Students Low-Income

Unequal Experiences and Outcomes for Black and Latino Males in California’s Public Education System

<Click on this link to download the complete report.>

By John Rogers and Rhoda Freelon.  Across the nation there is growing interest in improving the situation of young men of color, who are underrepresented in higher education and dramatically overrepresented in the criminal justice system (Lee & Ransom, 2011). Numerous studies have documented that black males enrolled in school often lag behind their peers academically, have less access to rigorous coursework, experience racial bias from school personnel because of lower expectations for boys of color, and are more likely to drop out (Gregory, Skiba, & Noguera, 2011; Holzman, 2010; Howard, 2008; Jackson & Moore, 2006; Sharon et al., 2010). Although it would be reasonable to expect that Latino males face similar challenges, there are few comparable studies that reveal their experiences. Given the new demographic realities facing the nation—and facing California in particular—it is important that we gain a better understanding of how both groups fare in the state’s public K–12 and postsecondary education system.  The research described in this policy brief is part of a larger study, Pathways to Postsecondary Success, which examines the educational pathways of America’s low-income youth, especially in California. We focus here on young black and Latino males because they are nearly 3.5 times as likely as white children to live in poverty (Davis, Kilburn, & Schultz, 2009) and, in comparison to many other California youth, experience relatively low high school and college graduation rates.2 With these issues in mind, we sought answers to the following questions:

  1. What inequities do Latino and black males encounter in California’s public schools?
  2. What disparities in educational outcomes do Latino and black males in California face?
  3. Are some public high schools better than others at promoting the achievement and success of these particular subgroups? What characteristics do successful schools share?

<Click on this link to download the complete report.>

Mentorship and the Postsecondary Educational Attainment of Low-Income Youth

<Click on this link to download the complete report.>

By Mariam Ashtiani and Cynthia Feliciano.  The relatively low educational attainment of youth from low-income backgrounds has been a long-standing social problem in the United States. For decades, researchers and policymakers have been concerned with reconciling the ideal of an American educational system that allows ample opportunities for upward mobility with the reality that educational outcomes are strongly linked to other factors, including family income (Davis-Kean, 2005; Duncan, Yeung, Brooks-Gunn, & Smith, 1998; Duncan, Featherman, & Duncan, 1972; Mare, 1980; Teachman, Paasch, Day, & Carver, 1997). In an era that has witnessed staggering increases in class inequality, the importance of earning a college degree has never been greater, and yet the availability of resources that facilitate college access and completion for students who grow up in poverty is steadily declining (Duncan & Murnane, 2011; Kahlenberg, 2010). Mentors, who can serve as role models or spark a sense of possibility for the future, offer one important avenue for low-income youth to gain access to important information and tools necessary for academic success. This brief explores the significance of mentorship in the college entry and completion of low-income youth. Drawing from a nationally representative longitudinal study of American adolescents, we address three main questions:

  1. Does being mentored affect the college entry and completion rates of low-income youth?
  2. Are certain types of mentorship more beneficial to low-income youth than others?
  3. Are certain types of mentorship more beneficial to low-income youth than to middle/high-income youth?

<Click on this link to download the complete report.>

Postsecondary Educational Pathways of Low-Income Youth: An Analysis of Add Health Data

<Click on this link to download the complete report.>

By Cynthia Feliciano and Mariam Ashtiani.  This study used data from a recent longitudinal survey conducted over a 14-year period to compare the educational pathways of young adults from low-income backgrounds to their middle/high-income counterparts. Specifically, the study examined whether the effect of low-income status in adolescence on postsecondary pathways is better explained by early academic indicators and educational ambitions or higher education enrollment patterns and out-of school responsibilities. The analysis showed that low-income youth are disadvantaged in terms of entry into higher education as well as degree attainment. Roughly half of young adults from low-income families do not complete any postsecondary schooling, and those who do enroll are less likely to earn bachelor’s degrees, partly due to lower educational ambitions and lower academic achievement in adolescence. Post-high school experiences are most decisive, however: Nontraditional patterns of enrollment in two-year colleges, shaped by out-of-school responsibilities such as full-time labor force participation and family obligations, are a key mechanism through which lowincome status in adolescence leads to lower likelihood of degree completion in young adulthood.

<Click on this link to download the complete report.>

Peer-Reviewed Research on Low-Income Students in Postsecondary Education: Trends and Future Directions

<Click on this link to download the complete report.>

By Vicki Park and Tara Watford.  The simultaneous impact of the Great Recession and a national focus on improving postsecondary access and persistence present both challenges and opportunities for the field of higher education. In this context, questions of how colleges and universities can better support low-income youth are increasingly at the forefront of research and educational reform agendas. The spotlight on higher education places researchers at an important crossroads—we need to assess not only what we know about low-income college students but also where our information gaps lie. Currently, we know that low-income students tend to enter and complete college in much smaller numbers than their middle- and high-income peers (Ashtiani & Feliciano, 2012; Oseguera, 2012) and only 11% of low-income students earn a postsecondary degree by the age of 26 (Institute for Higher Education Policy [IHEP], 2010). Historically underserved populations such as low-income Black, Latino and Native American students are less likely to earn degrees than their White and Asian/Pacific Islander peers (IHEP, 2011). Low-income students are also more likely to attend under-resourced, overburdened community colleges (Provasnik & Planty, 2008; Oseguera, 2012). But apart from these types of descriptive statistics, what research is being conducted on low-income college students? And specifically, how does the higher education field prioritize this research? In this brief, we examine several broad research trends that occur in five key peer-reviewed higher education journals over a 20-year period (1989–2008). In particular, we ask:

  1. How many articles were published that examine low-income youth in the context of postsecondary education?
  2. Were the data on low-income youth collected and analyzed via quantitative, qualitative or mixed-methods approaches?
  3. In what types of colleges and universities have low-income youth predominantly been studied?

Exploring these research trends allows us to better understand how the field has conceptualized the problems of college entry, persistence, and completion for low-income students. From this understanding, we can formulate research agendas= for the future that will be relevant and informative to initiatives aimed at improving college opportunities for low-income youth. More precisely, we can develop a deeper understanding of how higher education can promote equitable outcomes.

<Click on this link to download the complete report.>

Failure by Colleges and Government to Bridge Inequality

<Click here to download entire commentary from NY Times.>

Sobering commentary in NY Times on the initial promise of college as levelor of inequality through GI Bill and early years of federal financial aid programs and subsequent failure to keep up the financial commitment to the majority in society without the social capital of the priveledged classes.  Following is a short excerpt from the commentary.  Be sure to read some of the comments to the article (as of the moment, they number more than 250).

"When the G.I. Bill of Rights of 1944 made colleges accessible to veterans regardless of socioeconomic background, Robert Maynard Hutchins, the president of the University of Chicago, worried that it would transform elite institutions into “educational hobo jungles.” But the G.I. Bill was only the first of several federal student aid laws that, along with increasing state investment in public universities and colleges, transformed American higher education over the course of three decades from a bastion of privilege into a path toward the American dream.

Something else began to happen around 1980. College graduation rates kept soaring for the affluent, but for those in the bottom half, a four-year degree is scarcely more attainable today than it was in the 1970s. And because some colleges actually hinder social mobility, what increasingly matters is not just whether you go to college but where.  The demise of opportunity through higher education is, fundamentally, a political failure. Our landmark higher education policies have ceased to function effectively, and lawmakers — consumed by partisan polarization and plutocracy — have neglected to maintain and update them. . . ." <Click here to continue reading.>

White House Report on Efforts to Support Low Income College Students

<Click this web link to download the entire report.>

Executive Summary.  With the growing demand for college educated workers, a college education is one of the surest ways into the middle class.  To help more students afford and graduate from college, the Administration has taken steps to address these challenges doubling Federal investments in Pell Grants and college tax credits, reforming student loans, and taking new steps to reduce college costs and improve value. But while the President continues to push for changes that keep college affordable for all students and families, we can and must be doing more to get more low income students prepared for college, enrolle d in quality institutions, and graduating. success. Low income students face barriers to college access and Each year hundreds of thousands of low college, apply to the best fit schools, apply for financi al aid, enroll and persist in their studies, and ultimately graduate. As a result, large gaps remain in educational achievement between students from low- income families and their high income peers. Increasing college opportunity is not just an economic imperative, but a reflection of our values. We need to reach, inspire, and empower every student, regardless of background, to make sure that our country is a place where if you work hard, you have a chance to get ahead. Under the President and First Lady’s leadership, the Administration and the Department of Education engaged with leading experts to identify the barriers to increasing college opportunity

Some of the most promising actions are to help and encourage low income students to apply, enroll, and succeed in college. Based on the existing evidence, we identified four key areas where we could be doing more to promote college opportunity. On January 16 the Administration is announcing new commitments from colleges and university presidents, nonprofits, leaders of philanthropy and the private sector in these four key areas. These efforts mark the beginning of an ongoing mobilization that will work to promote evidence based techniques, continue to understand what works, and expand successful efforts.

Commitment by University of Minnesota for Low-Income Students

During the recent summit called by the White House for low-income college students, the University of Minnesota was represented at the meeting and made the following commitment to build upon current support to low-income students.  You can check out commitments by other colleges by clicking on the following web link provided by the Chronicle of Higher Education.  <Click on this web link>.

In summer 2014, the University of Minnesota will begin a new initiative, Retaining all Our Students (RaOS), that will focus on closing or eliminating the first-year retention gap between Pell-eligible students (86.9 percent), and non-Pell eligible students (91.3 percent). This three year $300,000 initiative is designed around four key components, including: (1) an enhanced financial literacy program with new materials focusing on the specific financial planning and information needs of low-income students and their families; (2) strong incentives for low-income students who are also in the President's Emerging Scholars (PES) program to participate in a PES summer bridge program; (3) the development of better success tracking tools for advisers to monitor academic progress and enhance the advising of Pell recipients students, including a targeted communications campaign; and (4) further leveraging the resources of the SMART Learning Commons tutoring centers by promoting the available services and connecting low-income students with peer tutors. Building on Existing Efforts: The University of Minnesota Promise Scholarship program, which began in 2007, now provides over $30 million annually in scholarships to more than 13,000 low- and middle-income Minnesota resident students who enroll on any of the University's five campuses. Eligible freshman and new transfer students with family incomes of up to $100,000 receive a guaranteed, multi-year scholarship. The PES program is designed for students who have faced challenges that may have impacted their high school metrics, but whose personal experiences and high school records indicate potential for collegiate success. The majority of the 500 PES students in this program are low income, students of color, and/or first-generation. PES provides nearly $1.5 million to support services that address the needs of PES students.