated populations, secondary education is unnecessary and again generating positive spillovers to all resi- the result of institutions becoming “inef- dents.4 Increased globalization and advances ficient” in the sense that they could provide in production technology suggest that post- a better quality education for the cost or secondary education will become even more could provide the same quality education important to the economic security of indi- at a lower cost if they simply reorganized. viduals and society in the future, as suggested Critics contend that, among other factors, by the work of economist David Autor. He this inefficiency arises because most states has documented that the occupations that finance their public institutions according have grown over the past
Recommended publications
  • Bridget Terry Long, Ph.D
    Bridget Terry Long, Ph.D. Harvard Graduate School of Education 101 Longfellow Hall, 13 Appian Way, Cambridge, MA 02138 [email protected] hhtp://gseacademic.harvard.edu/~longbr/ ACADEMIC POSITIONS Academic Dean, Harvard Graduate School of Education (2013 to present) Saris Professor of Education and Economics (endowed faculty chair; formerly called the Xander Chair; 2011 to present); Professor of Education and Economics, Harvard University, Graduate School of Education (2009 to present) Research Associate, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) (2009 to present). Faculty Research Fellow (2003‐09) Research Affiliate, Center for Analysis on Postsecondary Education and Employment (CAPSEE) (2011 to present) Research Affiliate, National Center of Postsecondary Research (NCPR) (2006‐12) Associate Professor of Education and Economics, Harvard University, Graduate School of Education (2004‐ 09) Visiting Scholar, Boston Federal Reserve Bank, New England Public Policy Center (2006‐07) Assistant Professor, Harvard University, Graduate School of Education (2000‐04) EDUCATION Ph.D. Harvard University, Economics (2000). Dissertation: The Market for Higher Education: Economic Analyses of College Choice, Returns, and State Aid Policy. Committee members: Caroline Hoxby (chair); Lawrence Katz; Claudia Goldin. M.A. Harvard University, Economics (1997) Fields: Labor Economics, Public Finance, Urban Economics. A.B. Princeton University, Economics (1995) Certificate in Afro‐American Studies. Courses Stanford University (Summer 1993) American Economic Association (AEA) Graduate School Preparation Program. BOARDS AND LEADERSHIP Member, National Board of Education Sciences (NBES), Institute of Education Sciences (IES), U.S. Department of Education. Presidential Appointment with Senate confirmation. Vice Chair (2010‐11). Chair (2011‐13). Member (2010 to present). Member, Board of Directors, MDRC (2010 to present).
    [Show full text]
  • History of Adult and Continuing Education
    History of Adult and Continuing Education The Adult and Continuing Education function has been central to the mission of the college since its founding in 1966. Originally it was one of three major college focal points along with vocational-technical education and student services. The department’s mission is consistent with several of the directives in SF550, the law that created the community college system in Iowa in 1966: Programs for in-service training and retraining of workers; Developmental education for persons academically or personally underprepared to succeed in their program of study; Programs for training, retraining, and preparation for productive employment of all citizens; and Programs for high school completion for students of post-high school age. The 1968 North Central Association Self Study prepared constructive notes as a first step toward regional accreditation on these major functions of the department: Adult and Continuing Education provided educational programs in four areas: adult basic education, adult high school diploma programs, high school equivalency programs, and general adult education. Adult basic education programs developed throughout the area provided instruction to adults with less than an eighth grade education. Adult high school diploma programs provided instruction to adults with a 10th grade education but less than a high school education. Students enrolled in these programs were working toward the completion of a high school program and the receipt of a diploma from an established secondary school within the area. High school equivalency programs provided instruction to students who had completed at least eighth grade, and by completing additional course work, could be granted a high school equivalency certificate by the Iowa State Department of Public Instruction.
    [Show full text]
  • EDUCATION in CHINA a Snapshot This Work Is Published Under the Responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD
    EDUCATION IN CHINA A Snapshot This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD member countries. This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Photo credits: Cover: © EQRoy / Shutterstock.com; © iStock.com/iPandastudio; © astudio / Shutterstock.com Inside: © iStock.com/iPandastudio; © li jianbing / Shutterstock.com; © tangxn / Shutterstock.com; © chuyuss / Shutterstock.com; © astudio / Shutterstock.com; © Frame China / Shutterstock.com © OECD 2016 You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgement of OECD as source and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should be submitted to [email protected]. Requests for permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be addressed directly to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) at [email protected] or the Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie (CFC) at [email protected]. Education in China A SNAPSHOT Foreword In 2015, three economies in China participated in the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment, or PISA, for the first time: Beijing, a municipality, Jiangsu, a province on the eastern coast of the country, and Guangdong, a southern coastal province.
    [Show full text]
  • Education Degree
    CAREER OPPORTUNITIES BACHELOR Of SCIENCE G Early Childhood Education Grades P-3 G (also includes coursework for certification in G DUCATION elementary education grades K-6) G E Elementary Education Grades K-6 G Secondary Education Grades 6-12 G DEGREE • Biology/Biology Education G • Biology/General Science Education G • Chemistry/Chemistry Education G • English/English Language Arts Education G • History/ General Social Studies Education G • Mathematics/Mathematics Education G P-12 Education G • Music Education (Choral) G • Music Education (Instrumental) G Child Development G (Non teacher certification program) G Graduates Seek Careers in: G • Hospitals G • Residential Programs G • Childcare Centers G • Head Start Programs G IVISION Of DUCATION G • Children’s Museums D E • State Agencies P.O. Box 39800 G Birmingham, AL 35208 G G G G G Please call for additional information G G Phone: 205-929-1695 G G www.miles.edu G G G G G G G G Miles College is accredited to award G G Bachelors degrees by the Commission on G G Colleges of the Southern Association of G G Colleges and Schools: 1866 Southern Lane, G G Decatur, GA 30033-4097, G G Phone: 404-679-4501 G G G G G G G DIVISION Of G G EDUCATION G G WHY STUDY EDUCATION AT STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS INTERNSHIP/STUDENT TEACHING MILES COLLEGE? AND ACTIVITIES CLOAKING CEREMONY e Division of Education offers programs in All candidates in the Division of Education are Each semester teacher education majors who are teacher education that meet the Alabama encouraged to participate in student organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Secondary Education San Francisco State University Bulletin 2020-2021
    Secondary Education San Francisco State University Bulletin 2020-2021 S ED 200 Introduction to Teaching and Education (Units: 3) SECONDARY EDUCATION Introduction to the field of education and to the profession of teaching. (Plus-minus letter grade only) Graduate College of Education Course Attributes: Dean: Dr. Cynthia Grutzik • D1: Social Sciences Department of Secondary Education S ED 300 Education and Society (Units: 3) Burk Hall, Room 45 Prerequisites: GE Areas A1*, A2*, A3*, and B4* all with grades of C- or (415) 338-1201/1202 better or consent of the instructor. Chair: Dr. Maika Watanabe Introduction to education and the role that education and schools play in Graduate Coordinator, Concentration in Secondary Education: Dr. Maika society. Watanabe Course Attributes: Graduate Coordinator, Concentration in Mathematics Education: Dr. Judith Kysh • UD-D: Social Sciences Professor • Social Justice YANAN FAN (2006), Professor of Secondary Education; B.A. (1992), Capital S ED 640 Supervised Observation and Participation in Public Schools Normal University, Beijing, China; M.A. (2000), Beijing Normal University, (Units: 3) Beijing, China; Ph.D. (2006), Michigan State University. Prerequisite: Concurrent enrollment in S ED 751. JUDITH KYSH (2000), Professor of Mathematics, Professor of Secondary A program of observation and participation in public schools under the Education; B.A. (1962), M.A. (1965), University of California, Berkeley; guidance of a university supervisor including regular meetings for the Ph.D. (1999), University of California, Davis. analysis of field experiences. (CR/NC grading only) [CSL may be available] Course Attributes: MAIKA WATANABE (2003), Professor of Secondary Education; B.A. (1995), Swarthmore College; M.A. (1999), Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • OVERVIEW of ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR): a Handbook for Corps Managers
    Pamphlet #5 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE US Army Corps RESOLUTION SERIES of Engineers® OVERVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR): A Handbook for Corps Managers ..ON a,'Jl'!'DIENT I A;;proved tm ;uclic reieo.NI ~- I>----• JULY 1996 IWR PAMPHLET 96-ADR-P-5 19970103 016 The Corps Commitment to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) This pamphlet is one in a series of pamphlets describing techniques for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). This series is part ofa Corps program to encourage its managers to develop and utilize new ways ofresolving disputes. ADR techniques may be used to prevent disputes, resolve them at earlier stages, or settle them prior to formal litigation. ADR is a new field, and additional techniques are being developed all the time. These pamphlets are a means ofproviding Corps managers with up-to-date information on the latest techniques. The information in this pamphlet is designed to provide a starting point for innovation by Corps managers in the use ofADR techniques. Other ADR case studies and working papers are available to assist managers. The current list ofpamphlets, case studies, and working papers in the ADR series is listed in the back ofthis pamphlet. The ADR Program is carried out under the proponency ofthe U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, Office ofChief Counsel, Lester Edelman, ChiefCounsel, and with the guidance ofthe U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers' Institute for Water Resources (!WR), Alexandria VA. Frank Carr serves as ADR Program Manager. Jerome Delli Priscoli, Ph.D., Senior Policy Analyst of!WR currently serves as Technical Monitor, assisted by Donna Ayres, ADR Program Coordinator. James L.
    [Show full text]
  • Secondary School Course Classification System: School Codes for the Exchange of Data (SCED) (NCES 2007-341)
    Secondary School Course Classification U.S. Department of Education NCES 2007-341 System: School Codes for the Exchange of Data (SCED) Secondary School Course Classification System: School U.S. Department of Education Codes for the NCES 2007-341 Exchange of Data (SCED) June 2007 Denise Bradby Rosio Pedroso MPR Associates, Inc. Andy Rogers Consultant Quality Information Partners Lee Hoffman Project Officer National Center for Education Statistics U.S. Department of Education Margaret Spellings Secretary Institute of Education Sciences Grover J. Whitehurst Director National Center for Education Statistics Mark Schneider Commissioner The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, and reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical systems; and review and report on education activities in foreign countries. NCES activities are designed to address high-priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high-quality data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, practitioners, data users, and the general public. Unless specifically noted, all information contained herein is in the public domain. We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a variety of audiences.
    [Show full text]
  • Explaining Charter School Effectiveness†
    American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2013, 5(4): 1–27 http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/app.5.4.1 Explaining Charter School Effectiveness† By Joshua D. Angrist, Parag A. Pathak, and Christopher R. Walters* Lottery estimates suggest Massachusetts’ urban charter schools boost achievement well beyond that of traditional urban public schools stu- dents, while nonurban charters reduce achievement from a higher baseline. The fact that urban charters are most effective for poor nonwhites and low-baseline achievers contributes to, but does not fully explain, these differences. We therefore link school-level charter impacts to school inputs and practices. The relative efficacy of urban lottery sample charters is accounted for by these schools’ embrace of the No Excuses approach to urban education. In our Massachusetts sample, Non-No-Excuses urban charters are no more effective than nonurban charters. JEL H75, I21, I28 ( ) growing body of evidence suggests that urban charter schools have the poten- A tial to generate impressive achievement gains, especially for minority students living in high-poverty areas. In a series of studies using admissions lotteries to iden- tify causal effects, we looked at the impact of charter attendance in Boston and at a Knowledge is Power Program KIPP school in Lynn, Massachusetts Abdulkadiro g˘ lu ( ) ( et al. 2009, 2011; Angrist et al. 2010, 2012 . Boston and Lynn charter middle schools ) increase student achievement by about 0.4 standard deviations per year in math (σ) and about 0.2 per year in English Language Arts ELA . Among high school stu- σ ( ) dents, attendance at a Boston charter school increases student achievement by about 0.3 per year in math and 0.2 per year in ELA.
    [Show full text]
  • Classifying Educational Programmes
    Classifying Educational Programmes Manual for ISCED-97 Implementation in OECD Countries 1999 Edition ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Foreword As the structure of educational systems varies widely between countries, a framework to collect and report data on educational programmes with a similar level of educational content is a clear prerequisite for the production of internationally comparable education statistics and indicators. In 1997, a revised International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED-97) was adopted by the UNESCO General Conference. This multi-dimensional framework has the potential to greatly improve the comparability of education statistics – as data collected under this framework will allow for the comparison of educational programmes with similar levels of educational content – and to better reflect complex educational pathways in the OECD indicators. The purpose of Classifying Educational Programmes: Manual for ISCED-97 Implementation in OECD Countries is to give clear guidance to OECD countries on how to implement the ISCED-97 framework in international data collections. First, this manual summarises the rationale for the revised ISCED framework, as well as the defining characteristics of the ISCED-97 levels and cross-classification categories for OECD countries, emphasising the criteria that define the boundaries between educational levels. The methodology for applying ISCED-97 in the national context that is described in this manual has been developed and agreed upon by the OECD/INES Technical Group, a working group on education statistics and indicators representing 29 OECD countries. The OECD Secretariat has also worked closely with both EUROSTAT and UNESCO to ensure that ISCED-97 will be implemented in a uniform manner across all countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisiting FAFSA Simplification: Expanding Access to the IRS Data Retrieval Tool
    Revisiting FAFSA Simplification: Expanding Access to the IRS Data Retrieval Tool We describe how the complexity in the FAFSA hinders students’ ability to meet financial aid deadlines and examine the feasibility of using a simplified formula to determine aid eligibility. Authors Key Findings Susan Dynarski is a 1 Applying for federal aid for college is complex and slow. Information professor of public about aid eligibility arrives well after students have made crucial policy, education, decisions about preparation for college. Complexity in the aid process and economics at the undermines the intent of aid, which is to get more students into college. University of Michigan. 2 Efforts to simplify the aid process have fallen short of intent. Mark Wiederspan is 3 Students would benefit from a simplified process that automatically a doctoral candidate determines aid eligibility using tax information. This would allow in higher education students to receive information about aid eligibility early, when they are administration at the making key decisions about college. University of Michigan. 4 We show that a simplified process could closely replicate the current distribution of aid, with a much lower paperwork burden on families and colleges. EPI Policy Brief #1 | May 2015 page 1 A simplified aid application shows promise in determining students’ financial aid eligibility. In June 2014 Senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Michael Bennet (D-CO) co- authored a bill that simplifies applying for financial aid. Based on research by EPI Co-Director Susan Dynarski and Judith Scott-Clayton of Columbia University,1 the bill would reduce the 100-question aid application to a postcard with two questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynarski, Joshua Hyman and Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach∗ October 16, 2011
    Experimental Evidence on the Effect of Childhood Investments on Postsecondary Attainment and Degree Completion Susan Dynarski, Joshua Hyman and Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach∗ October 16, 2011 Abstract This paper examines the effect of early childhood investments on college enrollment and degree completion. We use the random assignment in the Project STAR experiment to estimate the effect of smaller classes in primary school on college entry, college choice, and degree completion. We improve on existing work in this area with unusually de- tailed data on college enrollment spells and the previously unexplored outcome of college degree completion. We find that assignment to a small class increases the probability of attending college by 2.7 percentage points, with effects more than twice as large among blacks. Among those with the lowest ex ante probability of attending college, the ef- fect is 11 percentage points. Smaller classes increase the likelihood of earning a college degree by 1.6 percentage points and shift students towards high-earning fields such as STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics), business and economics. We confirm the standard finding that test score effects fade out by middle school, but show that test score effects at the time of the experiment are an excellent predictor of long- term improvements in postsecondary outcomes. We compare the costs and impacts of this intervention with other tools for increasing postsecondary attainment, such as Head Start and financial aid, and conclude that early investments are no more cost effective than later investments in boosting adult educational attainment. ∗We thank Jayne Zaharias-Boyd of HEROS and the Tennessee Department of Education for allowing the match between the STAR and National Student Clearinghouse data.
    [Show full text]
  • Tufts Fact Book 2013-14
    Tufts University Fact Book 2013 2014 FACT BOOK 2013-2014 Tufts University Fact Book 2013 2014 Published by the Office of Institutional Research & Evaluation, Tufts University © 2014 Trustees of Tufts College Tufts University Fact Book 2013 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................... 3 Preface...................................................................................................................................................... 1 University Vision Statement ...................................................................................................................... 2 HISTORY ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 Selected Highlights of 2013 ...................................................................................................................... 5 Aspects of Tufts University History ........................................................................................................... 8 Presidents ............................................................................................................................................... 19 ORGANIZATION ........................................................................................................................................ 21 Trustees .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]