Topic Areas

An increasingly prevalent type of program designed to address college attainment gaps are state-based financial aid programs that offer low-income middle school students a promise of funding for college in exchange for making a pledge to do well in high school, be a good citizen and not be convicted of a felony, and apply for financial aid to college.  Using a difference-in-differences specification, we estimate the effects of Washington State’s College Bound Scholarship Program on high school grades,  whether students graduate from high school, and incarceration in state prison during high school or during early adulthood.  We find evidence that eligible students’ high school grade point averages fell by 0.01 (from a pre-policy base of 2.38) and that the likelihood of being incarcerated fell by 0.1 percentage points (from a pre-policy base of 0.3 percentage points). These findings are robust to falsification exercises. Eligible students also experienced an increase in their rate of on-time high school graduation, but falsification tests show that this result is not due to the program, but rather due to broader secular improvement in graduation rates for disadvantaged youth.

Citation: Dan Goldhaber, Mark C. Long, Trevor Gratz, Jordan Rooklyn (2017). The Effects of Washington’s College Bound Scholarship Program on High School Grades, High School Completion, and Incarceration. CALDER Working Paper No. 178

The purpose of this paper is to assess the effects of this increase in the mandated minimum number of math courses. This assessment entails two separate questions. One is whether the policy affected actual course-taking among high school students. In exploring this question, we are attentive to the likelihood that the new standard might have a bigger effect on some groups of students than on others. Another question is whether any such changes in high school course-taking, together with the threat of being denied admission, affected college enrollment patterns or students’ choices or performance once enrolled.

Our findings fall into three groups. First, the evidence is consistent with the expectation that the increased requirements would influence the number of high school math courses taken by at least some students. Throughout our analysis we characterize students by their math aptitude as measured by their performance on the required 8^th grade math end of grade test, with performance divided into deciles from low to high.  Many students, particularly those at the higher deciles, were already taking four math courses by the time the minimum number was increased, so the new requirement presumably had no direct effect on them. But in eight of the 10 deciles we observed greater-than-expected increases in the share of students who, using the proxy we had (whether a student had taken Algebra II by 11^th grade), were in a position to meet the new four-course standard. We cannot prove that these increases were due to the policy, but it is reasonable to think that at least most of them were.

Second are findings related to whether the increase in math courses affected whether students enrolled in one of the state’s public university campuses and, if so, where. Because the increases in math courses were greatest for students with 8^th grade math scores in the middle deciles, one might have expected that the branch campuses whose students traditionally come from those deciles would have experienced the biggest increases in enrollment due to the changes in math course taking in high school. Surprisingly, we did not find that. Instead, we find increases in predicted enrollment due to changes in math course taking across all campuses, distributed differently across math achievement deciles. Each branch experienced increases in predicted enrollment, but those increases tended to be for students in the deciles that were already most common at those branches. For the branches that have traditionally drawn from deciles below the median, the newly stimulated enrollments came from those deciles. For the two branches with the highest shares of students from the top deciles before the policy change, the new policy stimulated new enrollment, and it was mainly in those same top deciles. Despite the general tendency before the change for top-decile students to have taken four math courses, many top decile students apparently had not been doing so, especially in school districts that had not pushed such students to do so in the past. Once the policy change was enacted, such districts beefed up their math pathways, causing more top students to take more math. Conceivably, the new requirement caused these top students to consider attending the leading research universities at Chapel Hill or NC State instead of one of the branches closer to their homes.

The third set of findings relate to whether the minimum course requirement affected the behavior of students once they enrolled in one of the branches. Here the results are less broad-based than for the other analyses.  We find some evidence that the policy change increased the likelihood that high decile students would major in a STEM field, but reduced the likelihood of low decile students of doing so.  Further, we find that the program raised the GPA of students in deciles 8 and 9, but had at most limited effects on four-year graduation rates. 

Citation: Charles Clotfelter, Helen Ladd (2016). Raising the Bar for College Admission: North Carolina’s Increase in Minimum Math Course Requirements. CALDER Working Paper No. 163

We study a popular dual enrollment program in Washington State using a new administrative database linking high school and postsecondary enrollments. Conditional on prior high school performance and basic demographic and economic covariates, dual enrollment students are more likely to attend any college, but they are no more likely to attend college full-time and are less likely to attend a four-year college. Supplementary analyses suggest selection on pretreatment college enrollment plans explains some of the initial diversionary effect of dual enrollment. Finally, we consider the role of common data limitations in interpreting results of dual enrollment studies.

Citation: Dan Goldhaber, James Cowan (2013). How Much of a “Running Start” do Dual Enrollment Programs Provide Students?. CALDER Working Paper No. 92