How about this for a change to that painful FAFSA application form?

According to reports, Secretary of Education Arnie Duncan has indicated plans to add a new button to the online FAFSA application. That one single button would authorize the IRS to fill in all the FAFSA required financial data directly from all relevant, filed tax returns.

That’s right, a button that would authorize the IRS to collect, summarize and drop the pertinent data already submitted during prior tax seasons into the form in the appropriate places. And with that step, the form we all have to do to be eligible for federal financial aid, the form that everyone, sooner or later comes to despise might actually be on the way towards being reasonable and dare we say it, user-friendly.

Now that would represent change we can believe in!

Promises of Fewer Questions and Quicker Response Times

It seems that at long last the U.S. Department of Education is about to streamline the indeterminate FAFSA form. Under President Barack Obama’s continued pledge to increase access to college, the DOE is about to eliminate 22 questions and some 20 different Web screens that used to appear when students filled out the FAFSA application online.

Perhaps even better news for students and their families, instead of waiting weeks and months to get the results, the new application will be able to provide an estimate on the amount of aid students would be eligible for in the matter of seconds.

All of the changes are seen by the Obama administration as increasing college enrollment. The steps come in direct response to data that indicates that one out of every five students that borrows for college does not fill out the FAFSA form.

Many contend that the reason so many students skip the application has been the sheer volume of information asked for on the form. For everyone the form has been a massive headache, but for some, it has been seen as a barrier.

According to the U.S. Department of Education, the FAFSA included 153 questions, some of which were not asked for when parents or the student filed their income taxes. The sum total for the DOE is that the form has ultimately been more difficult than filing income taxes.

The result, an estimated 1.5 million students who currently are enrolled in college likely qualify for Pell grants yet they never applied for them.

The Button by January

While work is under way to streamline and simplify the form, the magic button noted by Duncan still is not ready. The goal for the direct upload of information to the FAFSA from the IRS is scheduled to be in place by January.

So those of you about to enter your senior year in high school, and all those further out from applying, the new financial upload button should be in place by the time your turn comes.

Perhaps just as importantly, Obama wants more streamlining for students. Reports indicate he is asking Congress to eliminate another 26 financial questions, all deemed to have minimal effect on how much aid a student is eligible for.

Of course, while these steps will make it much tougher for us to dump on the FAFSA form down the road, we still wonder why it might not be possible to eliminate the application process altogether. Imagine if the government would, as a matter of course, determine a student’s eligibility based on a family’s tax return alone.

Perhaps the government could even take the step of notifying students directly of their potential eligibility and do so as soon as the child enters public school. Now that would be real progress.

Still, we will take the efforts of the Obama administration. Every single one related to the FAFSA is a step in the right direction.

When the time comes to purchase a car, the old folks recommend that you give the tires a good kick and that you take a peek under the hood. It is an expression that reminds us to look beyond the shadow and the glitz to what really matters. In the case of a car, the most important element is not how it looks but whether it gets you where you need to go.

Likewise, when it comes to attending college, it is important to remember what the ultimate goal is: earning a degree. As with that automobile, it is imperative that prospective college students look beyond the shadow and the glitz to the substance. In the case of a college education, one of the most important elements is completing your college program.

New Report

With the purpose in mind, we turn to the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research and the results of their recent study, Diplomas and Dropouts - Which Colleges Actually Graduate Their Students (and Which Don’t). And we offer directly the words from the Executive Summary:

In the fall of 2001, nearly 1.2 million freshmen began college at a four-year institution of higher education somewhere in the United States. Nearly all of them expected to earn a bachelor’s degree. As a rule, college students do not pack their belongings into the back of a minivan in early September wondering if they will get a diploma–only when.

For many students, however, that confidence was misplaced. At a time when college degrees are valuable–with employers paying a premium for college graduates–fewer than 60 percent of new students graduated from four-year colleges within six years. At many institutions, graduation rates are far worse. Graduation rates may be of limited import to students attending the couple hundred elite, specialized institutions that dominate the popular imagination, but there are vast disparities–even among schools educating similar students–at the less selective institutions that educate the bulk of America’s college students.

In simplest terms, the report notes the incredible “variation in graduation rates across more than 1,300 of the nation’s colleges and universities.” What makes the report so important for prospective students is that the folks at AEI found such variations within colleges of similar admissions criteria and students. Not only did the researchers find that four-year American colleges had a graduation rate of 53% within six years, they determined that rates below 50%, 40% and even 30% were distressingly easy to find.

The report offers a very tantalizing summation statement:

…..while student motivation, finances and ability matter greatly when it comes to college completion, the practices of higher education institutions matter, too.

And as for the impact for higher education in the long run, AEI reports:

…graduation rates as calculated here do convey important information–information that should be readily available to students selecting a school, parents investing in their child’s education, and policymakers and taxpayers who finance student aid and public institutions. We believe that the graduation rate measure included here should be just the beginning of a deeper inquiry into college success.

Schools with low graduation rates are not necessarily “bad” schools. A low graduation rate could reflect any number of factors, including a high degree of quality control. A low graduation rate at a school with a special focus on engineering, for instance, could be a signal of the rigor of its curriculum. Low graduation rates also reflect transfer rates, and students could be transferring to more selective schools out of these transfer institutions, thus depressing their graduation rates.

In general, however, we would argue that low graduation rates are an important indicator that
a given school may not be serving the needs of its degree-seeking students. When schools
that admit similar students have vastly different graduation rates, consumers should wonder
what this implies about institutional practices and quality.

Growing Recognition of a Major Issue

The latest report from AEI further raises questions related to America’s higher education system. Given a pass for many years, the paltry graduation rates of many colleges and universities are only now coming to light.

Students considering an institution of higher learning should give careful consideration to this data and information available from AEI. We certainly agree with the latter judgment expressed by the institute:

Low graduation rates are an important indicator. To us, a poor graduation rate reveals a lack of commitment by the school to provide the necessary supports required to ensure the success of degree-seeking students.

Our hat goes off to Sam Lee, a graduate student, and to Inside Higher Ed, for shedding some more light on the shaky college rankings game. Lee had noticed that the University of Southern California ranked lower than seventh on all of the graduate level engineering category subfields yet somehow managed to earn the number seven slot on the U.S. News and World Report College Rankings.

Lee’s questioning led Inside Higher Ed to contact both U.S. News and USC to see if it could get to the bottom of the matter. Turns out the large number of the engineering school’s professors that were reportedly also members of the National Academy of Engineering helped push the USC rankings to seventh.

But while USC reported to U.S. News 30 professors belonging to the academy and the school’s web site listed 34 such professors, Inside Higher Ed, through a very simple fact check, was able to determine that these figures were entirely inaccurate.

For reporting purposes, the school was supposed to be sending along the number of full-time faculty members that met the prestigious status. Turns out, of the 34 listed on the web site, 17 did not meet the criteria set forth by U.S. News.

U.S. News immediately acknowledged that if the school did have fewer faculty members in the academy than had been reported, the engineering college’s ranking would indeed fall. The exact drop would of course depend on the final numbers reported and how they related to competitor schools.

And in one of the most important acknowledgments for students to hear, officials for the magazine also indicated they were not in the business of verifying the accuracy of the reports from schools. Instead, they trust the schools to be institutions of integrity and simply take what is reported at face value. Of course, they also base their rankings on the information provided.

This episode comes on the heels of the surprising candor of a Clemson official who publicly expressed how the rankings could be gamed (including the very issue expressed here, the accuracy of the reported data). That story was all over the internet in prompt fashion as was a followup admonishment from school officials.

Ultimately, the lesson for students is not to put too much emphasis on these rankings. Especially now that it is clear that those doing the ratings acknowledge they do not verify the information provided.

In this economy, applying for financial aid may be an admissions disadvantage.

Most families are surprised to see the page one question on the common application form that asks whether you will be seeking financial aid. Ultimately, the question means admissions committees are aware of your financial need as they review your application packet.

True, the question does not reveal how much aid you will need. But the fact that the question is asked and the answer is available to admissions officials, it would seem that those schools that tout themselves as need-blind just might not be so need-blind as they indicate.

Paying in Full

In late March, the New York Times reported on what may or may not be a changing college dynamic. In “Paying in Full as the Ticket into Colleges,” the Times notes that schools are in fact letting in more wealthy students despite claims they are need-blind.

According to the Times, schools are admitting more students from the waiting list and more transfer students. In addition, some colleges have accepted more international students and only those international students that can pay in full. In addition, there was the suggestion that some schools may be using zip codes or parental backgrounds to help assess a family’s ability to pay.

This should come as no surprise given the financial times. College endowments have followed the path of most families’ college savings plans; sharply downward.

This creates a double-edged sword for higher education. Many applicants are in greater need of financial aid at the very same time that schools have fewer funds available to allocate.

Subsequently, the result has placed an even greater importance on a student’s ability to pay. Simply stated, every full paying student provides additional funds for schools allowing them to then help other students.

And the more full-paying students a school has, the better the school is able to weather the economic downturn.

Not So Need-Blind

While few schools seem willing to admit it, the general consensus is that financial need is playing a more significant role in the selection process. That may not be welcome news for students but it is a fact that applicants must keep in mind.

So, if schools are not so need-blind, what should a student do? The answer is relatively simple.

If you have the funds for school, you may now apply to more selective schools with greater confidence that an acceptance can follow. The economy will not make up for a poor transcript, but in an increasingly competitive market, strong resumes combined with an indication that you will not require financial aid may mean a greater chance of being accepted at more selective colleges.

For those in need of funds, a little more time selecting schools may be necessary. Given that your need might play a role in being accepted, it is imperative that you carefully select your back-up schools based upon a realistic desire to attend those schools.

In theory, need-blind means that your application would be reviewed based on your credentials only. In practicality, it could mean your need would get in the way of your being accepted at the more selective colleges.

Therefore you might get passed over by your number one college choice despite your academic record. If your own state university is not one you truly want to use as a back up, then examine flagship campuses in other states for a school that would meet your academic needs.

Colleges and universities have dozens, maybe hundreds, of scholarships to give away!

Do you know how to search a college or university website for scholarships? Digging up scholarships from college websites has become second nature for us. But it occurred to me that many students might not know how to find those college scholarship lists buried as they can be on deep college pages.

I’m going to share some quick tips that should help you find the scholarship resources you need on any college website, including some you could be missing.

First, let’s understand the common types of scholarships a college provides:

• Institutional scholarships—target general students and are based on academic merit and/or financial need.
• Endowed scholarships are likely department specific, and target a much smaller population of students typically studying in a particular subject or pursuing a certain degree.

**An endowed scholarship is one funded by private sources, often outside alumnae or corporations, usually with fond ties to the institution or department. You’ll also see many awards that have been established in memory of a student or faculty member, also endowed scholarships.

1. Here is a step by step strategy to follow for finding institutional scholarships on a college website:

• Start at ABC College’s homepage, not the bookstore page or the football team’s page, but the main page, probably something like, www.SomeCollege.edu.
• There are some pretty standard links on this page (obviously if any links say “scholarships” that should be a no-brainer, but that situation is rare); look for “Admissions,” “financial aid,” or “financial aid and tuition.” You might be given more general categories, like “prospective students” or “current students.” Some colleges try to make it more intuitive, with links like “paying for school.” Also, many sites feature a “Quick Links” drop down menu. Here you are likely to find a standard “financial aid” link.
• From the Financial Aid main page, you will likely have a choice of links including “how to apply,” “forms and applications,” and “types of financial aid.” Usually the “types of financial aid” link is the lead-in to information on scholarships, as well as loans and work-study programs.
• Follow the “scholarships” link. Chances are good you’ll end up on a page that tells you a bit about the institutional scholarships available, those merit and need-based general scholarships, plus information on eligibility and applying.
• Often there are further links for “outside scholarships” and “endowed scholarships.” Use these to access more targeted awards.

**To sum up what we just did: you should find the general merit and need scholarships on a webpage in the Financial Aid section of the college or university website. When in doubt, always head for “financial aid.”

2. Find endowed or departmental scholarships:

There are a couple of different ways to find the department-specific scholarships on a college or university website.

From the college homepage search any ‘academics’ link, and this should lead you further to a directory of departmental schools and subjects, such as biology or anthropology. After making your selection, most likely you will be lead to the department homepage. This is where your search can get tricky: from here you will likely have two search methods to choose from:

• Direct link to scholarships
• Hunt and peck method

Department specific scholarships may be as easy to find as the “endowed scholarships” link or they may be buried in deeper department pages with little direction on how to access them directly.

Here’s an example I just picked to examine the ‘hunt and peck method’, starting at Georgetown’s homepage:

I see the words ‘academic departments’ on the main menu, so I’m headed in the right direction.

From Georgetown University’s Academic Programs page I noticed a link stating, "All academic programs A-Z". Perfect!

Anthropology was selected from the list and I arrived at the Department of Sociology and Anthropology.

From there I had the following tabs/links from which to choose: Home, About, Programs, Courses, Faculty, Research, and Resources. Logically, which would you choose to explore first? I chose “Resources.”

There I had to choose from even more targeted links, and I went with “For Anthropology Students,”, it seemed logical.

Finally, that led me to the Anthropology Student Resource page and a long list of departmental scholarships and fellowship programs.

See? It can get tricky and I occasionally choose incorrectly using websites of different universities.

**The trick to finding departmental or endowed scholarships: be persistent. What do I do when I’m at a dead end? Back out and try again.

Use Google to find specific pieces of a college website:

When all else fails defer to Google: open a fresh Google search page. In the search box type in a query like this: scholarships <name of department><name of school> then hit Enter or the Search button. For example, I queried:

scholarships anthropology georgetown university

First search result: the GU Anthro department page (same page I described above where I clicked on the Resources link).

**Tip: Large universities house related departments inside colleges. The “College of Arts and Humanities,” for instance, will likely have a variety of departments like English and Sociology, so you might have to dig through a few academic layers to really get to the place where you want to be. If you get confused: Google the department name and university, simple as that.

Barriers to Higher Education are Alive and Well

The Higher Education Act of 1965 launched some of the first financial programs aimed at the support of low-income and disadvantaged students. Since then, dozens of federal and state scholarship and grant programs have been developed to assist the same. A popular theory remains: more and more free money will put more disadvantaged and minority students into college and solve the problem of low college attendance rates among high poverty students. Regardless of the money higher education continues to throw at low-income students, the numbers actually attending college and staying in college remain low. If money is not the solution, then what’s the problem?

The Problem

There are significant numbers of public funds already available for low-income students. Add to this the increasing trend among elite and reputable colleges and universities to spring for full tuition scholarships for academically eligible disadvantaged students and a more relevant question becomes: “With the money available already for low-income and minority students, why do so many fail to earn a college degree?” What circumstances beyond the financial, continue to impede the educational roadway of the disadvantaged student, and why does higher education, at large, repeat the same ineffective gestures in its quest for the solution?

Dream of College Access for All Americans

President Lyndon B. Johnson dreamed of building our country into one in which “a high school senior [could] apply to any college or any university in any of the 50 States and not be turned away because his family is poor…” He further declared, “Education in this day and age is a necessity.”¹ He made these statements on the same day he signed the Higher Education Act of 1965 into legislation. If higher education was deemed a necessity in 1965, then it has become critical by today’s standards.

For the most part President Johnson’s dream has become a reality, but outside of the financial, some of the same barriers to higher education remain:

• Schools that fail to adequately prepare students for college.
• Outside influences and expectations, especially those of parents/family and educators.
• Psychological factors.

Secondary Schools Fail to Prepare Students for College

Regardless of the money available to low-income students, in many cases students fail to even qualify for college admission. Perhaps, as some critics of the current system argue, where career and guidance counselors proactive in “talking up” college as soon as middle school, kids particularly from disadvantaged backgrounds would incorporate college goals into their futures much more naturally than when career and education goals are thought inconsequential.

Educators, including teachers, counselors, and principals, simply have low expectations of disadvantaged students, say some proponents of education reform. An overall neglect of college preparation routinely takes place at most minority and high poverty high schools. The perception that disadvantaged students will either not make it into college, have little interest in higher education, or be unworthy of the time spent to get them prepared, are all subversive and deeply damaging perceptions. At best this disregard is a primitive throwback to the same circumstances President Johnson sought to bury.

The Non-Existent College Prep Curricula

Average, college bound high school seniors are alarmingly unprepared for the rigors of college academics, but an even more disturbing population of low-income and minority students seem to avoid college altogether or possess test scores and academic records that have put many in higher education on alert. In fact, the circumstances renew debate over the quality of public school systems: “Nine in ten high school graduates from families earning more than $80,000 attend college by the time they are 24, compared to only six in ten from families earning less than $33,000.”²

Research proves that many of the so-called high school assessment tests “bear little resemblance to the work [students] are expected to do in college.” Despite the best hopes of those students that do possess college degree expectations, preparation for such is sorely lacking—students again and again clearly “lack crucial information on applying to college and on succeeding academically once they get there.”³ College administrators report that most students only think they are academically prepared; the sobering reality is that the so-called college prep curriculum they slogged through in high school was not college level work, after all.

Ironically, this lack of preparedness is the ailment of many average high school grads, and not exclusive to low-income students. But evidence shows that “a greater percentage of low-income students are marginally qualified or unqualified for admission at four-year institutions.”⁴

And college prep includes providing students the appropriate information with which to pursue college, including college search, financial aid and scholarships, and admissions processes. But in many disadvantaged schools the information is not disseminated, not included as a natural progression in education.

For students interested in pursuing college the process becomes a bit like fumbling in the dark: “many low-income college students need aid and do not know how to apply for federal or state assistance.”⁵ Low-income students often opt for a community college—open access and remedial coursework, and schedule flexibility that allows students to work part time and carry on normal family responsibilities.

High Scores vs. Student Success and the “Push-Out” Phenomenon

High schools across the country have new standards by which to adhere. Accountability in secondary education may play a significant part in the collegiate success or failure of certain students. Since the inception of No Child Left Behind the reliance on test-based schools has split students down the middle—in some areas. Students are either an asset or a deficit to a school.⁶

In New York City, test scores served to define a dispensable archipelago of students most likely to fail. Students at disadvantaged schools throughout the region were so overlooked that rogue administrators and educators systematically amputated from the system whole populations of underachievers for the “betterment” of the whole. The plan was simple: “push out” students with poor grades and low test scores and test score averages would look a lot better.⁷

The Teacher Factor

Does a high quality teacher make a difference to a low-income and/or disadvantaged student, and if so, why? A growing body of evidence shows that teachers do matter. But studies have begun to prove an alarming trend: “The very children who most need strong teachers are assigned, on average, to teachers with less experience, less education, and less skill than those who teach other children.”⁸

A study that surveyed three Midwest revealed consistent data proving that in most low income schools teachers were much more likely to be “inexperienced, out-of-field, and uncertified.” Furthermore, as school enrollment of low-income students increased, the population of teachers hired grew increasingly inexperienced.⁹ Most studies declare five years of teaching experience as the dividing line between experienced and inexperienced.

The less experienced the teacher the less likely he or she is to be qualified or motivated to guide disadvantaged students in wise career and education choices. Surprisingly, teacher surveys have also proven that on the whole they, too, tend to have an unsure grasp on the college preparatory process.¹⁰

The qualities most valued and effective in high-quality teachers include:

• Over five years experience teaching within their specialty.
• Teachers able to modify methods on-the-fly and in direct response to student abilities.
• Teachers with degrees from reputable institutions.

Contemporary findings such as these provide more leverage for school systems, and lawmakers when it comes time to plan teacher distribution models designed to serve future generations of students.

Can Experienced Teachers Get Disadvantaged Students to College?

Data has been culled from a crew of challenged high schools, turned-high-performing, in various regions of the U.S. that proves high quality teachers can make a significant difference with at-risk youth. In every high performing school surveyed almost half the student bodies were from high minority-high poverty backgrounds. And in every case the population of college bound students had increased above the national average.

What factors set high performing high schools with diverse student bodies well above others in nurturing college ready graduates?

• High quality and experienced teachers able to adjust methods to suit students.
• A very relevant and challenging college preparatory curriculum that surpasses state requirements.
• Unlimited access to academic tutors and career advisors.¹¹

Part of the goal of the Higher Education Act of 1965 was to promote improvement in high minority/high poverty schools, including attracting more experienced teachers. Contrary to some, both these factors—schools and teachers—continue to figure prominently in the educational futures of students.

College Admission Requirements Detrimental to Disadvantaged Students

Whether high school or college, the fact is that reputation, high marks, selectivity ratings, and even cost of tuition, all constitute factors that conspire to create an institution’s reputation. Ratings and credentials have become a beacon for student business, a means to market and advertise a college to expanding populations of prospective students.

The annual U.S. News and World Report: America’s Best Colleges has become a much-anticipated publication.

New criticism, though, from college administrators aims to downplay the relevancy of some of the ratings, which many say have nothing to do with a good college education. Why so much fuss over ratings? The report has been widely dubbed the college “beauty contest,” and the higher colleges and universities have driven ratings the better their business. But in the process, some pieces of the academic puzzle have been forsaken, like some populations of students.

Ratings Drive Business, Which In Turn Drives Up Admission Reqs

Colleges and universities that rank well in the U.S. News report seek to be considered “selective.” This kind of marketing seems to make business more brisk, but it also makes it challenging to attract a large minority or low-income student population. In order to make a college accessible for the majority of low-income and disadvantaged students, admission requirements must be relaxed.

The traditional metrics of admission include SAT scores and GPA, precisely the type of measurements most low-income students suffer by. As we explored above, it’s not their responsibility—educators have been loath to provide the proper guidance and nurture—and, besides, SAT and GPA are rarely accurate indications of academic worthiness. This then is why a growing stable of college administrators is taking aim at the notoriously exclusive annual ratings race.¹²

Compared to the relatively small number of college administrators backing away from the ratings game, there are plenty that believe in its promise. For instance, a strong cadre of schools believes the marketing theory that overpriced products and services attract buyers and consumers because high price implies high quality. This then is why tuitions are hiked and SAT and GPA requirements inflated. Yet again, disadvantaged students are unable to reach certain institutions where, ironically, money is likely to exist for their education.

When Admission Hikes Purposely Dismiss Disadvantaged Students

Another strategy behind ramped up admission requirements seeks to purposely define the splinter group of underachievers and those students with low test scores and make it impossible for them to essentially clog the way of those students without academic challenges. Low income and minority students with low SAT scores and low GPAs “will be steered” to the state’s community colleges.

Simultaneously more college prep programs are being built into the state’s public school system. Students will now have a system in place able to alert them should their academics fall below realistic first year college goals.¹³

Outside Influences Offer Most Resistance to College Life

Besides money and academic challenge, many low-income and disadvantaged students face challenges much more murky to middle and upper income, white Americans. In some cases the influence of parents and family are more profound than more mainstream issues.¹⁴

Parental Influence

Consider the idea that many minority and low-income students come from first generation families, meaning no one else has yet gone to college. For many average American students, the dream of a college degree is fueled over the years by parents. When that drive is not there, other priorities may take precedence, such as job, finance and family.

It’s not that parents of first gen college students have no desire to see their children succeed, even go to college, but most are unable to provide the type of support necessary to bolster a fresh and, perhaps, disenfranchised college newbie.

Cultural Perceptions of Debt

Financial aid experts may also have discovered another roadblock—“cultural aversion to debt.” Over the years the financial aid needs of middle and upper income students have risen, but statistics have shown little or no increase in the student loan debt among low-income and ethnic minority student groups, which “calls into question the effectiveness of student loans in aiding low-income populations.” Studies strongly suggest that minorities are “more sensitive to price and less willing to use educational loans to pay for college when making their college decisions.”¹⁵

Tuition sticker shock may be a similar deterrent. Even though academically talented low-income students may qualify to enroll in elite universities where the ability to prove a certain level of disadvantage buys them a free ride, only a fraction of those actually eligible partake of the opportunity. The scholarships from institutions like Harvard and Princeton are not just in place for altruistic purposes. These “white-bread” institutions want to diversify and offering money for disadvantaged students seems a good idea. Surprisingly, a much larger wellspring of academically qualified low-income students is out there. SAT scores prove the numbers,¹⁶ but where are they?

Educator Expectation Matters, Too

The nation’s low-income students, including those with academic fortitude and those dubbed low-achievers, may share common bonds: many face familial and cultural obstacles, but do they also face low educator expectations? Studies have already measured the effect of educator expectation on the college outcomes of low-income, minority students and found alarming numbers of low-quality teachers and counselors with little hope for students in lower income brackets.

Teachers and advisors acting out of their personal beliefs and stereotypes may be unable to provide the unbiased guidance underserved students require to get them to the doorstep of a college campus, whether it be a community college or one of the elite universities.¹⁷

What Then if Not Money?

Considering the obstacles discussed above, are there further psychological impacts? If I am a student from a low-income household in which neither of my parents attended college, isn’t it likely that a college degree will not be a main priority in my life? And if I am academically talented, would I not feel out of place and disenfranchised on a Harvard campus even if my education were fully funded?

If I overheard teachers in my high school complaining about their jobs and saying that many of the students will be lucky to make it to graduation, much less college, would I not doubt my teachability, my worth as a student?

Harvard can roll out its red carpet and dangle full scholarships ‘til the cows come home, but what really eats away at the collegiate futures of low-income, minority students—talented or not—has little to do with money.

Footnotes

1. LBJ for Kids, accessed September 3, 2007, http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/lbjforkids/edu_whca370-text.shtm.
2. “Harvard Announces New Initiative to Aimed at Economic Barriers to College,” Harvard University Gazette, February 28, 2004, accessed September 5, 2007, http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/daily/0402/28-finaid.html.
3. Rooney, Megan, “High Schools Fail to Prepare Many Students for College, Stanford Study Says,” March 3, 2003, accessed September 4, 2007, http://ed.stanford.edu/suse/news-bureau/displayRecord.php?tablename=susenews&id=25.
4. Andrea Venezia, Michael Kirst, Anthony Antonio, Betraying the College Dream: How Disconnected K-12 Schools and Postsecondary Education Systems Undermine Student Aspirations, 2003, accessed September 4, 2007, http://www.stanford.edu/group/bridgeproject/betrayingthecollegedream.pdf.
5. Kirst, Michael, “Betraying the College Dream in America,” The College Puzzle, August 21, 2007, accessed September 4, 2007, http://thecollegepuzzle.blogspot.com/2007/08/betraying-college-dream-in-america.html.
6. Beveridge, Andrew, “Counting Drop Outs,” Gotham Gazette, August 2003, accessed September 4, 2007, http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/demographics/20030814/5/492.
7. Beveridge, Andrew, Gotham Gazette.
8. Heather Peske, Kati Haycock, Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality, The Education Trust, June 2006, accessed September 2, 2007, http://www2.edtrust.org/NR/rdonlyres/010DBD9F-CED8-4D2B-9E0D-91B446746ED3/0/TQReportJune2006.pdf.
9. Peski, Haycock, The Education Trust.
10. Venezia, Kirst, Antonio, Betraying the College Dream
11. “Preparing All High School Students for College and Work: What High-Performing Schools are Teaching,” ACT, February 23, 2005, accessed August 30, 2007, http://www.act.org/news/releases/2005/2-23-05.html.
12. “U.S. News College Rankings Debated,” The Online News Hour (transcript), PBS, August 20, 2007, accessed September 5, 2007, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/education/july-dec07/rankings_08-20.html.
13. Tresaugue, Matthew, “UT Campuses Will Raise Admission Standards,” University of Houston, May 10, 2007, accessed September 5, 2007, http://www.uh.edu/ednews/2007/hc/200705/20070510admission.html.
14. Szelenyi, Katalin, “Minority Student Retention and Academic Achievement in Community Colleges,” 2004, accessed August 29, 2007, http://www.ericdigests.org/2001-4/minority.html.
15. Cultural Barriers to Incurring Debt, ECMC Group Foundation, 2003, accessed September 3, 2007, http://www.ecmcfoundation.org/documents/CulturalBarriersExecSummary.pdf.
16. “Large Numbers of Highly Qualified, Low-Income Students Are Not Applying to Harvard and Other Highly Selective Schools,” Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 2006, accessed August 26, 2007, http://www.jbhe.com/news_views/52_low-income-students.html.
17. Patricia George and Rosa Aronson, How Do Educators’ Cultural Belief Systems Affect Underserved Students’ Pursuit of Postsecondary Education?” Pathways to College Network, 2003, accessed September 3, 2007, http://www.pathwaystocollege.net/pdf/EducatorsCulturalBeliefs.pdf.

What SAT Scores Reveal and the Demise of Marriageable Males

Girls, young women, there are too many of you on America’s college campuses. That is in comparison with your male counterparts. The college world has been waiting patiently for the scales to rebalance themselves, but male enrollment remains lackluster, so intervenes humankind.

Male Affirmative Action

Our report, The White Man’s Guide to Getting a Minority Scholarship, examines the possibilities for a white male qualifying for minority scholarships. It is a controversial topic, at best, and not one we take lightly.

But, what exactly has happened to the populations of males, many white, on college campuses, that continues to inspire the marginally offensive concept?

SAT Scores: Education’s Favorite Metric

Back in the mid-90s legal action against College Board and Educational Testing Service served to correct what educational experts had alleged for years “that the PSAT, the test that makes high school students eligible for National Merit Scholarships” was designed to appeal more to males than to females. The corrected test was designed with a writing component, which seemed to offer an equitable correction.

It’s been understood for decades that females perform better in the classroom than males, but on tests the opposite was true. In 1995, based on university research, the following SAT truths were proven:

“The SAT falls far short of its sole advertised claim — the accurate prediction of first year college grades — by consistently underestimating the academic performance of females.”

So college admissions systems based on test scores of course tended to favor males.

Why the Shortage of Males on Campus, though?

Current research suggests that because girls “from all backgrounds” adapt more readily to classroom environments many are quite prepared for college when it rolls around. Secondary school systems lag alarmingly behind in proper college preparation. But if females can keep up, it may just be a symptom of Education’s bigger ill that a larger percentage of males than in the past are not making it to college, a problem that is complicated even more because it apparently cuts across all other demographics.

Does the SAT continue to influence college demographics? Here’s a basic comparison test. Consider:

• Males tend to score higher on the math portion of the SAT.
• Females tend to score higher on the reading portion of the SAT.
• Given an average math SAT score and an average reading SAT score from a college campus, how closely do the scores reflect the gender demographics of the campus?

Armed with statistics on average math and reading SAT scores from almost any college campus in the U.S., I chose a few colleges with scores significantly higher in both categories and a few with scores relatively even. My questions: in cases where math scores far outpace reading scores will I find a larger population of males on campus, and when the scores in reading are significantly higher will I find more females? At the same time, when SAT averages for both categories are somewhat even will the gender demographics be also fairly split?

A couple of obvious choices:

• Sweet Briar College (women’s college); math: 548, reading: 586
• Hampden-Sydney College (men’s college); math: 573, reading: 571

• Bowdoin College; math: 690, reading: 690; 577 males, 655 females.
• Carnegie Mellon University; math: 718, reading: 657; 60% male, 40% female (CMU admits more women to try and balance its heavy engineering and comp sci degree programs)
• College of the Atlantic; math: 586, reading: 624; 55 males, 133 females (very small college enrollment)
• Evergreen State College; math: 539, reading: 587; 25% males, 75% females.
• Lafayette College; math: 665, reading: 620– 1,095 males, 1,051 females
• Massachusetts Institute of Technology; math: 755, reading: 712; 44% females (undergrad)
• Ohio Wesleyan University; math: 605, reading: 606– 1,111 males, 1,076 females.
• Reed College; math: 661, reading: 698– 55% female and a strong Humanities curriculum.

Drive for Balanced Campuses: Better Social Life and the Fear of a Diminishing Educated (Nubile) Male Population

For the most part the above SAT scores are indicative of the demographics, but a more telling statistic may be the comparison between the numbers of male and female applicants at any one institution versus those actually chosen for admission. This is likely where major turns of the screw occur. While the debate seems focused on ‘gender parity’, a much murkier, and at times sophomoric, rationale is at work: for example, the unspoken fear that the decreasing population of male students will translate into a less educated, less marriageable male population for their well-educated female counterparts.

• At MIT females face a much easier time of admission over 7,000 males apply annually, compared with over 2,000 females, but the ratio of those actually admitted is 758 males : 736 females.

• At Lafayette College, the formerly male student body has emphasized female enrollment and now is close to gender parity. Nearly 800 more male applicants than female are considered annually, but enrollment is almost balanced.

• The College of William and Mary is one that has made headlines in the last few years for its high rejection rate for women. Men have a much easier time with admissions: over 2,000 more applications from females are received annually, in comparison to males, but the ratio of students admitted is 1,596 male : 1,696 female.

The William and Mary syndrome has become the way of admissions at many smaller, private schools.

Why is it that we always want to fix things?

Some conservative pundits think that favoritism in college admissions is perfectly fine “we just must be upfront about it.” I’m a bigot & that’s okay, because I’m being honest about it. The Admitting-it-Makes-it-Okay Theory. Hmmmm.

Do we really have that much of a problem just enrolling students based on the merit of their applications and interests? What are the roadblocks to unbiased college admissions? What trips us up and makes us favor one type of student over another? And what, pray tell, keeps some admissions officers up at night fearful of a less than worthy male (viable mate) population?

I wonder when the education ecosystem, unnaturally manipulated, might begin to exhibit signs of a new kind of stress.

Scholarships for Low Income Students at Elite Universities

I know you’re out there. The statistics prove it. While only a fraction of you actually applies to Harvard or Princeton, many more probably flirt with the thought then dismiss it’s too unrealistic, who would believe it, right? SAT records prove a much deeper pool of academically eligible low-income students than most educators would have us believe, or maybe no one expected, and expectations do play a part, don’t they?

The List

Here’s the list of colleges and universities, and it’s constantly growing, that provide full scholarships to academically talented low-income students (and you’re out there):

• Harvard
• Princeton
• Stanford
• Amherst College
• University of North Carolina
• University of Virginia
• Williams College
• University of Washington
• University of Chicago (starts Fall 2008)

One study showed that based on SAT scores, low-income students from over 10,500 high schools in the U.S. possessed scores that would make them eligible for Harvard’s admissions requirements, but that students from only 5,000 (that’s half, 50%) of those schools actually applied. If there was only 1 student counted from each of those schools, then over 5500 students chose something else.

Why?

Deeper factors contribute to the college choices made by underserved students, factors like family and parental opinions, even self-perception.

See Yourself to a Free and Elite Degree

1. Picture Yourself [ here], now fill in the blank with one of the names off that list right up there. Imagine yourself everyday on that campus; get a real good picture in your mind. Call or write for the catalog and cut out pictures of the campus & pin them up in your room, tape them to the fridge.

2. Reach out and contact someone on the campus. For example, many colleges and universities have student and faculty bloggers. Logon and ask questions, post a comment, become engaged with a piece of the college life. In the case of faculty blogs, this is an excellent way to make an academic contact, a possible mentor and someone who may be able to actually lend some gentle guidance and advice. A couple blogs I quickly found:

• A Harvard Economics Professor
• The Amherst Chirp
• Stanford School of Medicine student blogs

Just a few ideas… Take your catalog, your admission form, and contact information to your high school career counselor and tell him or her to picture you [ there].

Scenario: What If Every Student Went Directly to College, What Then?

The rhetoric is that education is important, but is our economy really prepared for the scenario in which every student does choose to attend a four-year college? First responses are “Sure, no problem.” But if you take up a strong cup of coffee and sit down with some friends to jaw over it, it’s likely you’ll dig up some pretty big reasons why this scenario could backfire, economically.

If everyone suddenly chose to go to a four-year college and earn a degree—Utopian at best, but a mind-bending what-if….

• Would we lose employees in the McDonald’s down the street?
• Would Ford and Chrysler be forced to move operations to countries where there was still a manufacturing work force?
• Would there be builders to make houses with hammers and nails?
• Would asphalt be laid for new super highways?
• Would there be someone to tow your car when it breaks down?

Let’s ease up just a bit on this farfetched concept and try this one: What if every graduating high school student next year entered college right out of high school; just one class of graduating seniors? (Again, Utopian because as rumpled as secondary schools are, too many seniors fail to graduate or be adequately prepared to enroll in college). Right now there is a population that does, in fact, graduate and go directly to school, but there is also a population that divides work with school, and a population that enters the work force. Without the population of high school students that foregoes college to enter the work force, how many jobs would go unfilled?

Get a Technical or Trade Education–Millions of Skilled Jobs to Fill

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, by 2012 there will be an upsetting shortage of laborers in a number of key sectors: healthcare, IT, and manufacturing and production, are among them. The reasons are multi-pronged. Since education has re-routed students to college, as opposed to trades, there are fewer and fewer skilled laborers entering the work force. By 2012 more workers in these sectors will retire, leaving jobs unfilled.

Doesn’t sound so competitive, does it?

Since jobs will be unfilled because students are heading to college or dropping out of high school—leaving them totally unprepared for anything but unskilled jobs—then it’s necessary to see the numbers associated. The BLS reports that, between new job creations and retiring workers, over 56 million new and existing jobs will possibly sit vacant! Some of these will require two or four-year degrees, but plenty of them only require career or “on-the-job” training. Are we encouraging well qualified technical students? Is anyone in education brave enough to counsel students, perhaps underachieving in academics, to consider a skilled and well-paying trade as opposed to the alternative—dropping out?

Scholarships Available for Trade/Professional Programs

There has been some recent excitement in some types of career programs: cosmetology (notice increasing number of Aveda Institutes, for example), massage therapy (a high-demand skill), and HVAC, which goes hand in hand with the construction industry. All of these professional trades require a term of specialized schooling and increasing numbers of sources are funding scholarships and grants for interested students.

Lack of Vocational Choices

Once upon a time vocational schools were innately partnered with many public high schools. Students with a drive for auto mechanics, agriculture, and carpentry and construction could spend part of their high school careers learning a trade—a well-paying one, at that. In the 90s, though, in Education’s zeal to see every student remade into a robotic scholar, vocational schools were severed from the public systems and most are defunct, non-existent.

Political Waffling

In 2006, President Bush signed back into action the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act. The act is designed to allow for increased support for technical and vocational education programs. Currently there is some buzz on the Presidential campaign trail that favors cutting budget spending on technical education. So what’s it going to be?

Education’s One-Track Mind

But as much as one might try to force a square peg into a round hole, there are some students failing out of school simply because they are not the next great academicians. Twenty years ago, he or she had the option to pursue farming or auto repair or welding or computer repair and networking versus so called college prep, but most have no such choice. A growing chorus of career counselors and educators is brave enough at least to suggest we explore steering some students into trade schools versus four-year liberal arts colleges, inspire them to success as opposed to failure. In fact, in surveys, some high school drop-outs cite “boredom” and lack of challenge as significant factors in their decisions to part ways with academia.

Maybe if some of these students had had options for careers, they might have felt less pressure to vacate a one-track system.

In some cases students may have options for scholarship funds to vocational schools—like the state of Kansas Vocational Scholarship—but without the proper guidance in high school many will not likely find these sources on their own.

The New Innovators—Trade and Technical Students Will Drive Economic Growth

If innovation and entrepreneurship will be key to worker success in the future, as many predict, then students with the hutzpah to step off the beaten path and machete a pathway to a vocational or technical career will be the most successful among the innovators and entrepreneurs. God knows they will have to be their own best advocates—no one else is at the helm.

The Undercurrent in Undergraduate Education

As exciting as college prep can be, there is an alarming undercurrent that threatens almost half the population of incoming freshman—attrition. How do colleges and universities keep disillusioned students from dropping out?

The number of college freshman dropouts is typically cited between 1 in 4 or 1 in 5, with some sources positing arguments that nearly half of all college students fail to graduate. Surveys of high school students show no lack of interest for a college degree, in fact 95% of high school students when asked about college indicated a “very strong desire” to complete a degree program.¹ If only a fraction of those respondents actually earns a degree, then what happened to change their attitude and/or desire?

A complex array of contributory factors may be to blame, and a growing stable of remedies offered for their cure. But what are the fundamental causal factors of college freshmen attrition and how can they be more directly halted?

High School Grads Poorly Prepared for Campus Challenges

High schools are generally motivated to make sure students go to college. The drive to go to college has little to do with the success rates of students, however. In fact, a mountain of research clearly illustrates that the motivation to excel in college has little to do with the reality of contemporary campus living. The real meat of the drop out problem is the academic preparation, or lack thereof, that students receive prior to arrival on campus.

High School Seniors that “Blow Off” School Likely to Suffer on Campus

A common practice among high school seniors is to take that last year as easy as possible, blow it off, waste it in easy courses. Perhaps this worked, once upon a time, but today’s high school senior slumming it his or her last year is doing more harm than good, report most studies.² College advisers these days urge high school seniors to avoid “resting on their laurels,” and instead spend their senior year immersed in courses that pose academic challenge. This is the best method for college prep, say administrators. A Department of Education study proved the importance of academic challenge in regards to college performance:

“…the academic intensity of a student’s high school course work was the top factor influencing whether students earned a college degree — more than family income, high school grades, ethnicity or test scores.”³

Even for students that work very hard and then take it easy their final year of high school the odds are not so good. This is a wasted year, time in which every bit of a student’s good work can be undone. Given the fact that studies show students lose learned knowledge over the course of a summer break, it’s understandable how they could become quite academically bankrupt, after a full year of cushy coursework and time off from serious studies. Their GPAs are still high, but academic agility is low.

High School Students Fail New College Admissions Standards

College admissions standards have also become a major hurdle to clear for students. Add on a “lost” year of academics and students that for all intents and purposes should be college-ready, are unable to make the academic cut. Colorado State University system’s administrators decided, out of sheer necessity, to ease new admissions requirements for incoming freshman in the Fall of 2007, or risk losing about 20% of their incoming freshman class.⁴

Why the Strong Desire to Go to College?

Problem: 95% of high school students expect to earn a college degree and indicate a strong desire for the same, but, regardless, more and more incoming college freshman are disastrously unprepared and unmotivated to achieve that goal. What, then, drives them in herds onto America’s campuses every fall?

Those same student respondents that expressed the “of course” attitudes about college, also responded that their primary motivators for pursuing college were: good job, good salary.⁵ Somewhere between the illusion of the American Dream and a Bachelors degree lies the truth. Do students simply expect to earn a degree with little work? It makes sense that students whose educational experiences up through secondary school have been somewhat boring, unchallenging and downright lackluster, may expect that their college experience will be similar. Given this illusion, then of course, most students see a college degree in their future, and are justifiably caught very off guard when their first semester of college rolls around and kicks them squarely between the eyes.

What High-Performing High Schools Know That Others Don’t

Samples of select high school teaching methods and policies, chosen for their success rates with college-ready students, reveal fundamental strategies that consistently nurture college campus-ready high school students:

• High quality, experienced, and flexible teachers.
• Teachers capable of evaluating the teaching-learning paradigm and prepared to adjust techniques given the results.
• Auxiliary mentors, tutors, and after school study assistance, available and engaged.
• Advanced college preparatory coursework “beyond state and district standards.”⁶

Any suggestion from naysayers that these methods would fail in certain high schools is moot– these methods belong to and were observed in practice in a handful of “high-performing” schools in high minority, high poverty areas. Which means, essentially, that if these methods work to develop the skills of high school students in disadvantaged schools, they should work in almost any high school in America. Furthermore, the study that distilled these findings was ultimately presented as a primer for education lawmakers.⁷

Some Students Face Deeper Challenges on Campus

Academic shortcomings notwithstanding, there are student populations that statistically struggle even harder.

Why First Generation Students Face Further Adversity

First-generation college students, especially minorities, face challenges stemming first and foremost from lack of familial support. In fact, the majority of ethnic minority students rate “parental influence” as a number one factor in their “educational choices.”⁸ This is not to say that parents do not want a college education for their children, but parents without experience of academic life beyond high school are less prepared to provide the emotional and psychological support and motivation necessary to keep their first-in-family student on campus. These types of students may also feel disenfranchised from higher education, and out of place with students whose families take college as a matter of course.

Male Freshman May Struggle with College Structure

Males are, on the average, less agile than their female counterparts when it comes to standardizing their on-campus lives, including organizational skills, prioritization and time management, and defining successful study habits and methods. Course assignments tend to fall behind and concrete goals are elusive. When these factors fall apart or are non-existent, males may be unable to remain academically buoyant, further supporting the alarming statistics: for every 100 women that graduate college, only 73 men will do the same.⁹

If so many college freshmen are surprised by the rigors of college academics—in combination with the traditional transition to campus life—that they are at risk for dropping out, then what’s being done to change the freshman experience?

Since America’s high schools are failing to adequately renovate curriculum or recruit (and pay for) the type of teachers necessary to maintain a high-performing program, then it must become the responsibility of colleges and universities to provide the necessary student support.

Freshman Survival: Retention Programs Stem Anxiety

Some college and university administrators are quite concerned that the drop out rate among college freshman is their responsibility. In response, retention programs have begun to spring up. Whether grassroots, campus-created, or pre-packaged Freshmen Survival courses administered by professional educational coaches, retention programs essentially guide students with bumpy campus transitions and connect them to the resources—academic, social, religious, medical, financial—they will need to succeed on campus.

Preparedness for college life goes well beyond the pale of sheer academics. Fueling the need for transition programs. High school students are equally unprepared for the responsibilities of a more “adult” world. Common challenges that await freshman on traditional college campuses:

• Financial matters
• Study and time management
• Personal organization and prioritization

“Give Them Time, They’ll Find Their Way Around”

Students most likely to drop out do so before they reach their sophomore year. Some leave for holiday breaks, Spring Breaks, and summer vacation, and never return, some with little indication they are leaving. The general excitement about college quickly wanes, but many administrators still believe much of the work is done once kids are on campus. As bright an idea as retention programs seem, they are only being used on a fraction of America’s campuses—29%.¹⁰

Factors in College Retention: What Programs Can Be Put in Place to Help Students?

Over the last few years college administrators, as well as students, have tackled the issues inherent to student retention. A large number of colleges and universities of all kinds, collectively assigned the following practices as primary in retention programs:¹¹

• Freshman seminars and courses.
• Academic assistance, from mentors and tutors to remedial courses.
• Available advisors willing to engage with students and offer sooner-than-later guidance on academic goals.

Alternative indicators suggest that there are other factors that make a difference in student engagement and transition:

• Evidence suggests that students with campus-based jobs are less likely to drop out. Perhaps they are more disciplined with study skills and time management.¹²
• Remediation programs, or high school level courses that help bring students up to speed with essential freshman courses. Remedial coursework remains popular in community college systems, a controversial issue in higher education, but possibly a strong reason why an increasing number of students are opting for 2+2 programs, or community college to four-year transfer programs. Some supporters of remedial programs insist the concept must be accepted among four-year colleges, as well, to stem the dropout rate or discourage transfers to community colleges.¹³
• Available advisers are seen by students as “concerned person[s] in the campus community” able to interact and connect with freshman. Student responses have suggested this type of “quality interaction” may be one of the simplest solutions for new students away from home for the first time and feeling lost in the shuffle.¹⁴

Retention Tools

Colleges and universities unable to design and develop their own retention programs may utilize pre-packaged programs or resources from a number of providers:

• Of the 29% of schools that have retention programs, 13¹⁵ so far participate in the “Foundations of Excellence in the First College Year.” Policy Center on the First Year of College administers this program with a mission to inspire college and university campuses to become “engaging” environments for first year students. With tools provided through the Foundations of Excellence program, institutions may conduct careful self-assessment of all aspects of campus life, including “policies and practices.” Eventually changes are developed—the outcome, a totally synthesized campus that embraces first year students and their experiences, instead of excluding and isolating.
• The National Resource Center for the First Year Experience and Students in Transition provides written materials, seminars, conferences, and networking opportunities for institutions interested in creating a “first year experience” worth hanging around to savor. The Center is best known for its University 101 course, an innovative and very successful program that guides new students in their shift to campus life.
• The Center for the Study of College Student Retention provides a stable of resources for institutions. Administrators have access to research specific to the issues, as well as a general guide designed to lead any institution through development of a retention program.

High Dollar Freshman “Coaches” Hit a Mother Lode

Plenty of lip service is paid to for-profit “coaching” services prior to college—professional assistance with admissions forms, guidance during college and financial aid processes, as well as scholarship and grant assistance. But some colleges and universities are paying top dollar for another kind of coaching service—retention coaches.

First year coaches function as a freshman’s guardian angel; they provide motivation when students feel down, guidance in mapping academic goals, and offer tips and advice for improving study habits, managing time, coexisting with roommates, and building successful relationships with campus faculty and advisers.¹⁶

A mere handful of student coaching businesses exist, but plenty more are sure to follow—the money making potential is great and this segment of the education market, so far untapped. But with service fees of “$800 to $1,400 per student”¹⁷, what colleges and universities are paying? Apparently, plenty.

Freshman Attrition: No Easy Answer

Given the disparity of issues facing contemporary college freshmen, it’s clear there is no one easy answer to halt freshman dropouts. Students begin their college careers with little understanding of the impending rigors. Apparently high schools, save for a few high-performers, dish up less than desirable college preparatory curriculum. Admission to a college would also seem to validate a students’ academic record, but this is misleading, as well.

Retention programs are likely to continue spreading among college campuses; they must. Sources suggest that the federal government may soon challenge higher education on the dropout issue, perhaps with fines for high numbers of students that fail to make it to graduation.

First year on campus, given all the factors at work, is a tricky balancing act. Groundwork for first year transitions must be built. On the other end of the spectrum, is it just a dream that U.S. high school education will make the sweeping changes necessary to lead kids to college level academics; to inspire them as opposed to bore them?

¹ National Freshman Attitudes Report, Noel-Levitz, 2007, accessed August 30, 2007,

² Perez, Gayle, “Educators Support Temporary Lower Admissions Standards,” August 17, 2007, accessed August 27, 2007, http://www.chieftain.com/metro/1187335298/6.

³ “Study: One in Five Drop Out of College Before Sophomore Year,” Albany Democrat-Herald, February 21, 2006, accessed August 27, 2007, http://www.democratherald.com/articles/2006/02/21/news/oregon/state03.txt

⁴ “Study: One in Five Drop Out of College Before Sophomore Year,” Albany Democrat-Herald, February 21, 2006, accessed August 27, 2007, http://www.democratherald.com/articles/2006/02/21/news/oregon/state03.txt

⁵ National Freshman Attitudes Report, Noel-Levitz.

⁶ “Preparing All High School Students for College and Work: What High-Performing Schools are Teaching,” ACT, February 23, 2005, accessed August 30, 2007, http://www.act.org/news/releases/2005/2-23-05.html .

⁷ Implications for Policymakers, ACT, 2005, accessed August 30, 2007, http://www.act.org/path/policy/pdf/success_implications.pdf.

⁸ Szelenyi, Katalin, “Minority Student Retention and Academic Achievement in Community Colleges,” 2004, accessed August 29, 2007, http://www.ericdigests.org/2001-4/minority.html .

⁹ National Freshman Attitudes Report, Noel-Levitz.

¹⁰ Draeger, Justin, “An Examination of First-Year College Students,” NASFAA, 2007, accessed August 26, 2007, http://www.nasfaa.org/publications/2007/examinationoffirst-yearcollegestudents.html .

¹¹ Wesley Habley, Randy McClanahan, What Works in Student Retention? All Survey Colleges, ACT, 2004, accessed August 30, 2007, http://www.act.org/path/postsec/droptables/pdf/AllColleges.pdf .

¹² Cermak, Katherine, “On-Campus Employment as a Factor of Student Retention and Graduation,” DePaul University, February 19, 2004, accessed August 26, 2007, http://oipr.depaul.edu/open/gradereten/oce.asp .

¹³ Gehrman, Elizabeth, “What Makes Kids Drop Out of College?” Harvard University Gazette, May 4, 2006, accessed August 26, 2007, http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2006/05.04/13-dropout.html

¹⁴ “Many U.S. Colleges Overlooking a Potential Cure for College Dropouts,” ACT News, June 23, 2004, accessed August 26, 2007, http://www.act.org/news/releases/2004/6-23-04.html .

¹⁵ “MSU Fights to Retain Freshman Students,” KFYR-TV, August 21, 2007, accessed August 26, 2007, http://www.kfyrtv.com/News_Stories.asp?news=9751 .

¹⁶ DeBare, Ilana, “Executive Style Coaches Put College Students on Track to Success,” San Francisco Chronicle, August 19, 2007, accessed August 26, 2007, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/19/BU2QRJB29.DTL .

¹⁷ DeBare, “Executive Style Coaches Put College Students on Track to Success.”