Your search found 2763 results.

Descriptors:
Student Costs; Bachelors Degrees; Public Colleges; Electronic Learning; Competency Based Education; Private Colleges; Proprietary Schools; Academic Advising; Public Opinion

Abstract:
In August 2010, Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, speaking informally at a technology conference, said technological innovations should be able to lower the cost of college to $2,000 a year. Mr. Gates's comments reportedly caught the attention of Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican of Texas, who came up with his own back-of-the-envelope estimate of how much college should cost: Multiplying $2,000 times four and adding $2,000 for the cost of books or other learning materials, the governor decided that a bachelor's degree should cost $10,000. In February 2011, Mr. Perry challenged public colleges in his state to create a $10,000 degree. Several of them have answered the call. From Texas, the idea of a $10,000 bachelor's degree has spread like an Internet meme to governors in Florida and Wisconsin, a state legislator in California, and some national online colleges. But the growing attention to the bargain-basement bachelor's degree is not just an indication of how an idea can quickly take hold with the public and lawmakers. The idea itself has become a kind of Rorschach test for how people view American higher education, what they think its role should be, and whom or what they blame for its shortfalls. Like a lot of things that get passed around on the Internet, Mr. Gates's comments became obscured by the interpretation. What he went on to say was that college costs would diminish because place-based higher education would become "five times less important" in five years. But in the rush to answer the subsequent gubernatorial challenges, the proposals that have emerged in Florida and Texas, in particular, have relied largely on shifting some costs of the traditional college model from the state to some other entity, such as businesses, community colleges, secondary schools, and even the student. In other words, the $10,000 degree will still cost more than $10,000. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Student Costs; Socioeconomic Status; Social Class; College Students; College Admission; Student Diversity; Affirmative Action; Economically Disadvantaged; College Entrance Examinations; Scores; Student Organizations; Court Litigation

Abstract:
At Middlebury College--and on campuses throughout the country--class is coming out of the closet. Long hidden from view, economic status is emerging from the shadows, as once-taboo discussions are taking shape. The growing economic divide in America, and on American campuses, has given rise to new student organizations, and new dialogues, focused on raising awareness of class issues--and proposing solutions. With the U.S. Supreme Court likely to curtail the consideration of race in college admissions this year, the role of economic disadvantage as a basis for preferences could further raise the salience of class. Today's young people have grown up in a world unlike that of their parents. Class inequality has taken on much greater salience than racial inequality. Today's youth didn't grow up seeing fire hoses being trained on peaceful civil-rights demonstrators. Instead they have grown up in a country where racism continues to exist, but where voters elected and then re-elected a black president, and where Latinos are a rising political power. And they have come of age at a time of growing economic inequality, when the advantages of economic privilege are greater than ever before. Wealthy families have always had more resources to invest in their children, but the gap in that spending between wealthy and poor families has tripled since the 1970s. For 50 years, higher education has managed to avoid questions of class. But gaping economic disparity, changing student sentiment, and the U.S. Supreme Court seem likely to bring class back, once again, to the forefront. Having taken some modestly successful steps to include women and racial minorities, will the colleges accept the challenge? Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
College Students; Student Costs; Textbooks; Electronic Publishing; State Legislation; State Aid

Abstract:
Providing college students with free textbooks is no easy task. That seems to be the major lesson from several efforts to produce e-books that are low-cost or free to help reduce students' costs. Money pressures, slow adoption by professors, and quality concerns stand in the way as these projects hope to rival traditional publishing. Take Flat World Knowledge Inc., an upstart publisher that had been a key proponent of a so-called "freemium" model of giving away electronic copies of textbooks and asking students to pay for extras like flash cards or printed copies. The company announced a sudden move away from that model in November, stating that its free-content option will no longer be available starting in January. The reason for the change: Students were not buying as many printed copies as predicted because those who wanted one got a used copy rather than buy a new one from Flat World. Flat World will still offer textbooks at lower prices than traditional publishers do, but nothing will be free. The company's basic online books cost about $20 each. Flat World Knowledge is also pursuing a sponsored-licensing model with some colleges, where an outside company or foundation would enter into an agreement with Flat World Knowledge or the college to help pay for the cost of content. The e-book company will be able to judge the impact of its "free to fair" pricing transition by next year. Some see Flat World Knowledge's move away from the freemium model as a warning for other open-access textbook projects. Finding ways to support the production of free textbooks is not the only unresolved issue for open-textbook proponents. Another challenge is getting buy-in from instructors, who must be persuaded to adopt the textbooks. And when books are written by volunteers, keeping quality high can be more difficult than in the traditional model, where authors are paid by publishers. Producing free textbooks may sound like a good idea, but it is turning out to be easier said than done. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Foreign Countries; Higher Education; Undergraduate Students; School Holding Power; Educational Policy; Public Policy; Access to Education; Student Experience; Tuition; Student Costs; Proprietary Schools; Educational Trends; Futures (of Society)

Abstract:
This article traces recent policy developments relating to full-time undergraduate student retention within the English higher education system. It focuses specifically on the changing government policies and strategies designed to influence institutional behavior to promote widening participation while attending to the student experience and through that to raising student retention rates. The article finally explores the potential impact of recent proposals to allow institutions to be free to raise tuition fees, placing the burden of cost on the student alongside an encouragement to open the market to more completion through "for profit" new private sector providers. (Contains 6 figures, 4 tables, and 5 footnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Public Schools; High Schools; High School Students; Credits; Dual Enrollment; Postsecondary Education; Advanced Placement Programs; Distance Education; Academic Education; Vocational Education; Student Transportation; Student Costs; Institutional Characteristics; Prerequisites; Educational Finance; Associate Degrees; Bachelors Degrees; Certification; Secondary School Teachers; College Faculty; Grouping (Instructional Purposes); National Surveys

Abstract:
This report provides nationally representative data on the prevalence and characteristics of dual credit and exam-based courses in public high schools. For this survey, dual credit is defined as a course or program where high school students can earn both high school and postsecondary credits for the same courses; exam-based courses are Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) previously collected data on dual credit and exam-based courses for the 2002-03 school year from high schools (Waits, Setzer, and Lewis 2005; Kleiner and Lewis 2005). To gather current data on dual credit and dual enrollment, NCES fielded an updated survey of public high schools on dual credit and a complementary survey of postsecondary institutions on dual enrollment. The study presented in this report collected information from public high schools with grade 11 or 12 about dual credit and exam-based courses for high school students in the 2010-11 school year. NCES, in the Institute of Education Sciences, conducted this survey in fall 2011 using the Fast Response Survey System (FRSS). FRSS is a survey system designed to collect small amounts of issue-oriented data from a nationally representative sample of districts, schools, or teachers with minimal burden on respondents and within a relatively short period of time. The survey was mailed to approximately 1,500 public high schools with grade 11 or 12 in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The unweighted survey response rate was 91 percent and the weighted response rate using the initial base weights was also 91 percent. The survey weights were adjusted for questionnaire nonresponse and the data were then weighted to yield national estimates that represent all eligible public high schools in the United States. Because the purpose of this report is to introduce new NCES data from the survey through the presentation of tables containing descriptive information, only selected national findings are presented. These findings have been chosen to demonstrate the range of information available from the FRSS study rather than to discuss all of the data collected; they are not meant to emphasize any particular issue. Readers are cautioned not to make causal inferences about the data presented here. The findings are based on self-reported data from public high schools. Appended are: (1) Standard Error Tables; (2) Technical Notes; and (3) Questionnaire. (Contains 31 tables and 10 footnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (1098K)

Descriptors:
Law Schools; Admission (School); Declining Enrollment; Enrollment Trends; Tuition; Student Costs; Debt (Financial); Employment Potential; Lawyers; Quality of Working Life; Educational Finance; Context Effect; Employment Patterns; Education Work Relationship

Abstract:
The Law School Admission Council recently reported that applications were heading toward a 30-year low, reflecting, as a "New York Times" article put it, "increased concern over soaring tuition, crushing student debt, and diminishing prospects of lucrative employment upon graduation." Since 2004 the number of law-school applicants has dropped from almost 100,000 to 54,000. Good thing, too. That loud pop people are hearing is the bursting of the law bubble--firms, schools, and disillusioned lawyers paying for decades of greed and grandiosity. The bubble grew from a combination of U.S. News-driven ranking mania, law schools' insatiable hunger for growth, and huge law firms' obsession with profit above all else. Like the dot-com, real-estate, and financial bubbles that preceded it, the law bubble is bursting painfully. But now is the time to consider the causes, take steps to soften the impact, and figure out how to keep it from happening again. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Student Costs; Student Financial Aid; Paying for College; Fiscal Capacity; Money Management; Parents; Family Income; Racial Differences; African American Students; Hispanic American Students; Policy

Abstract:
Changes in financial aid policies raise questions about students being asked to pay too much for college and whether parents' college savings for their children helps reduce the burden on students to pay for college. Using trivariate probit analysis with predicted probabilities, in this exploratory study we find recent changes in the financial aid system place a higher responsibility on African American, Latino/Hispanic, and moderate-income students to pay for college themselves. We also find when parents open a savings account, start a state-sponsored savings plan, or open a college investment fund students are less likely to pay for college with student contributions. Therefore, we suggest in addition to grants and scholarships, policies that encourage accumulation of savings for college among minority and lower income families may help reduce the college cost burden they experience. (Contains 2 figures and 4 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
High School Seniors; High Achievement; Economically Disadvantaged; Access to Education; College Applicants; Guidance; Student Costs; Access to Information; Intervention; Educational Research; Program Effectiveness; College Admission; Enrollment

Abstract:
This study examined the effects of providing low-income, high-achieving high school seniors with college application guidance and information about the costs of college. The "application guidance" included information about deadlines and requirements for college applications at nearby institutions, at the state's flagship institution, and at in- and out-of-state selective colleges. The study reported that the intervention increased the percentage of students who: (a) applied to a selective institution (from 55% to 67%), (b) were admitted to a selective institution (from 30% to 39%), and (c) enrolled in a selective institution (from 29% to 34%). Students in the intervention group also completed more admissions applications, and were admitted to more colleges, than students in the comparison group. All of these differences were statistically significant. The study is a randomized controlled trial. As such it could potentially "meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) evidence standards without reservations." However, there was attrition in the overall study sample, and more information is needed to determine whether attrition rates were similar in the intervention and comparison groups. A more thorough review (forthcoming) will explore this issue further and will determine the final study rating. [The following study is reviewed in this "Quick Review": Hoxby, C., & Turner, S. (2013). "Expanding college opportunities for high-achieving, low income students." Stanford, CA: Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (88K)

Descriptors:
Dormitories; Student Costs; Paying for College; Colleges; Higher Education; College Students; Preferences; Incentives; Students; Student Characteristics; High Achievement; Heterogeneous Grouping

Abstract:
This paper investigates whether demand-side market pressure explains colleges' decisions to provide consumption amenities to their students. We estimate a discrete choice model of college demand using micro data from the high school classes of 1992 and 2004, matched to extensive information on all four year colleges in the U.S. We find that most students do appear to value college consumption amenities, including spending on student activities, sports, and dormitories. While this taste for amenities is broad-based, the taste for academic quality is confined to high-achieving students. The heterogeneity in student preferences implies that colleges face very different incentives depending on their current student body and the students who the institution hopes to attract. We estimate that the elasticities implied by our demand model can account for 16 percent of the total variation across colleges in the ratio of amenity to academic spending, and including them on top of key observable characteristics (sector, state, size, selectivity) increases the explained variation by twenty percent. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Income; School Business Relationship; Higher Education; Student Costs; Corporate Support; Online Courses; College Students; Colleges; Electronic Learning; Educational Finance

Abstract:
Coursera has been operating for only a few months, but the company has already persuaded some of the world's best-known universities to offer free courses through its online platform. Colleges that usually move at a glacial pace are rushing into deals with the upstart company. But what exactly have they signed up for? And if the courses are free, how will the company--and the universities involved--make money to sustain them? Some clues can be found in the contract the institutions signed. "The Chronicle" obtained the agreement between Coursera and the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, the first public university to make such a deal, under a Freedom of Information Act request, and Coursera officials say that the arrangement is similar to those with the other partners. The contract reveals that even Coursera is not yet sure how it will bring in revenue. A section at the end of the agreement, titled "Possible Company Monetization Strategies," lists eight potential business models, including having companies sponsor courses. That means students taking a free course from Stanford University may eventually be barraged by banner ads or promotional messages. But the universities have the opportunity to veto any revenue-generating idea on a course-by-course basis, so very little is set in stone. Coursera is following an approach popular among Silicon Valley start-ups: Build fast and worry about money later. Venture capitalists--and even two universities--have invested more than $22-million in the effort already. Coursera's leaders say they are actively pursuing only two of the moneymaking ideas on the list: (1) charging students who pass the courses a small fee for a certificate; and (2) serving as a matchmaker between students looking for jobs and companies seeking qualified employees. Even those two ideas are works in progress, though. None of the partner colleges have decided how much they will charge for certificates. And the company is still studying how best to work with employers, and how much to charge. When and if money does come in, the universities will get 6 to 15 percent of the revenue, depending on how long they offer the course (and thus how long Coursera has to profit from it). The institutions will also get 20 percent of the gross profits, after accounting for costs and previous revenue paid. That means the company gets the vast majority of the cash flow. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website