2008 by The Education Trust, Inc. COLLEGE ACCESS AND SUCCESS: Where Are We? What Do We Need to Do? Mississippi Summit Jackson, Mississippi February, 2008

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

COLLEGE ACCESS AND SUCCESS: Where Are We? What Do We Need to

Do?

Mississippi Summit

Jackson, Mississippi February, 2008

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Over past 25 years, we’ve made a lot of progress on the access

side.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Immediate College-Going Up

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Year

Per

cent

Goi

ng to

Col

lege

Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, NCES, The Digest of Education Statistics 2002 (2003), Table 183 AND U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey Report, October 2002.

Recent High School Graduates

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Most High School Grads Go On To Postsecondary Within 2 YearsEntered Public 2-Year Colleges

26%

Entered 4-Year Colleges 45%

Other Postsecondary 4%

Total 75%

Source: NELS: 88, Second (1992) and Third (1994) Follow up; in, USDOE, NCES, “Access to Postsecondary Education for the 1992 High School Graduates”, 1998, Table 2.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

College-going up for all groups.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

College-Going Increasing for Recent* High School Grads at All Income Levels

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10019

8019

8119

8219

8319

8419

8519

8619

8719

8819

8919

9019

9119

9219

9319

9419

9519

9619

9719

9819

9920

0020

0120

0220

0320

04

Per

cen

t G

oin

g t

o C

oll

ege

Low** Middle High

**Due to small sample sizes, 3-year averages used for Low-income category

* Percent of high school completers who were enrolled in college the October after completing high school

Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, NCES, The Condition of Education, 2006, Table 29-1, http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2006/section3/indicator29.asp

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Immediate* College-Going Increasing for All Racial/Ethnic Groups:

1980 to 2005

0102030405060708090

100

Year

Pe

rce

nt

Go

ing

to

Co

lle

ge

African American Latino White

Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, NCES, The Condition of Education, 2006, Table 29-1, http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2006/section3/indicator29.asp

* Percent of high school completers who were enrolled in college the October after completing high school

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But though college-going up for minorities, gains among whites

have been greater

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

All Groups Up In College-Going from 1980-2005, But Gaps Also Increase

13

1.7

23.4

0

10

20

30

40

50

Black Hispanic White

Perc

enta

ge P

oin

t In

crease

in

College G

oin

g, 1980-2

005

Source: U.S. Department of Education, NCES, The Condition of Education 2006.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

And though college going up for low-income students, they still haven’t reached rate of high

income students in mid-seventies.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Highest Achieving Low-Income Students Attend Postsecondary at Same Rate as Bottom Achieving

High Income Students

Achievement Level (in quartiles)

Low-Income

High-Income

First (Low) 36% 77% Second 50% 85% Third 63% 90% Fourth (High) 78% 97%

Source: NELS: 88, Second (1992) and Third Follow up (1994); in, USDOE, NCES, NCES Condition of Education 1997 p. 64

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But access isn’t the only issue:

There’s a question of access to what…

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

And what about graduation?

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Black and Latino Freshmen Complete College at Lower Rates

(6 Year Rates; All 4-Year Institutions)

59%

41% 41%

64%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

White Black Latino Asian

Source: U.S. DOE, NCES, 1995-96 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-Up (BPS: 96/01) in U.S. DOE, NCES, Descriptive Summary of 1995-96 Beginning Postsecondary Students: Six Years Later. Table 7-6 on page 163.

Overall rate: 55%

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

And from 2-year institutions?

Lower still.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

California Community Colleges:Success Rates for Degree-Bound Freshmen*

33%

27%

15%18%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Asian White Black Latino

Shulock, Nancy. Excludes students who did not complete at least 10 credits.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

The result?

Increases in college completion not commensurate with increases

in college going.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

College Going vs. Completion of BA or Higher, White

0102030405060708090

10019

8019

8119

8219

8319

8419

8519

8619

8719

8819

8919

9019

9119

9219

9319

9419

9519

9619

9719

9819

9920

0020

0120

0220

0320

04

Year

Pe

rce

nt

White College-Going White Completion

Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, NCES, The Condition of Education, 2006, Tables 29-1 and 31-3 http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2006/section3/indicator29.asp , http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2006/section3/indicator31.asp

•Immediate College-going refers to the percentage of high school completers who were enrolled in college the October after completing high school. Percent attaining their BA refers to the percentage of 25-29 year-olds with a BA or higher

+19

+10

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

0102030405060708090

100

Year

Pe

rce

nt

Black College-Going BlackCompletion


College Going vs. Completion of BA or Higher, African American


+20

+5.5

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

0102030405060708090

100

Year

Pe

rce

nt

Hispanic College-Going Hispanic Completion


College Going vs. Completion of BA or Higher, Latino


+10

+3.3

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Add it all up…

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Different groups of young Americans obtain degrees at very

different rates.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Some Americans Are Much Less Likely to Graduate From College

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Some Americans Are Much Less Likely to Graduate From College:

B.A. Rates by Age 24

Young People From High SES Families

75%

Young People From Low SES Families

9%

Source: “Family Income and Higher Education Opportunity 1970 to 2003,”in Postsecondary Education Opportunity, Number 156, June 2005.

SES is a weighted variable developed by NCES, which includes parental education levels and occupations and family income. “High” and “low” refer to the highest and lowest quartiles of SES.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

These gaps threaten the health of our democracy.

But they are also especially worrisome given which groups are growing…and which aren’t.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

There is Rapid Growth Among Groups Who Already Are Under-Represented

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

African American

Asian

Latino

Native American

White

Millions

Projected Increase in the Population of 25-64 Year-Olds, 2000 to 2020

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Projections

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Not surprisingly, our international lead is slipping away

We’re still relatively strong (although no longer in the lead)

with all adults.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

U.S.: 3rd Out of 30 Industrialized Nations in Overall Postsecondary Degree Attainment (B.A. & A.A.)

05

101520253035404550

Can

ada

Japa

nU

nite

d S

tate

s Fi

nlan

dD

enm

ark

Nor

way

Aus

tralia

Kor

eaIc

elan

dN

ethe

rland

sB

elgi

umS

wed

en

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

Irela

ndS

witz

erla

ndS

pain

Luxe

mbo

urg

New

Zea

land

Fr

ance

G

erm

any

Gre

ece

Aus

tria

Hun

gary

P

olan

dM

exic

o

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Italy

Por

tuga

l Tu

rkey

Per

cen

t o

f A

du

lts

Ag

es 2

5-64

wit

h

Ass

oci

ates

Deg

ree

or

Hig

her

Source: 2007 OECD Education at a Glance, www.oecd.org/edu/eag2007. Note: data is for 2005.

United States (38%)

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But the U.S. is 9th out of 30 countries in the percentage of younger workers

with A.A. degree or higher

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Can

ada

Japa

nK

orea

Nor

way

Irela

ndB

elgi

umD

enm

ark

Spa

inFr

ance

U

nite

d S

tate

s A

ustra

liaFi

nlan

dS

wed

en

Luxe

mbo

urg

Icel

and

Net

herla

nds

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

Sw

itzer

land

New

Zea

land

P

olan

dG

reec

eG

erm

any

Aus

tria

Hun

gary

P

ortu

gal

Mex

ico

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Italy

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Turk

ey

Pe

rce

nta

ge

(A

ge

s 2

5-3

4)

wit

h

As

so

cia

tes

De

gre

e o

r H

igh

er


United States (39%)

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

. . . and the U.S. is one of only two countries where there is no increase in college attainment among younger workers.

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Kor

eaFr

ance

Ire

land

Spa

inLu

xem

bour

g Ja

pan

Pol

and

Bel

gium

Can

ada

Nor

way

Por

tuga

l S

wed

en

Den

mar

k A

ustra

liaIc

elan

d

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

Gre

ece

Net

herla

nds

Italy

M

exic

oFi

nlan

dN

ew Z

eala

nd

Hun

gary

Tu

rkey

A

ustri

aS

witz

erla

nd

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Ger

man

y

Dif

fere

nc

e in

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Wo

rkfo

rce

w

ith

As

so

cia

tes

De

gre

e o

r H

igh

er:

A

ge

s 2

5-3

4 C

om

pa

red

to

45

-54


United States (0)

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

To reach top performing countries

3855

0

20

40

60

80

100

U.S. Attainment Top Performers

Per

cen

t o

f A

du

lts

Ag

es 2

5-64

BA + AA


20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

WHAT’S GOING ON?

Many in higher education would like to believe that this is mostly about lousy high schools and stingy federal and

state policymakers.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

They are not all wrong.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Low Income and Minority Students Continue to be

Clustered in Schools where we spend less…

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Nation:Inequities in State and Local Revenue

Per Student

Gap

High Poverty vs. Low Poverty Districts

-$907 per student

High Minority vs. Low Minority Districts

-$614 per student

Source: The Education Trust, The Funding Gap 2005. Data are for 2003

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

…expect less

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Source: Prospects (ABT Associates, 1993), in “Prospects: Final Report on Student Outcomes”, PES, DOE, 1997.

Students in Poor Schools Receive ‘A’s for Work That Would Earn ‘Cs’

in Affluent Schools87

35

56

34 41

22 21

11

0

100

Per

cent

ile -

CT

BS

4

A B C DGrades

Seventh Grade Math

Low-poverty schools High-poverty schools

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

…teach them less

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Source: CCSSO, State Indicators of Science and Mathematics Education, 2001

Fewer Latino students are enrolled

in Algebra 2

45

62

0

80

1998

Per

cen

t En

rolle

d

Latino

White

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

African American, Latino & Native American high school graduates are less likely to have

been enrolled in a full college prep track

25

46

22 21

39

0

50

AfricanAmerican

Asian Latino NativeAmerican

White

per

cen

t in

co

lleg

e p

rep

Source: Jay P. Greene, Public High School Graduation and College Readiness Rates in the United States, Manhattan Institute, September 2003. Table 8. 2001 high school graduates with college-prep curriculum.

Full College Prep track is defined as at least: 4 years of English, 3 years of math, 2 years of natural science, 2 years of social science and 2 years of foreign language

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

…and assign them our least qualified teachers.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

More Classes in High-Poverty, High-Minority Schools Taught By Out-of-Field

Teachers

34%

19%

29%

21%

0%

50%

Per

cen

t o

f C

lass

es T

aug

ht

by

Ou

t o

f F

ield

Tea

cher

s

*Teachers lacking a college major or minor in the field. Data for secondary-level core academic classes.Source: Richard M. Ingersoll, University of Pennsylvania. Original analysis for the Ed Trust of 1999-2000 Schools and Staffing Survey .

High poverty Low poverty High minority Low minorityNote: High Poverty school-50% or more of the students are eligible for free/reduced price lunch. Low-poverty school -15% or fewer of the students are eligible for free/reduced price lunch.

High-minority school - 50% or more of the students are nonwhite. Low-minority school- 15% or fewer of the students are nonwhite.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Poor and Minority Students Get More Inexperienced* Teachers

20%

11%

21%

10%

0%

25%

Perc

en

t o

f T

each

ers

Wh

o A

re

Inexp

eri

en

ced

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, “Monitoring Quality: An Indicators Report,” December 2000.

*Teachers with 3 or fewer years of experience.

High poverty Low poverty High minority Low minority

Note: High poverty refers to the top quartile of schools with students eligible for free/reduced price lunch. Low poverty-bottom quartile of schools with students eligible for free/reduced price lunch. High minority-top quartile; those schools with the highest concentrations of minority students. Low minority-bottom quartile of schools with the lowest concentrations of minority students

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

While we’re making some progress in addressing these

problems in elementary schools…

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

NAEP Reading, 9 Year-Olds:

Record Performance for All Groups

150

170

190

210

230

250

1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re


Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress

Note: Long-Term Trends NAEP

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

NAEP Math, 9 Year-Olds: Record Performance for All Groups

150

170

190

210

230

250

1973 1978 1982 1986 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re




20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

We have not yet turned the corner in our high schools.

Gaps between groups are wider today than they were in 1990.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

NAEP Reading, 17 Year-Olds

220

240

260

280

300

320

1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re


21 29



20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

NAEP Math, 17 Year-Olds

220

240

260

280

300

320

1973 1978 1982 1986 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re


20 28



20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

And no matter how you cut the data, our performance relative to other

countries isn’t much to brag about.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

US 15 Year-Olds Rank Near Middle Of The Pack Among 32 Participating Countries: 1999

U.S. RANKREADING 15TH

MATH 19TH

SCIENCE 14TH

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

PISA 2003: US 15 Year-Olds Rank Near The End Of The Pack Among

29 OECD Countries

U.S. RANK READING 20TH

MATH 24TH

SCIENCE 19TH

Source: NCES, 2005, International Outcomes of Learning in Mathematics, Literacy and Problem Solving: 2003 PISA Results.NCES 2005-003

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2003: U.S. Ranked 24th out of 29 OECD Countries in Mathematics

300

350

400

450

500

550

Fin

lan

dK

ore

aN

eth

erla

nds

Japa

nC

ana

daB

elgi

um

Sw

itzer

land

New

Ze

ala

ndA

ustr

alia

Cze

ch R

epu

blic

Icel

and

Den

mar

kF

ranc

eS

wed

en

Aus

tria

Ger

man

yIr

ela

ndO

EC

D A

vera

geS

lova

ck R

epu

blic

Nor

way

Luxe

mbo

urg

Pol

and

Hun

gar

yS

pain

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Por

tuga

l

Italy

Gre

ece

Tu

rkey

Mex

ico

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results , data available at http://www.oecd.org/

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

U.S. Ranks Low in the Percent of Students in the Highest Achievement Level (Level 6)

in Math

0

2

4

6

8

10

Bel

giu

m

Kor

ea

Japa

nF

inla

nd

Net

her

land

sN

ew Z

eal

and

Sw

itzer

land

Aus

tral

iaC

ana

daC

zech

Re

pub

licIc

ela

ndD

enm

ark

Sw

ede

nO

EC

D A

vera

geA

ustr

iaG

erm

any

Fra

nce

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Nor

way

Ire

land

Pol

and

Luxe

mbo

urg

Hun

gar

yU

nite

d S

tate

s

Italy

Tu

rkey

Spa

inP

ortu

gal

Gre

ece

Mex

ico

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results, data available at http://www.oecd.org/

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

U.S. Ranks 23rd out of 29 OECD Countries in the Math Achievement of the Highest-

Performing Students*

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

Bel

giu

mJa

pan

Kor

ea

Sw

itzer

land

Net

her

land

sN

ew Z

eal

and

Fin

lan

dA

ustr

alia

Can

ada

Cze

ch R

epu

blic

Den

mar

kS

wed

en

Ger

man

yO

EC

D A

VE

RA

GE

Aus

tria

Icel

and

Fra

nce

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Nor

way

Hun

gar

yLu

xem

bour

gIr

ela

ndP

olan

dU

nite

d S

tate

sS

pain

Italy

Tu

rkey

Por

tuga

lG

reec

eM

exic

o

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re

* Students at the 95th PercentileSource: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results , data available at http://www.oecd.org/

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

U.S. Ranks 23rd out of 29OECD Countries in the Math Achievement

of High-SES Students

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

Bel

giu

mN

eth

erla

nds

Fin

lan

dC

zech

Re

pub

licC

ana

daJa

pan

Kor

ea

Sw

itzer

land

Aus

tral

iaG

erm

any

New

Ze

ala

ndF

ranc

eD

enm

ark

Sw

ede

nA

ustr

iaH

ung

ary

OE

CD

AV

ER

AG

ES

lova

k R

epub

licLu

xem

bour

gIr

ela

ndIc

ela

ndP

olan

dN

orw

ayU

nite

d S

tate

sS

pain

Por

tuga

lIta

lyG

reec

eT

urk

eyM

exic

o

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results, data available at http://www.oecd.org/

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Even in problem-solving, something we consider an

American strength…

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

PISA 2003: Problem-Solving, US Ranks 24th Out of 29 OECD Countries

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

Kor

ea

Fin

lan

dJa

pan

New

Ze

ala

ndA

ustr

alia

Can

ada

Bel

giu

mS

witz

erla

ndN

eth

erla

nds

Fra

nce

Den

mar

kC

zech

Re

pub

licG

erm

any

Sw

ede

nA

ustr

iaIc

ela

ndH

ung

ary

OE

CD

Ave

rage

Ire

land

Luxe

mbo

urg

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Nor

way

Pol

and

Spa

inU

nite

d S

tate

sP

ortu

gal

Italy

Gre

ece

Tu

rkey

Mex

ico

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re

Source: NCES, 2005, International Outcomes of Learning in Mathematics, Literacy and Problem Solving: 2003 PISA Results.NCES 2005-003

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

So yes, preparation is part of the problem.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

And so is government support for financial aid.

Both the federal government and state governments have shifted more and more of their aid resources toward

more affluent students.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Maximum Pell Grant Coverage of Cost of College

36%

84%

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1975 2005

East

West

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But colleges and universities are not

unimportant actors in this drama of shrinking opportunity, either.

.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

For one thing, the shifts away from poor students in institutional

aid money are MORE PRONOUNCED than the shifts in

government aid.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Students from Families with Income < $40,000, 1995:56% of Institutional Aid,38% of students on Public 4-Year Campuses

56

38

0

20

40

60

1995

Pe

rce

nt

Share of InstitutionalGrant Aid

Percentage ofUndergraduatePopulation

Source: National Postsecondary Student Aid, (2003-2004) data analysis conducted by Jerry Davis for the Education Trust

Note: These numbers reflect outcomes students in four-year public colleges.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

By 2003, Aid and Enrollment Had Declined For Students from Family Income < $40,000

56

3538

28

0

20

40

60

1995 2003

Pe

rce

nt

Share of InstitutionalGrant Aid

Percentage ofUndergraduatePopulation

Source: National Postsecondary Student Aid, (2003-2004) data analysis conducted by Jerry Davis for the Education Trust

Note: These figures are for students in four-year public colleges.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

This is true even in our most prestigious public universities.

Flagships and other Public Research Extensive Universities

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Flagships spend more money on aid than their students receive

from either federal or state sources.

They could choose to cushion the effects of increased cost on poor

students. But they don’t.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Big increases in spending on high income students

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Typical institutional grant recipient in low-income family now gets LESS than typical

grant recipient in high income family

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

So it’s not all about the students. What colleges do is important.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Moreover, what colleges do also turns out to be very important in

whether students graduate or not.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Current College Completion Rates:4-Year Colleges

• Approximately 4 in 10 entering freshmen obtain a Bachelor’s degree within 4 years;

• Within six years of entry, that proportion rises to about 6 in 10.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But graduation rates vary widely across the nation’s postsecondary

institutions

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Some of these differences are clearly attributable to differences

in student preparation and/or institutional mission.

But not all…

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Some colleges are far more successful than their students’

“stats” would suggest.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Doc/Research Institutions With Similar Students Getting Different Results

Median SAT

Size % Pell Overall 6 Yr-Grad Rate

White/URM Grad Rate Gap

Penn State 1195 33,975 19% 83% -14%

Univ of Wisconsin

1240 27,711 12% 76% -21%

Texas

A & M

1185 33,901 14% 75% -9%

Univ of Washington

1185 25,059 21% 71% -11%

Univ of Minnesota

1145 28,273 16% 54% -19%

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Masters Level Institutions With Similar Students Getting Different Results

Median SAT


URM 6-Yr Grad Rate

Millersville U of PA

1055 6369 19% 66% 46%

SUNY at Plattsburgh

1045 5130 33% 59% 52%

NW MO State

1010 5043 27% 53% 44%

Northern Michigan U

1010 7831 32% 45% 38%

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Bac General/Masters Institutions With Similar Students Getting Different Results

Median SAT


URM 6-Yr Grad Rate

Elizabeth City (NC)

810 2039 60% 51% 54%

Kentucky State

825 1827 49% 39% 44%

Fayetteville State (NC)

865 3820 55% 38% 39%

U of Ark Pine Bluff

775 2918 68% 31% 31%

Coppin State (MD)

875 2691 57% 22% 22%

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

College Results Online

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Bottom Line:

• So yes, we have to keep working to improve our high schools;

• But we’ve got to focus on improving our colleges, too.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Mississippi:What do the numbers tell us?

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

8th grade

Highest grade for which National Assessment data are available by

state.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2007 NAEP Grade 8 Reading Average Overall Scale Scores by State

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

Mas

sach

uset

tsV

erm

ont

Mon

tana

Mai

ne

New

Ham

pshi

reN

ew J

erse

y

Sou

th D

akot

aM

inne

sota

Nor

th D

akot

aO

hio

Pen

nsyl

vani

aC

onne

ctic

utIo

wa

Kan

sas

Neb

rask

aV

irgin

iaC

olor

ado

Ore

gon

Wyo

min

gD

elaw

are

Idah

oM

arvl

and

Was

hing

ton

Indi

ana

New

Yor

kW

isco

nsin

Illin

ois

Mis

sour

iK

entu

cky

Uta

h

Nat

iona

l Pub

licTe

xas

Flor

ida

Mic

higa

nO

klah

oma

Ala

ska

Geo

rgia

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Tenn

esse

eA

rkan

sas

Rho

de Is

land

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Ariz

ona

Wes

t Virg

inia

Loui

sian

aA

laba

ma

Nev

ada

Cal

iforn

iaH

awai

i

New

Mex

ico

Mis

siss

ippi

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP Data Explorer, http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/

Proficient Scale Score: 281

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2007 NAEP Grade 8 Reading Average African American Scale Scores by State

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

Haw

aii

Mas

sach

uset

tsC

olor

ado

Virg

inia

Ala

ska

Del

awar

eO

rego

nM

aryl

and

New

Jer

sey

Texa

sA

rizon

aN

evad

aN

ew M

exic

o

Pen

nsyl

vani

aIo

wa

Ken

tuck

yW

ashi

ngto

nC

onne

ctic

utG

eorg

iaK

ansa

sN

ew Y

ork

Ohi

oM

inne

sota

Flor

ida

Illin

ois

Nat

iona

l Pub

licN

ebra

ska

Okl

ahom

aIn

dian

aM

isso

uri

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Wes

t Virg

inia

Loui

sian

aTe

nnes

see

Rho

de Is

land

Mis

siss

ippi

Cal

iforn

iaA

laba

ma

Ark

ansa

sM

ichi

gan

Wis

cons

in

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re



20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2007 NAEP Grade 8 Reading Average White Scale Scores by State

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

Mas

sach

uset

ts

New

Jer

sey

Con

nect

icut

Mar

vlan

dC

olor

ado

Texa

sD

elaw

are

Mon

tana

New

Yor

kO

hio

Min

neso

taV

erm

ont

Virg

inia

Kan

sas

Pen

nsyl

vani

a

Sou

th D

akot

aG

eorg

iaIll

inoi

sN

ebra

ska

Nat

iona

l Pub

licA

lask

aIo

wa

Mai

neM

isso

uri

New

Ham

pshi

re

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Nor

th D

akot

aO

rego

nW

ashi

ngto

nW

isco

nsin

Ariz

ona

Wyo

min

gFl

orid

aId

aho

Indi

ana

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Mic

higa

n

Rho

de Is

land

Tenn

esse

eA

rkan

sas

Cal

iforn

iaO

klah

oma

Uta

h

New

Mex

ico

Ken

tuck

yLo

uisi

ana

Mis

siss

ippi

Nev

ada

Haw

aii

Ala

bam

a

Wes

t Virg

inia

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re



20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2007 NAEP Grade 8 Reading Average Poor Scale Scores by State

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

Mai

neM

onta

naV

erm

ont

Sou

th D

akot

a

Nor

th D

akot

a

New

Ham

pshi

reId

aho

Mas

sach

uset

tsW

yom

ing

Del

awar

eM

inne

sota

Neb

rask

aIo

wa

Kan

sas

Ore

gon

Pen

nsyl

vani

aK

entu

cky

Mis

sour

iO

klah

oma

Uta

hV

irgin

iaC

olor

ado

Indi

ana

Mar

ylan

dN

ew J

erse

yO

hio

Was

hing

ton

New

Yor

kFl

orid

aIll

inoi

sTe

xas

Nat

iona

l Pub

licA

rkan

sas

Geo

rgia

Tenn

esse

e

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Wes

t Virg

inia

Wis

cons

inLo

uisi

ana

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Ala

ska

Mic

higa

nC

onne

ctic

utH

awai

iM

issi

ssip

pi

New

Mex

ico

Rho

de Is

land

Ala

bam

aA

rizon

aN

evad

aC

alifo

rnia

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re



20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2007 NAEP Grade 8 Math Average Overall Scale Scores by State

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

Mas

sach

uset

tsM

inne

sota

Nor

th D

akot

aV

erm

ont

Kan

sas

New

Jer

sey

New

Ham

pshi

re

Sou

th D

akot

aV

irgin

iaM

onta

naW

yom

ing

Col

orad

oM

aine

Mar

ylan

d

Pen

nsyl

vani

aTe

xas

Wis

cons

inIn

dian

aIo

wa

Ohi

oW

ashi

ngto

nId

aho

Neb

rask

a

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Ore

gon

Ala

ska

Del

awar

eC

onne

ctic

ut

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Mis

sour

iU

tah

Illin

ois

Nat

iona

l Pub

licN

ew Y

ork

Ken

tuck

yFl

orid

aM

ichi

gan

Ariz

ona

Geo

rgia

Okl

ahom

a

Rho

de Is

land

Ark

ansa

sTe

nnes

see

Loui

sian

aN

evad

aC

alifo

rnia

Wes

t Virg

inia

Haw

aii

New

Mex

ico

Ala

bam

aM

issi

ssip

pi

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re



20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2007 NAEP Grade 8 Math Average African American Scale Scores by State

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

Col

orad

oO

rego

nA

lask

aTe

xas

Virg

inia

Kan

sas

Ariz

ona

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Del

awar

eM

aryl

and

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Mas

sach

uset

tsN

ew J

erse

yN

ew M

exic

oW

ashi

ngto

nG

eorg

iaM

inne

sota

Flor

ida

Indi

ana

Nat

iona

l Pub

licLo

uisi

ana

New

Yor

kO

hio

Okl

ahom

aIo

wa

Ken

tuck

yP

enns

ylva

nia

Con

nect

icut

Nev

ada

Ark

ansa

sTe

nnes

see

Cal

iforn

iaIll

inoi

sM

isso

uri

Mis

siss

ippi

Rho

de Is

land

Wes

t Virg

inia

Wis

cons

inA

laba

ma

Mic

higa

nN

ebra

ska

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re



20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2007 NAEP Grade 8 Math Average White Scale Scores by State

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

310

Mas

sach

uset

tsM

aryl

and

Texa

sN

ew J

erse

yM

inne

sota

Col

orad

oV

irgin

iaK

ansa

s

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Nor

th D

akot

aD

elaw

are

Ala

ska

Con

nect

icut

Pen

nsyl

vani

a

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Wis

cons

in

Sou

th D

akot

aV

erm

ont

Neb

rask

aW

ashi

ngto

nIll

inoi

sO

hio

Mon

tana

Nat

iona

l Pub

licN

ew Y

ork

Indi

ana

Wyo

min

gO

rego

nA

rizon

a

New

Ham

pshi

reFl

orid

aIo

wa

Geo

rgia

Mis

sour

iC

alifo

rnia

Idah

oM

aine

Uta

hM

ichi

gan

New

Mex

ico

Rho

de Is

land

Loui

sian

aA

rkan

sas

Nev

ada

Tenn

esse

eK

entu

cky

Okl

ahom

aM

issi

ssip

piA

laba

ma

Haw

aii

Wes

t Virg

inia

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re



20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2007 NAEP Grade 8 Math Average Poor Scale Scores by State

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

Nor

th D

akot

aV

erm

ont

Kan

sas

Mai

ne

Mas

sach

uset

ts

Sou

th D

akot

aTe

xas

Wyo

min

gId

aho

Min

neso

taM

onta

naIn

dian

a

New

Ham

pshi

reD

elaw

are

Iow

aO

rego

n

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Mar

ylan

dN

ew Y

ork

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Ohi

oV

irgin

iaW

ashi

ngto

nC

olor

ado

Ken

tuck

y

Pen

nsyl

vani

aU

tah

Ala

ska

Mis

sour

i

New

Jer

sey

Wis

cons

inFl

orid

a

Nat

iona

l Pub

licN

ebra

ska

Loui

sian

aO

klah

oma

Ark

ansa

sA

rizon

aG

eorg

iaIll

inoi

sTe

nnes

see

Wes

t Virg

inia

Mic

higa

nN

evad

aH

awai

i

New

Mex

ico

Cal

iforn

iaM

issi

ssip

pi

Rho

de Is

land

Con

nect

icut

Ala

bam

a

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re



20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Some recent progress, especially in math at lower grades

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Rankings are for the 40 states with Overall data in both 2000 and 2007. Data refer to the percentage point difference between the percent of students at Below

Basic in 2007 and 2000.

NAEP Grade 4 Math Movement Out of Below Basic, Overall, 2000-2007


Top States

Arkansas 26%

Mississippi 25%

Georgia, Hawaii 22%

National Average 17%

Range 26% to 8%

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Rankings are for the 32 states with African American data in both 2000 and 2007. Data refer to the percentage point difference between the percent of students at Below

Basic in 2007 and 2000.

NAEP Grade 4 Math Movement Out of Below Basic, African American, 2000-2007


Top States

California 33%

Arkansas, Kentucky 32%

MS, OH, SC, VA, WV 29%

National Average 28%

Range 33% to 15%

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

High School, College

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

College Going Rate for Recent High School Graduates:

Mississippi Top Third (2004)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

New

Yor

kS

outh

Car

olin

aN

orth

Car

olin

aM

assa

chus

etts

Indi

ana

New

Mex

ico

Con

nect

icut

Mis

siss

ippi

Wyo

min

gM

ichi

gan

Wis

cons

inC

olor

ado

Ken

tuck

yR

hode

Isla

ndIll

inoi

sLo

uisi

ana

Flor

ida

Okl

ahom

aM

isso

uri

Haw

aii

Ariz

ona

Idah

oA

lask

aW

ashi

ngto

nU

tah

Co

lleg

e C

on

tinu

atio

n R

ate

Source: Postsecondary.org

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But When High School Dropout Rate is Factored In, State Performance Drops

to Bottom Quarter(HS Grad. Rate x College Continuation Rate, 2004)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Nor

th D

akot

aM

inne

sota

Iow

aM

assa

chus

etts

Kan

sas

Wis

cons

inIn

dian

aC

olor

ado

Ark

ansa

sIll

inoi

sM

isso

uri

Rho

de Is

land

New

Yor

kW

est V

irgin

iaM

aine

Idah

oK

entu

cky

Ver

mon

tTe

xas

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Mis

siss

ippi

Ore

gon

Cal

iforn

iaTe

nnes

see

Ala

ska

Ch

an

ce fo

r C

olle

ge

Source: Postsecondary.org

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Six-Year College Graduation Rates: Mississippi Middle Third

(2005)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Del

awar

eM

aryl

and

Rho

de Is

land

Ver

mon

tV

irgin

iaC

alifo

rnia

Illin

ois

Min

neso

taN

ew Y

ork

Mai

neS

outh

Car

olin

aO

rego

nN

ebra

ska

Kan

sas

Col

orad

oM

issi

ssip

piTe

nnes

see

Nor

th D

akot

aU

tah

Sou

th D

akot

aId

aho

Wes

t Virg

inia

Loui

sian

aN

ew M

exic

oA

lask

a

Gra

du

atio

n R

ate

Source: Ed Trust Analysis of IPEDS data. First-time, full-time freshmen completing a BA within 6 years.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Overall Six-Year Graduation Rates for Largest Public University:

Mississippi Bottom Quarter, 2005

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Cal

iforn

iaIll

inoi

sW

isco

nsin

Del

awar

eTe

xas

Mic

higa

nN

ew H

amps

hire

New

Jer

sey

Ohi

oIn

dian

aM

isso

uri

Ver

mon

tN

ebra

ska

Ala

bam

aK

entu

cky

New

Yor

kTe

nnes

see

Ark

ansa

sM

issi

ssip

piA

rizon

aS

outh

Dak

ota

Mai

neM

onta

naN

ew M

exic

oId

aho

Gra

du

atio

n R

ate

Source: Ed Trust Analysis of IPEDS data

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Six-Year Graduation Rates for African Americans at Largest

Public University:Mississippi Below Average, 2005

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Texa

sM

aryl

and

Pen

nsyl

vani

aV

irgin

ia

New

Jer

sey

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Con

nect

icut

Mas

sach

uset

tsO

hio

Was

hing

ton

Iow

aA

laba

ma

Ark

ansa

sM

issi

ssip

piM

inne

sota

Ariz

ona

Neb

rask

aN

ew Y

ork

Ore

gon

Nev

ada

New

Mex

ico

Ala

ska

Gra

du

atio

n R

ate

Source: Ed Trust Analysis of IPEDS data

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Adults Ages 25-64 with at least Associate’s Degrees:

Mississippi Bottom Quarter

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Mas

sach

uset

tsC

olor

ado

Min

neso

taM

aryl

and

New

Yor

kN

orth

Dak

ota

Rho

de Is

land

Neb

rask

aC

alifo

rnia

Kan

sas

Iow

aO

rego

nD

elaw

are

Flor

ida

Ala

ska

Mic

higa

nA

rizon

aId

aho

Ohi

oS

outh

Car

olin

aO

klah

oma

Ala

bam

aM

issi

ssip

piK

entu

cky

Ark

ansa

s

% w

/ Co

lleg

e D

eg

ree

s

Source: NCHEMS - calculated using data from U.S. Census Bureau

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Adults 25+ with at leastBachelor’s Degrees

Mississippi Bottom Quarter

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

% w

/ BA

De

gre

es

Source: Postsecondary.org – Educational Attainment by State 1977 to 2007

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Looking ahead?

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

The College Educated Population In Mississippi: Today and Tomorrow

29%

37%

46%

55%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Per

cent

of

Adu

lts A

ges

25-6

4 w

ith

Col

lege

Deg

rees

Source: NCHEMS; estimates calculated using data from US Census Bureau; http://www.makingopportunityaffordable.org/adding-it-up/p04/

Mississippi

Current

USA

Projected

2025

USA

Current

Best-

Performing

Nations, Current

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

What can we do?Several high-leverage places to

focus

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

First, let’s be clear:improving high schools is

hugely important.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Far too many of our high schools—especially those serving concentrations of poor and

minority students—don’t prepare their students for much of

anything.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But let us also be clear that it doesn’t have to be that way.

Some schools serving exactly the same students manage to produce much, much higher achievement.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Elmont Memorial Junior-Senior High School

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Elmont Memorial Junior-Senior High SchoolElmont, New York

• 1,966 Students in Grades 7-12

• 75% African American

• 12% Latino

Source: New York State School Report Card, http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/irts/reportcard/

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Elmont MemorialHigher Percentage of Students Meeting Graduation

Requirements than the State, Class of 2004 Regents English

99 99 100 100 99

85

74 72 75

88

0

20

40

60

80

100

All AfricanAmerican

Latino Poor Non-Poor

Pe

rce

nt

Me

eti

ng

Gra

du

ati

on

Re

qu

ire

me

nts

Elmont

New York


20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Elmont MemorialHigher Percentage of Students Meeting Graduation

Requirements than the State, Class of 2004 Regents Math

96 95 94 94 96

83

68 6872

86

0

20

40

60

80

100

All AfricanAmerican

Latino Poor Non-Poor

Pe

rce

nt

Me

eti

ng

Gra

du

ati

on

Re

qu

ire

me

nts

Elmont

New York


20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

University Park Campus School

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

University Park Campus SchoolWorcester, Massachusetts

• 220 Students in Grades 7-12

• 9% African American

• 18% Asian

• 35% Latino

• 39% White

• 73% Low-Income

Source: Massachusetts Department of Education School Profile, http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

University Park Results: 2004

• 100% of 10th graders passed MA high school exit exam on first attempt.

• 87% passed at advanced or proficient level.

• Fifth most successful school in the state, surpassing many schools serving wealthy students.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

These schools, however, exceptions.

We need them to be the rule.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Work on aligning standards, assessments and high school course requirements matters a

lot.

American Diploma Project

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But everybody in this room knows that policy alignment is only the first—and perhaps the

easiest—step.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

To get students to these standards, teachers will need:

• Robust curriculum materials;

• Help designing powerful units, assignments;

• Help mastering the array of teaching strategies necessary to get all learners to much higher standards;

• Better data on how their students are doing along the way.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

This is particularly fertile ground for high school/college

collaboration.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

What to do on the higher education side?

Six suggestions.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

1. Get folks engaged in looking at their data.

Yes, the numbers will often suggest the need for better preparation. But they will also

typically show that we’re not doing so well even by the students who meet our definition

of “prepared.”

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

NASH/EdTrust Math Success Initiative

9 Systems Analyzing Data on Student Success in Math Courses

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Participating Systems

• State Univ System of Florida

• University System of Georgia

• University of Hawaii System

• Purdue University• State University of

New York

• Kentucky Council on Postsecondary Ed

• University of Louisiana System

• Mississippi Institutions of Higher Learning

• Nevada System of Higher Education

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Some Initial Findings• Large numbers of remedial students not successful—either

withdraw or fail.• Large D, F, W rates in first several credit-bearing courses• Preparation matters. Students who have higher ACT math

subscores, for example, more likely to be successful. BUT prep levels only explain a small part of success (ACT around one-third; SAT even less).

• Math coursework taken during senior year important. Many students taking courses below Algebra 1.

• In many cases, students who test as non-ready have success rates in non-remedial courses equal to those in the remedial courses designed for them. (California Community Colleges, too.)

• Wide differences in these rates even among comparable institutions.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Much more to learn—including how big the differences are

among faculty members--but clear indicators for action.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

2. Do a close analysis of student progression through your

institutions and ACT on what you learn.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Two states in our network—KY and NV—have done such

analyses, focused specifically on students with developmental

needs.

Conclusion: Student who take those courses immediately on entry are much

more likely to succeed.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Both now have new policies.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

University of Northern Iowa “Path Analysis”:

Not enough sections of key courses.

By adding just a few sections, unblocked clogged arteries…and

student success went up.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

#3. Learn from your own high performers.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Almost every system has found some campuses that get better

results. Important to understand what they are doing.

Should be looking at the data by faculty member, as well, and working to

understand teaching practices that work.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

4. Take on introductory courses.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Drop-Failure-Withdrawal RatesMathematics

• Georgia State U 45%• Louisiana State U 36%• Rio CC 41%• U of Alabama 60%• U of Missouri-SL 50%• UNC-Greensboro 77%• UNC-Chapel Hill 19%• Wayne State U 61%

Source: National Center for Academic Transformation

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Drop-Failure-Withdrawal RatesOther Disciplines

• Calhoun CC Statistics 35%• Chattanooga State Psychology 37%• Drexel U Computing 51%• IUPUI Sociology 39%• SW MN State U Biology 37%• Tallahassee CC English Comp 46%• U of Iowa Chemistry 25%• U of New Mexico Psychology 39%• U of S Maine Psychology 28%• UNC-Greensboro Statistics 70%

Source: National Center for Academic Transformation

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Of course, some of this may be about preparation. But clearly

not all…

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

College Algebra Course Redesign:UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA

SUCCESS RATES • Fall 1998• Fall 1999

• Fall 2000• Fall 2001• Fall 2002• Fall 2003• Fall 2004

• 47.1%• 40.6%

• 50.2%• 60.5%• 63.0%• 78.9%• 76.2%

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Also, totally eliminated black/white gap in course

outcomes.Same students.

Same preparation.

Different results.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

#5. Set some stretch goals.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

A lot of systems, campuses don’t set goals. At best, report increases or decreases.

Those numbers can be seriously misleading. But they also don’t

inspire or engage.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

New NASH Access to Success Initiative: One example of an

effort to set serious stretch goals, measure and report progress

over time.

Goal?By 2015 to reduce by at least half the gaps in

college going and college success that separate low-income students and students of

color from others.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

#6. How about teacher preparation?

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

This area, too, is a place where folks in higher ed can just throw

up their hands. “Until those K-12 people raise salaries to a

decent level and don’t hire anybody who can fog a mirror, there’s no way that we can raise

our standards.”

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But, some higher ed leaders aren’t throwing up their hands.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

• Louisiana: Blue Ribbon Commission;

• North Carolina: System Leadership on Teacher Pay Issues.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

#7. Finally, what about mounting a big effort to increase need-based state aid, as well as rethinking how we use our institutional aid dollars?

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Over the past few decades, role of higher education has been

transformed from agent of opportunity and mobility, to

another agent of stratification.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

Perhaps not surprising, given the relentless march of privilege in our society and the tendency of

privileged people to demand ever more.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

But…that’s not why most of us in higher education got into this

business.Somehow, we’ve got to find a way

to refocus our energies and our resources.

20

08

by T

he

Ed

uca

tion

Tru

st, Inc.

The Education TrustDownload this Presentation

And Subscribe to Equity Express

www.edtrust.org

Washington, DC: 202-293-1217

Oakland, CA: 510-465-6444

Documents

2008 by The Education Trust, Inc. COLLEGE ACCESS AND SUCCESS: Where Are We? What Do We Need to Do? Mississippi Summit Jackson, Mississippi February, 2008