Your search found 2389 results.

Descriptors:
Student Loan Programs; Loan Repayment; College Students; Institutional Characteristics; Proprietary Schools; Public Colleges; Private Colleges; Two Year Colleges; Graduation Rate; Minority Group Students

Abstract:
This paper examines the institutional determinants of federal loan status for a recent cohort of college students. We first set out how institutions influence loan accumulations and repayment rates, with particular focus on for-profit colleges. We then test a set of hypotheses about loan status and repayment using national data on loans, defaults, and repayments merged with college-level data. For all measures of loan status there are significant raw gaps between for-profit colleges and public and not-for-profit colleges. After controlling for student characteristics, measures of college quality, and college practices, large gaps in loan balance per student remain: students in for-profit colleges, especially the 2-year colleges, borrow approximately four times as much as they would have at a 2-year public college. For a student attending the "average" college, their repayment rate is predicted to be 5 [9] percentage points lower if that college is for-profit compared to public [non-profit]. Repayment rates are also lower for colleges with higher proportions of minority students and with lower graduation rates; contrary to some claims, single-program institutions appear to have higher repayment rates. 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:
Parent Attitudes; Paying for College; Higher Education; Money Management; Parent Financial Contribution; Family Financial Resources; Parent Responsibility; Economic Factors; Motivation; Family Income; Racial Differences; Ethnicity; Student Loan Programs; Grants; Goal Orientation

Abstract:
Sallie Mae has conducted an ongoing study, "How America Pays for College," annually since 2008. Through that study, the researchers are able to provide a clearer picture of how the typical American undergraduate is paying for college today. This report is the third in the "How America Saves for College" series conducted since 2009. Interviews took place in August 2012 with a nationally representative sample of more than 1,600 parents. Sallie Mae's "How America Saves for College 2013" shows American families overwhelmingly expect their children to attend college and that most parents are optimistic about their ability to save for it. It also shows that anticipated savings often don't tie to the amount that families are currently saving, nor meet with the reality of the cost of college. Families who have set a savings goal for themselves plan to save close to $39,000 for each child's college education costs. When asked another way, parents who are saving plan to save about 32 percent of the future cost of college. Based on families' current savings behaviors, actual savings will amount to about half their goal amount. (Contains 10 figures, 54 tables, and 10 footnotes.) [For 2010 report, see ED540411.] 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 (2262K)

Descriptors:
Student Financial Aid; Federal Government; Higher Education; Incentives; Eligibility; Educational Change; Tax Credits; Tuition; Student Loan Programs; Credentials; Grants; Low Income Groups; Outreach Programs

Abstract:
The federal financial aid system is no longer up to today's demands. Built in a different era, its haphazard evolution over the decades has made it inefficient, poorly targeted, and overly complicated. With the need for higher education never greater and college growing increasingly unaffordable, students deserve a streamlined aid system that is more understandable, effective, and fair. Policymakers can achieve such reforms at no additional cost to taxpayers--by rebalancing existing resources and better aligning incentives for students and institutions of higher education. Ultimately, those reforms will increase access to high-quality credentials and boost student success in higher education and the workforce. In "Rebalancing Resources and Incentives in Federal Student Aid," the authors offer more than 30 specific policy recommendations that are designed to create such a system. Nothing is off-limits. They recommend specific changes to federal grants, loans, tax benefits, college outreach programs and federal regulations to provide more direct aid to the lowest-income students, while strengthening accountability for institutions of higher education to ensure that more students are able to earn affordable, high-quality credentials. Taken together, the package of proposals in their report is "budget-neutral" over the 10-year period from federal fiscal years 2013-2022. Pell Grant Funding Sources are appended. (Contains 1 figure, 3 tables, and 120 notes.) 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 (1095K)

Descriptors:
Student Financial Aid; Labor; Tuition Grants; Labor Supply; Parents; College Students; Student Loan Programs

Abstract:
This paper compares partial and general equilibrium effects of alternative financial aid policies intended to promote college participation. We build an overlapping generations life-cycle, heterogeneous-agent, incomplete-markets model with education, labor supply, and consumption/saving decisions. Altruistic parents make inter vivos transfers to their children. Labor supply during college, government grants and loans, as well as private loans, complement parental transfers as sources of funding for college education. We find that the current financial aid system in the U.S. improves welfare, and removing it would reduce GDP by two percentage points in the long-run. Any further relaxation of government-sponsored loan limits would have no salient effects. The short-run partial equilibrium effects of expanding tuition grants (especially their need-based component) are sizeable. However, long-run general equilibrium effects are 3-4 times smaller. Every additional dollar of government grants crowds out 20-30 cents of parental transfers. 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:
Student Loan Programs; Federal Aid; Debt (Financial); Undergraduate Students; Dropouts; Comparative Analysis; College Graduates; Longitudinal Studies; Incidence; Employment; Income; Public Colleges; Private Colleges; Two Year Colleges; Proprietary Schools

Abstract:
This Statistics in Brief focuses on students who do not complete a postsecondary credential and the substantial federal education debt they accrue. Specifically, the analysis compares the cumulative debt from Stafford and Perkins loan programs of students who did not complete a degree within 6 years of first enrolling ("noncompleters") with that of their counterparts who did complete ("completers"). Students still enrolled in postsecondary education after 6 years are not included because many of these students have not yet entered repayment or formally entered the labor force and lack sufficient income data for a key measure used in the analysis. These students constitute 15 percent of beginning postsecondary students in 2009 and 14 percent in 2001 (Berkner, He, and Cataldi 2002; Skomsvold, Radford, and Berkner 2011, table 2.0A). The study is based on data from the two most recent cohorts of first-time beginning postsecondary students surveyed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES): students who began postsecondary education in 1995-96 and those who began in 2003-04. Each cohort was followed for 6 years, with final data collection for each cohort occurring in 2001 and 2009, respectively. The sampled students were identified in the 1995-96 and 2003-04 National Postsecondary Student Aid Studies (NPSAS), respectively, and followed up in the corresponding Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS) Longitudinal Studies (BPS:95/01 and BPS:04/09). (Contains 3 tables, 8 figures and 9 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 (1251K)

Descriptors:
Presidents; Budgets; Politics of Education; Preschool Education; Educational Finance; College Readiness; Career Readiness; Paying for College; Cost Effectiveness; Student Financial Aid; Student Loan Programs; Loan Repayment

Abstract:
President Obama sent his fiscal year 2014 budget request to Congress on April 10, 2013. The New America Foundation's Education Policy Program released this subsequent issue brief, "Key Questions on the Obama Administration's 2014 Budget Request." Obama's budget request totals $71.2 billion in appropriations funding for the U.S. Department of Education. It includes spending for a pre-kindergarten federal-state partnership program for low- and moderate-income 4-year-olds and a new college and career readiness competitive grant effort. The request also details a number of proposals to address college affordability, innovation, transparency, and quality, including a proposal that would pay alternative higher education providers like MOOCs and employers who provide high-quality two-year degrees at no cost to the student. The White House budget request would reform interest rates on federal student loans, tying them to the 10-year Treasury note rate plus an additional percentage each year, but leaving the rates fixed over the life of the loan. The proposal is adapted from a plan published last year by the Education Policy Program's Jason Delisle. The Education Policy Program at the New America Foundation has reviewed the president's proposals and generated a list of key questions that policymakers, the media, stakeholder groups, and the public should ask about the proposals. 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 (166K)

Descriptors:
Student Costs; College Students; Student Financial Aid; Student Loan Programs; Grants; Debt (Financial); Graduation Rate; Colleges; Community Colleges; Disproportionate Representation; Employment; Majors (Students)

Abstract:
Efforts to keep higher education affordable for all students and to promote not only access, but success--all in a climate of dwindling state appropriations and lean budgets--made the past year one of reckoning for colleges. Total outstanding student-loan debt hit the $1-trillion mark as federal officials scrambled to ease the burden on borrowers, partly by requiring colleges to disclose more about students' cost of attendance and financial-aid awards. A campaign-season debate arose in Congress over a scheduled interest-rate increase on some student loans. And the national college-completion agenda prompted both attention to underrepresented students and scrutiny of graduation rates. Seeing students through to graduation remained a challenge for colleges. The author reports on how the national goals to increase the number of graduates bring attention to how colleges can better help students succeed. 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:
Employment Level; Student Loan Programs; Paying for College; Debt (Financial); Family Income; Federal Aid; Loan Repayment; Parents

Abstract:
As the cost of college has spiraled ever upward and median family income has fallen, the loan program, called Parent PLUS, has become indispensable for increasing numbers of parents desperate to make their children's college plans work. Last year the government disbursed $10.6-billion in Parent PLUS loans to just under a million families. Even adjusted for inflation, that's $6.3-billion more than it disbursed back in 2000, and to nearly twice as many borrowers. A joint examination by ProPublica and The Chronicle of Higher Education has found that PLUS loans can sometimes hurt the very families they are intended to help: The loans are both remarkably easy to get and nearly impossible to get out from under for families who've overreached. When a parent applies for a PLUS loan, the government checks credit history, but it doesn't assess whether the borrower has the ability to repay the loan. It doesn't check income. It doesn't check employment status. It doesn't check how much other debt--like a mortgage or other student loans--the borrower is already on the hook for. Much attention has been focused on students burdened with loans through their lives. The recent growth in the PLUS program highlights another way the societal burden of paying for college has shifted to families. It means some parents are now saddled with children's college debt even as they approach retirement. Unlike other federal student loans, PLUS loans don't have a cap on borrowing. Parents can take out as much as they need to cover the gap between other financial aid and the full cost of attendance. Colleges, eager to raise enrollment and help families find financing, often steer parents toward the loans, recommending that they take out thousands of dollars with no consideration as to whether they can afford it. When it comes to paying the money back, the government takes a hard line. PLUS loans, like all student loans, are all-but-impossible to discharge in bankruptcy. If a borrower is in default, the government can seize tax refunds and garnish wages or Social Security. What is more, repayment options are actually more limited for Parent PLUS borrowers compared with other federal loans. Struggling borrowers can put their loans in deferment or forbearance, but except under certain conditions Parent PLUS loans aren't eligible for either of the two main income-based repayment programs to help borrowers with federal loans get more-affordable monthly payments. 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:
Alumni; Donors; Private Financial Support; Undergraduate Students; Student Financial Aid; Research Universities; Student Loan Programs; Scholarships; Student Employment

Abstract:
We investigate how undergraduates' financial aid packages affect their subsequent donative behavior as alumni. We analyze micro data on alumni giving at an anonymous research university, and focus on three types of financial aid, scholarships, loans, and campus jobs. Consistent with the view of some professional fundraisers, we allow the receipt of a given form of aid "per se" to affect alumni giving. Our main findings are: (1) Individuals who take out student loans are less likely to make a gift, "ceteris paribus." Further, individuals who take out large loans make smaller contributions as alumni, conditional on making a gift. (2) Scholarship aid reduces the size of a gift, conditional on making a gift, but has little effect on the probability of making a donation. (3) Aid in the form of campus jobs does not have a strong effect on donative behavior. (Contains 8 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:
Administrator Attitudes; Student Loan Programs; Federal Government; Deans; Medical Schools; Prediction; Medical Students; Loan Repayment

Abstract:
When students or recent graduates come to talk with Anthony M. Sozzo, an associate dean for student affairs at New York Medical College, about repaying their federal loans, he sometimes struggles with what to tell them. He states that the answers are increasingly being complicated by an ever-expanding federal loan-servicing system. The number of entities that service the loans owned by the federal government has risen sharply over the past several years, from one company in 2008 to 13 as of this month. Keeping up with the increase in servicers has been a challenge, financial-aid officers say, and at the individual-borrower level the changes are causing confusion over what borrowers are expected to pay and where they should go to manage their loans. With 13 companies now handling federal direct loans and more to come, aid administrators predict that the resulting inconsistencies will overwhelm borrowers. 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