Category: policy & research

  • Improving State Longitudinal Data Systems

    Improving State Longitudinal Data Systems

    Title: Powering Potential: Using Data to Support Postsecondary Access, Completion, and Return on Investment
    Source: The Data Quality Campaign

    To make decisions about when and where to pursue their next educational credential, students and their families need to be able to understand the full picture of pursuing further education. They need access to real-time program information, which includes data on enrollment and completion, program performance, financial aid availability, employment, and return on investment.

    A new publication from the Data Quality Campaign highlights the current landscape and challenges of state data systems for postsecondary education and offers recommendations to align state and institutional data systems.

    Key findings include:

    How the existing postsecondary and workforce data landscape varies

    According to the report, nearly all states have agencies that oversee postsecondary institutions and collect some student or programmatic data within postsecondary student unit record systems (PSURSs). However, the authors note that agency-specific data are often disconnected from other sectors’ data. As a result, student information cannot connect with postgraduation outcomes, as is possible with statewide longitudinal data systems.

    Education and workforce data systems differ greatly across states. Sixty-eight percent of PSURSs connect to workforce data, but only 11 percent identify the industry and general occupation that individuals are employed in.

    States collect a variety of postsecondary data from institutions through a variety of methods, but the report emphasizes that states identify many common uses of the data, such as in supporting workforce alignment.

    Data challenges that states are facing

    The report observes that federal funding for states to develop data systems has been increasingly siloed, with different grant programs focusing on the development of data systems that each have a narrow focus (e.g., workforce and K–12 data).

    Education and workforce data systems identify students using different methods, making connecting individuals’ data and tracking their pathways difficult. However, the authors note that some states are making changes to improve matching accuracy.

    Recommendations for states to proactively use data in cooperation with postsecondary institutions

    The report recommends that states ensure data are used in collaboration with postsecondary institutions to inform policy and practice. This includes creating guided pathways and aligning institutions’ educational offerings with their states’ workforce needs. By evaluating trends in postsecondary completion, employment outcomes, and employment needs, policymakers can refine programs that guide students into pathways with high completion and high-paying careers.

    Institutions collect a variety of information about students, including enrollment demographics and course grades. According to the report, given many institutions’ limitations to do robust analysis, this information should be integrated with statewide data systems.

    States can use data to make the admissions and financial aid application processes easier for students and to streamline the process of enrolling in high-demand educational offerings. States and institutions can also leverage their shared data to identify students at higher risk of not completing their postsecondary program and tailor financial support, emergency aid, and academic supports to provide on-time interventions to these students.

    To read the full report from the Data Quality Campaign, click here.

    —Austin Freeman


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • Navigating Anti-DEI in Higher Education

    Navigating Anti-DEI in Higher Education

    Title: Critical Leadership for Civil Rights in Higher Education: The Experiences of Chief Diversity Officers Navigating Anti-DEI Action

    Authors: Jeffrey K. Grim, Arissa Koines, Raúl Gámez, Erick R. Aguinaldo, and Jada Crocker

    Source: National Center for Institutional Diversity, University of Michigan

    Chief diversity officers (CDOs) in higher education play a critical role in ensuring civil rights and facilitating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) on campuses. In a qualitative study of 40 CDOs by the National Center for Institutional Diversity, authors found that CDOs tend to take one of three approaches.

    The first approach, strategic inaction, involves not changing any current practices and watching how political trends change. Proaction involves “responding to foreseen anti-DEI actions to ensure they could successfully support all students, faculty, and staff without the disruption of political attacks on specific naming conventions or activities” (p. 4). The third strategy is reaction, in which CDOs eliminate DEI measures to comply with laws and regulations.

    Based on their findings, the authors offer the following seven recommendations for current CDOs in higher education.

    1. Resist anti-DEI intimidation tactics: Higher education leaders should remember that these tactics are exactly that: tactics. As such, do not preemptively comply with threats or potential anti-DEI actions.
    2. Partner with other institutional leaders: Create a cohesive plan of action and message for DEI. Consider Shared Equity Leadership as a frame for doing collective work.
    3. Develop coalitions with external stakeholders: Establish relationships with key higher education stakeholders (alumni, policymakers, nonprofits, etc.). Work together to advocate for DEI in higher education and its role in diversifying the workforce.
    4. Make research-informed decisions: Anti-DEI actions tend to be ideologically, rather than empirically, based. Consistently evaluate and track data so that there is justification for DEI work.
    5. Maintain organizational accountability: Diversity officers should be regularly assessed and evaluated, with data being used to highlight the impact of their work. Criteria for evaluation should be comparable to metrics for evaluating employees in other offices.
    6. Utilize professional development and network: CDOs should harness resources and connect with other CDOs to build a network of support, opportunity, and mentorship.
    7. Support health and well-being of DEI professionals: Leaders should be flexible and aware of the physical and mental toll of DEI work right now. Offer CDOs supports that work for them (e.g., compensatory time for after-hours meetings, professional development, etc.).

    Read the full report here.

    —Kara Seidel


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • Pell Grant Dollars Are Left Unclaimed: What That Means for Students and States

    Pell Grant Dollars Are Left Unclaimed: What That Means for Students and States

    Title: Pell Dollars Left on the Table

    Authors: Louisa Woodhouse and Bill DeBaun

    Source: National College Attainment Network

    Pell Grants have long supported low-income students as they pursue higher education, increasing the financial capabilities and academic opportunities afforded to students. However, receiving federal financial aid through Pell Grants is dependent on filing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), which can serve as a barrier to students.

    The National College Attainment Network (NCAN) has published a report on the unclaimed Pell Grants left on the table by high school graduates. Approximately 830,000 Pell Grant-eligible students did not complete FAFSA in the 2024 cycle, resulting in nearly $4.4 billion in unclaimed Pell Grant awards. These unclaimed funds are valuable to both students and states, with the ability to further the educational pursuits of low-income students and strengthen state economies.

    NCAN has run reports detailing the value of unclaimed Pell Grants over the past four years. Typically, nearly 60 percent of high school graduates complete the FAFSA by June 30, with completion rates trailing off markedly as students begin their summer.

    However, due to the technical challenges and delayed launch of FAFSA that occurred in the 2024 cycle, by the end of June, only 50 percent of high school graduates had completed the form. By August 30, 57 percent of students had filed the FAFSA, decreasing the amount of financial aid left on the table. The implications are clear: hindrance to the financial aid application process, whether that be through technical difficulties, decreased assistance, or short staffing, can result in many students losing access to Pell Grant funds.

    The impact of lower FAFSA completion rates, and therefore more unclaimed Pell Grants, is not felt exclusively by students but by states as well. In 2024, students in California and Texas each left nearly $550 million in Pell Grant awards unclaimed. While these states lose the most when FAFSA completion rates are low, they also stand to gain the most if completion rates increase.

    Analysis from NCAN finds that if FAFSA completion rates had increased by an additional 10 percentage points this year, California would have seen a $145 million increase in Pell Grant awards while Texas would have received an additional $130 million. The additional federal aid could translate into more students attending postsecondary institutions, filling workforce gaps and strengthening the states’ economies.

    In establishing the significance of increasing FAFSA filing rates for low-income students, NCAN offers commentary on how states can better support students, especially in the wake of potential policy changes directed at higher education. States can fund FAFSA completion efforts, providing additional in-school and online resources for students to access when filing. Additionally, FAFSA data sharing among states may enable high school counselors and local college access partners to better target students that could benefit from additional assistance.

    To read more about unclaimed Pell Grants and the role states can play on bolstering FAFSA completion rates, click here.

    —Julia Napier


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • Dual Enrollment’s Long-Term Effects on Student Earnings

    Dual Enrollment’s Long-Term Effects on Student Earnings

    Title: Do Dual Enrollment Students Realize Better Long-Run Earnings? Variations in Financial Outcomes Among Key Student Groups

    Authors: Navi Dhaliwal, Sayeeda Jamilah, McKenna Griffin, Dillon Lu, David Mahan, Trey Miller, and Holly Kosiewicz

    Source: The Research Institute at Dallas College and University of Texas at Dallas

    Dual enrollment partnerships between school districts and colleges and universities provide an opportunity for high school students to enroll in college courses, often saving them time and money. However, the long-term impacts of dual enrollment have not been studied in depth, and the existing body of research offers mixed results. A recent working paper reveals many dual enrollment students experience long-term economic benefits, although outcomes vary based on race and socioeconomic status.

    In the study, students from the 2011 graduating class across 22 Texas school districts were tracked and examined, contrasting the outcomes of students that participated in dual enrollment against those that did not. Ultimately, by the sixth year after graduation, dual credit students were earning more than their peers. Students earned 4 to 9 percent more annually between year six and year 12.

    Additional highlights from the working paper include:

    • Many dual enrollment participants benefited from higher earnings than non-participants in years six through twelve after high school graduation, but not all student subgroups saw significant benefits.
    • African American, Hispanic, and limited English proficient students experienced smaller increases in long-term earnings outcomes.
    • Economically disadvantaged and African American students that enrolled in dual credit programs also reported higher levels of student loan debt compared to non-participants. For example, there was an $831 to $855 increase in student debt from year three to four for economically disadvantaged dual credit students, and a $1,231 to $1055 increase in student debt from years one to four for African American dual credit participants.

    To read the full report, click here.

    —Austin Freeman


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • No, Endowments Are Not the Answer to Federal Attacks on Higher Ed

    No, Endowments Are Not the Answer to Federal Attacks on Higher Ed

    Learn more about how endowments support students and research: Contact Congress, read our brief Understanding College and University Endowments, and explore our Tax Resource webpage.


    The Trump administration has launched an aggressive and unprecedented attack on higher education—unlike anything we’ve seen before. Billions of dollars in federal support for vital research on diseases like cancer, Alzheimer’s, and HIV disappeared overnight. The law and longstanding due process protections for institutions have been disregarded.

    These sweeping actions have harmed every type of institution—and, more importantly, the students and communities they serve. As a consequence, colleges and universities have been forced to freeze hiring, lay off staff, eliminate programs, halt life-saving clinical trials, and pause graduate admissions—all within the administration’s first 100 days.

    Some traditional supporters of higher education, as well as frequent critics, suggest that there is an easy way out: colleges and universities should simply use their endowments to plug these sudden financial gaps. This idea has come from across the political spectrum—from Republican Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland and the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute to liberal New York Times columnist Ezra Klein and the left-leaning think tank New America.

    These calls to “just spend the endowment” tend to resurface during crises, as seen during the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. If endowment spending increased then, why can’t the same thing happen now? It sounds simple, but it’s wrong.

    First, while institutions have increased endowment spending during major emergencies, the billions of dollars in research funding cuts being proposed now dwarfs anything confronted previously. In 2023, the federal government provided nearly $60 billion on research funding, compared to total endowment spending—financial aid, research, student services, academics, operations, and more—of about $35 billion, according to IPEDS data.

    Second, during these recent crises, institutions didn’t have to shoulder the burden alone. They acted in partnership with the federal government and other stakeholders to weather the storm. That shared response made a difference. In 2025, however, the federal government isn’t a partner—it’s the source of the crisis. And unlike past emergencies, there is no clear end in sight, leaving open the potential of a devastatingly long-term drain on endowments.

    Third, endowments are not like a single checking or savings account that can be dipped into at will. Instead, they consist of up to thousands of individual accounts, the vast majority of which are legally restricted by donors. These restrictions often designate support for specific purposes like expanding financial aid, supporting the chair of a particular academic discipline, or fueling groundbreaking medical and technological research. Most endowment spending boosts access for low-income students and academics. The 2024 NACUBO-Commonfund Study of Endowments found that almost about two thirds of endowment spending goes directly to financial aid and academics, and institutions with large endowments are the most likely to provide need-blind admissions, meet students’ full financial need, and offer no-loan financial aid packages. These funds cannot legally be redirected to make up for canceled government funding—or bail out reckless federal policy decisions.

    Even the wealthiest institutions don’t have enough unrestricted funds to routinely absorb massive, sustained cuts without irreparably draining their endowments. Endowments are managed like marathon runners: they expend energy strategically, knowing they can’t sprint the whole race. There are times to surge—such as during the pandemic—but that pace can’t last. Try to sprint the whole race, and the endowment, like a runner, collapses. Reckless financial decisions today won’t just hurt current students—they’ll shortchange the next generation as well.

    For this reason, endowment spending is closely monitored, regularly audited, and guided by strict policies designed to ensure long-term sustainability. Colleges and universities spend what is both prudent and legally permitted each year while preserving benefits for future students. According to the 2024 NACUBO report, institutions’ average effective spending rate was nearly 5 percent. That figure isn’t arbitrary. It’s shaped by state laws, donor intent, and sound financial stewardship. Some states actually impose legal restrictions on the percentage of endowment spending each year. For example, in Ohio, spending more than 5 percent in a given year could expose an institution to legal liability.

    Misconceptions about endowments aren’t just misleading—they threaten the very people and programs that they were created to support: scholarships, research, academic excellence, and the futures of countless students and faculty. And they divert attention from the real issue: an unprecedented assault on American higher education.


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • How Can Institutions Best Support Their Online Learners?

    How Can Institutions Best Support Their Online Learners?

    Title: Supporting Online Learners: Insights from SUNY’s Campus Coaching Programs

    Authors: Marjorie Dorimé-Williams, Jálynn Castleman, Parker Cellura, Rebekah O’Donoghue, and Makoto Toyoda

    Source: MDRC

    The structure and delivery of online programs can have significant impacts on a student’s ability to succeed. After examining success coaching practices at three State University of New York institutions, the authors of new analysis from MDRC offer several policy recommendations to support online learners.

    Within each university, there were a variety of approaches to providing help for online students. Analyzing and comparing the programs indicated there are three primary types of support for online learners: coaching communication strategies and technology applications, student engagement, and academic outcomes.

    Some of the most effective practices in each category are:

    Coaching Strategies

    Personalized support from coaches is one of the most effective ways to help students. By minimizing the coach-to-student ratio, institutions can ensure coaches have a manageable workload, enabling them to cater their coaching to fit individual students’ needs.

    Tracking student data can help coaches identify needs and tailor support. Performance and outcome metrics, such as grades, course attendance, and credit accumulation, can be used to identify struggling students and guide intervention strategies. Additionally, learning management systems that track student engagement can facilitate personalized communication to fit students’ needs and preferences.

    Opportunities for professional development help coaches provide the best support for their students. Institutions should continually provide training opportunities to help inform online pedagogy.

    Student Engagement

    Centralizing support services improves student access and awareness.A unified, easily accessible platform can ensure that students know about and use available resources.

    Building community is especially important—and especially challenging—for asynchronous learners. Faculty can foster connections through synchronous or asynchronous study groups and should be mindful of online students’ varied schedules.

    Responsive, innovative communication helps keep students engaged. Timely feedback and meeting students where they are—through tools and communication styles they prefer—can promote sustained engagement.

    Academic Outcomes

    Faculty need targeted training to effectively adapt courses for online delivery. Professional development can help instructors redesign courses for virtual environments and maintain instructional quality.

    Quality standards for course design can improve consistency and effectiveness. Standardized templates and interaction guidelines help ensure that all online courses meet a baseline of student support and instructional quality.

    Coaches and faculty can collaborate to provide holistic academic support. Integration of coaching within academic programs strengthens both in- and out-of-classroom support, creating a more cohesive experience for online students.

    With an increasing proportion of students participating in online courses, building capacity to support online learners promotes success for all students, especially those who are entirely online. Institutions committed to improving their online programs can dedicate resources to developing and evaluating courses and support systems.

    To read the full report, click here.

    —Erica Swirsky


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • How Major Restrictions Silently Reshape Student Pathways

    How Major Restrictions Silently Reshape Student Pathways

    Title: The Invisible Barrier: How Restrictions on Majors Influence Career Paths

    Source: Strada Education Foundation

    Author: Nichole Torpey-Saboe and Akua Amankwah-Ayeh

    When university departments face increasing demand, many implement additional entry requirements. But this seemingly reasonable practice has far-reaching consequences for equity and workforce development, according to new research from Strada Education Foundation surveying recent college graduates.

    The study found that while 67 percent of recent public four-year institution graduates considered a restricted major, only 50 percent were admitted to one. This gap translates to more than 200,000 students annually deterred from pursuing their preferred field of study—with the impact falling disproportionately on historically marginalized populations. Black graduates (27 percent) and first-generation students (22 percent) did not pursue restricted majors of interest at higher rates than the average graduate (17 percent).

    A notable finding is that major restrictions operate largely outside institutional awareness. For every student formally rejected from a restricted major, four others never apply, deterred by requirements they see as difficult to meet. This “invisible barrier” effect means institutional data captures only a fraction of the impact, making it difficult for institutions to fully assess the effects of these policies.

    These findings align with economic research by Zachary Bleemer and Aashish Mehta that highlights two conclusions. First, major restrictions have tripled the economic value gap between degrees earned by underrepresented minority students and their peers since the mid-1990s. Second, there is no evidence that restrictions improved educational outcomes for excluded students or enhanced the value of restricted majors for those who remained.

    The most common restrictions respondents report are academic performance thresholds: out-of-department GPA requirements (42 percent), in-department GPA thresholds (33 percent), and test score requirements (29 percent). Other barriers include higher costs (15 percent), required work hours (12 percent), wait lists (9 percent), portfolio reviews (8 percent), and auditions (7 percent).

    The research identifies four approaches institutions might consider:

    • Implement bridge programs for underrepresented students in gateway courses for high-demand majors, paired with specialized academic and career advising.
    • Develop alternative credential pathways through certificates, minors, and interdisciplinary programs that provide students access to skills in high-demand fields without major-specific entry barriers.
    • Secure funding, such as through state appropriations, to expand educational resources and capacity in high-demand departments, recognizing these programs’ higher delivery costs as well as their value.
    • Work with industry leaders to secure access to equipment, facilities, guest instructors, and financial support to expand capacity in resource-intensive programs.

    While institutional resource constraints are real, the unintended consequences of major restrictions are reshaping student pathways in ways that affect both equity and workforce development. By implementing thoughtful alternatives, institutions can better respond to student aspirations while addressing workforce needs.

    For more information, read the complete Strada Education Foundation report and Bleemer & Mehta’s economic analysis on how these policies affect long-term wage disparities.

    —Alex Zhao


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • The State of Student Mental Health at HBCUs

    The State of Student Mental Health at HBCUs

    Title: Flourishing: Bolstering the Mental Health of Students at HBCUs and PBIs

    Source: United Negro College Fund (UNCF)

    Student mental health is often a chief concern for university administrations and faculty alike, with institutions working to develop strong mental health resources for students. Mental health concerns, however, can vary drastically from student to student, requiring dynamic responses to support the ever-changing challenges students face.

    Over the course of two semesters in 2023, over 2,500 students at 16 HBCUs and two Predominantly Black Institutions were administered the Health Minds Survey (HMS) to determine the unique mental health challenges and provide insights into the college experience for Black students. A report by UNCF, in partnership with the Healthy Minds Network and The Steve Fund, found that Black students at HBCUs demonstrate more positive mental health outcomes compared to students overall. The report also highlights potential areas for schools to further support students. The key takeaways are listed below:

    • HBCU students are flourishing: 45 percent of HBCU students report flourishing mental health, in comparison to the national HMS sample of students (36 percent) and Black students at small predominantly white institutions (PWIs) (38 percent). These figures were determined by students agreeing with statements such as “I am a good person and live a good life” and “I am confident and capable in the activities that are important to me.”
    • HBCU students report a greater sense of belonging (83 percent) and lower levels of high loneliness (56 percent) than their peers when compared to Black students at PWIs, of whom 72 percent report feeling a sense of belonging and 58 percent report high loneliness.
    • HBCU students report less anxiety, less substance use, and being less at-risk for developing an eating disorder than both the national HMS sample of students and the sample of Black students at PWIs.
    • Financial stress plays a significant role in mental health for students at HBCUs, with 52 percent of students reporting that their financial situation is “always” or “often” stressful.
    • More than half of students at HBCUs report unmet mental health needs (54 percent), which can be defined as “exhibiting moderate to severe symptoms of anxiety or depression and reporting no mental health treatment within the past year.” Findings indicate that this may stem in part from HBCU students reporting stigmas around seeking out mental health services. 52 percent of HBCU students reported experiencing these stigmas, compared to 41 percent of the national HMS sample.
    • Nearly 80 percent of HBCU students agree that student mental health is a top priority for their school, and 55 percent of students report feeling that their campus supports open discussions regarding mental health.

    In response to the survey findings, the report supplies several recommendations to further support and increase research on HBCU mental health resources. UNCF states that producing longitudinal studies regarding mental health at HBCUs and exploring the intersecting factors that impact mental health may allow institutions to better react to the ever-changing mental health needs of their students. Further data support would provide means to measure outcomes for mental health programs and resources, allowing institutions to fine-tune their services to best support student flourishing.

    To read more, click here to access the full report.

    Julia Napier


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • The Net Price of College Is Falling for Most Students

    The Net Price of College Is Falling for Most Students

    Title: College Prices Are Falling for Everyone (Almost)

    Source: Brookings Institution

    Author: Phillip Levine

    New research from the Brookings Institution reveals a surprising truth: inflation-adjusted college prices have fallen for most students over the past five years. Phillip Levine’s analysis examines what students actually pay—the net price after financial aid—rather than the sticker prices that dominate media coverage.

    Using data from net price calculators at 200 institutions and proprietary financial aid records from 14 highly endowed colleges, his findings challenge the common narrative:

    Widespread price decreases: Between 2019-20 and 2024-25, inflation-adjusted net prices declined across institution types. Public flagship universities saw reductions of 7.1-17.3 percent, depending on family income level, while other public institutions experienced decreases of 8.5-13.2 percent. Private colleges with very large endowments had substantial declines, ranging from 7.0-43.4 percent, and tuition-dependent private colleges saw net prices drop by 16.8-23.3 percent.

    Lower-income students benefit most: Families earning $40,000 annually, representing the 25th percentile of the income distribution, experienced the largest reductions, with net prices dropping by 13.2-40.9 percent depending on institution type.

    Wide price variation by income: At private institutions with very large endowments, students from families earning $40,000 pay approximately $4,400 annually, while those from families earning $240,000 pay $82,800 annually.

    At many institutions, families earning $40,000 are still expected to contribute $15,000-$20,000 annually. Only the most heavily endowed institutions typically offer aid packages that lower-income families can reasonably manage. This raises important policy implications: proposed increases to endowment taxes may undermine institutions’ ability to provide generous financial aid, potentially harming the very students who benefit most from their pricing models. Private colleges and universities rely heavily on endowments to fund scholarships, research, and education—often more than they rely on tuition revenue. Treating endowments like business profits could shift the financial burden onto students and weaken U.S. innovation.

    The complexity of college pricing creates uncertainty for families, policymakers, and media. Greater transparency about the true cost of attendance is essential. By focusing on actual prices rather than headline-grabbing sticker prices, we can help reshape the national conversation on college affordability and ensure that misconceptions don’t deter qualified students from pursuing higher education.

    To read the full Brookings research analysis, click here.

    —Alex Zhao


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • State Dashboards Help Students See Higher Education’s Long-Term Value

    State Dashboards Help Students See Higher Education’s Long-Term Value

    Title: Bridging Education and Opportunity: Exploring the ROI of Higher Education and Workforce Development

    Author: Paula Nazario

    Source: HCM Strategists

    New insights from HCM Strategists highlight how continued state investments in higher education are creating pathways to economic mobility, with the majority of degree programs delivering increased earnings and a solid return on investment (ROI). However, despite the continued success and quality of many degree programs, both students and the public have increased concerns about whether postsecondary credentials are worth the time and money.

    If consumers do not understand the ROI of their credentials, this can contribute to decreased enrollment, funding, and research, which would in turn produce broader economic and social consequences. While the data are clear that a majority of postsecondary programs do pay off, there are many degrees that fail to provide a measurable ROI. HCM Strategists’ recent analysis of College Scorecard data shows that the average student at over 1,000 institutions earns less 10 years after they first enrolled than the typical high school graduate. While nearly two-thirds of these institutions are certificate-focused, for-profit institutions, there are still many private nonprofit and public colleges that do not provide strong economic outcomes.

    To help students and the public understand the differences between institutions and degree programs that provide positive and negative value, the author of the brief urges states and policymakers to provide clear data on post-graduation outcomes. Some states have already advanced initiatives to help consumers see in real time the differences in earnings for those that enroll in higher education.

    The author highlights several states initiatives that help students see the value of their credentials including California Community Colleges’ Salary Surfer tool, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board’s student outcomes dashboards and reports, and the Virginia Office of Education Economics’ College and Career Outcomes Explorer. Ohio and Colorado are also highlighted for their investments in employer partnerships to expand graduates’ opportunities for well-paying and workforce relevant jobs.

    To read more on these new insights from HCM Strategists, click here.

    —Austin Freeman


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link