Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab...
-
Upload
meghan-hampton -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab...
![Page 1: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Heterogeneity Among Pell RecipientsEvidence and Implications
Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-RabUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison
Affordability and College Attainment in Wisconsin Public Higher EducationJuly 7, 2011
![Page 2: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Motivation
• Policymakers are pursuing equity and excellence agendas simultaneously—aiming to expand access and diversity while also increasing college completion rates
• One popular proxy for diversity is the percent of low-income students on campus
• Since most colleges and universities lack information on family income, Pell Grant receipt is the common measure
![Page 3: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Possible Unintended Consequences
• Equity and excellence can conflict: a greater representation of Pell recipients is associated with lower graduation rates
• Accountability for completion rates may create incentives for colleges to “cream” the top tier of Pell recipients
• There is already evidence of fierce competition for high-ability, low-income students among institutions with greater resources
![Page 4: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Common Assumptions and Potential Problems
• Pell receipt signifies a common set of student characteristics
• This facilitates a comparison of the presence and performance of Pell recipients across institutions as a way to assess institutional performance
• However, this approach implies general homogeneity among Pell recipients as a group
• It also implies no role for institutions in the sorting of Pell recipients across colleges and universities
![Page 5: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Focus of this Study
We consider the degree to which Pell Grant recipients are heterogeneous:1. Across four selectivity tiers of public Wisconsin
universities and both 2-year sectors2. Across institutions within selectivity tiers and sectors3. Within institutions
In other words, we ask “Can we simply assume a Pell recipient is a Pell recipient is a Pell recipient?”
![Page 6: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Pell Grant 101
• Students and their families must fill out the FAFSA • Eligibility is based on an expected family contribution
(EFC)• Students with an EFC of below $4,041 in 2008-09
academic year were eligible to receive a Pell up to $4,731• The needs analysis (EFC calculation) is one source of
variation among Pell recipients—it relies on an array of information about family income and assets
![Page 7: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Keeping the Pell Grant
Initial receipt does not ensure continued receipt. Renewal requires:1. Refiling a FAFSA2. Continuing to have a qualified EFC3. Making “satisfactory academic progress”
• Varies by institution but usually a C average
So—once a Pell recipient, not always a Pell recipient
![Page 8: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Pell Characteristics Nationwide (2008-2009)
• 6.1 million recipients • 28.4% of undergraduates received a Pell• 41% of recipients were dependents
• 49% of dependents had a zero EFC• 38% of dependents scored in the lowest quartile on
ACT/SAT, while only 14% scored in the top quartile
![Page 9: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Pell Recipients in Wisconsin Public Higher Education (2008-2009)• Nearly 60,000 students received Pell Grants
• 20% of university students• 23% of Wisconsin Technical College System students• 24% of UW Colleges students
• Rates of retention to the 2nd year of college at universities: • 76% for Pell recipients vs. 81% for non-recipients
• 6-year bachelor’s completion rates at universities:• 55% for Pell recipients vs. 68% for non-recipients
![Page 10: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Wisconsin Public Higher Education
• 13 public universities (UW)• Tier 1: Median ACT 25-28 (Universities A-C)• Tier 2: Median ACT 23 (Universities D-F)• Tier 3: Median ACT 22 (Universities G-J)• Tier 4: Median ACT 20-21 (Universities K-M)
• UW Colleges (13 two-year branches)• Wisconsin Technical College System (16 two-year districts)
![Page 11: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Sample for this Study
• Stratified random sample of first-time, traditional-age Pell recipients who enrolled full-time at a public Wisconsin college or university in September 2008
• Total number of students=2370
![Page 12: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Data
• FAFSA • Gender, age, parental income and assets, EFC, parental
education, dependency status• Observed for all students
• ACT scores• Observed for 52.4% of university students
• National Student Clearinghouse • Tracks whether a student is enrolled at any institution in
the fall 2009 semester• Observed for all students
![Page 13: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Data
• Self-administered mail survey of students• 28 pages• 74% response rate in fall 2008
• Includes the following measures that are often affect student outcomes but are usually not measured in national, state, or institutional datasets:• Motivation and effort• Social capital (access to information)• Developmental stage (progress towards adulthood)
![Page 14: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Measuring Heterogeneity
We use three approaches:
• Graphical distributions (kernel density plots)• Standard deviations• Percentiles of distributions (10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th)
![Page 15: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Question #1: How do Pell recipients vary across selectivity tiers and sectors?• Compared to Tier 1 recipients, Tier 4 Pell recipients:
• Have less economic security and financial capital• Have clearer goals for the future• Are farther along the transition to adulthood
• Compared to UW Colleges students, WTCS students:• Are slightly more willing to sacrifice today for tomorrow
(e.g. they think longer-term)• Are more confident in their ability to get good grades in
college• Have fewer financial resources
![Page 16: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Within-Tier Variation
Distribution of parental income—Tier 1 Distribution of parental income—Tier 4
0.0
0001
.000
02.0
0003
Den
sity
0 20000 40000 60000 80000Parent adjusted gross income
University AUniversity BUniversity C
0.0
0001
.000
02D
ensi
ty
0 20000 40000 60000 80000Parent adjusted gross income
University KUniversity LUniversity M
![Page 17: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Within-Tier Variation
Distribution of ACT scores--Tier 1 Distribution of ACT scores--Tier 4
0.0
5.1
.15
.2D
ensi
ty
10 15 20 25 30 35ACT composite score
University AUniversity BUniversity C
0.0
5.1
.15
Den
sity
10 15 20 25 30 35ACT composite score
University KUniversity LUniversity M
![Page 18: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Within-Institution Variation
1 2 3 4 50.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
Financial confidence—University A
1 2 3 4 50.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
Financial confidence-- Uni-versity L
![Page 19: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Within-Institution Variation
1 2 3 4 50.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
Transition to adulthood--Uni-versity L
1 2 3 4 5
-10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
Transition to adulthood--Uni-versity A
![Page 20: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
University A
University B
University C
University D
University E
University F
University G
University H
University I
University J
University K
University L
University M
UW Colleges
0 20 40 60 80 100
Year 2 Pell Renewal Rates by Institution and Tier
Renewal Rate (%)
Tier 4
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 1
![Page 21: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
University A
University B
University C
University D
University E
University F
University G
University H
University I
University J
University K
University L
University M
University of Wisconsin Colleges
Wisconsin Technical College System
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0
Year 2 Persistence Rate by Institution and Tier
Persistence Rate (%)
Tier 4
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 1
![Page 22: Heterogeneity Among Pell Recipients Evidence and Implications Robert Kelchen and Sara Goldrick-Rab University of Wisconsin-Madison Affordability and College.](https://reader030.fdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032708/56649e795503460f94b79257/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Conclusions
• There is wide variation among Pell Grant recipients attending Wisconsin’s public colleges and universities
• The differences in students are not strictly linked to the selectivity of the institutions they attend
• Blunt measures of accountability– such as “Percent Pell” or “Pell Graduation Rates” may create perverse incentives
• Designing better measures of accountability will require use of data systems that can better profile students and their needs