img:is([sizes=auto i],[sizes^="auto," i]){contain-intrinsic-size:3000px 1500px} /*# sourceURL=wp-img-auto-sizes-contain-inline-css */

天美影视传媒

Skip to content
Blog

Category: Archive

Content posted prior to 2020. Will not be remediated for accessibility unless specifically requested.

UW Cohort Default Rate Remains Very Low Relative to National Average

Posted on

The U.S. Department of Education (ED) recently released its annual update on federal student loan cohort default rates (CDRs), which measure the frequency with which student borrowers at all levels (undergraduate, graduate, etc.) default on their federal loans. Although the UW鈥檚 CDR rose while the national CDR declined, the UW鈥檚 rate still remains well below that of the nation.

ED is in its first year of using only the听more accurate three-year CDR measure 鈥� as opposed to the two-year CDR. Thus, this year鈥檚 report only includes the FY2011 three-year CDR, which represent the percentage of student borrowers who entered into repayment in FY2011, but failed to make loan payments for a 270-day period within three years of leaving school.

The Department provides breakdowns of its data by , and . Here are some key findings:

  • The national three-year CDR declined from 14.7 to 13.7 percent overall.
  • The three-year rate decreased over last year鈥檚 rates for all sectors:
    • Public institutions decreased very slightly from 13.0 to 12.9 percent,
    • Private nonprofits decreased from 8.2 to 7.2 percent, and
    • For-profits鈥� whopping 21.8 percent rate decreased to 19.1 percent.
  • The UW鈥檚 three-year CDR increased slightly from 3.9 to 4.3 percent, but this is still nearly 10 percentage points below the national average.听

While this is good news, many students still struggle to afford ever-increasing tuition fees and/or to repay their student loans. The UW reaches out to our former students at risk of default on their Stafford Loans and helps identify federal repayment options that could benefit them.听Former UW students who are in default or experiencing difficulties repaying their loans can contact the Office of Student Financial Aid for assistance (osfa@uw.edu, 206-543-6101). Students can also visit to explore their repayment options.

Kaplan鈥檚 New 鈥淥pen College鈥� May Not Be a Bargain for All Students

Posted on

On Monday, launched “” which is intended to help adult students earn a Bachelor of Science degree in Professional Studies by offering credit for a combination of competency-based course assessments, experiential learning, and external exams (AP, IB, CLEP, DSSTs, etc.). Open College will include free online courses and mentoring to help prospective students identify and organize prior experience that could qualify for college credit. Once students enroll and have their prior skills assessed for credit, they will pay a subscription fee of $195 per month, an assessment fee of $100 per each of the remaining 35 鈥渃ourse equivalents鈥� needed to earn a degree, and a $371-per-credit fee for a final six-credit capstone course.

According to :

鈥淎 student entering with no credits who pursued the program for 48 straight months could earn a bachelor鈥檚 degree for about $15,000. Students who earned credits based on their prior experience would end up paying less than that. Officials expect that such students would typically enroll with about 60 credits, take 24 to 30 months to complete a degree, and pay about $9,500.鈥�

Kaplan鈥檚 administration sees Open College as the newest candidate in the hunt to create a $10,000 bachelor’s degree and as a new, flexible way for adults to advance their career.听 While Open College鈥檚 structure and pricing may work well for some students, a few things should be considered before rushing to enroll in Open College.

First, students at Open College will receive little, if any, financial aid.听 Open College鈥檚 website says it will not participate in federal student aid programs; it also gives no indication that students will be eligible for state financial aid or that it will offer any form of institutional aid. Therefore, although comparisons are difficult and potentially problematic, it鈥檚 worth noting that in 2013-14, resident students at public four-year institutions paid an average of $3,120 in annual net tuition and fees (published tuition and fees less grant and aid scholarship from federal, state or institutional sources).[1] If we assume, as Kaplan did, that a student entering with no credits would take 48 months to earn a degree and that tuition and fees would not increase during those four years, then a resident student who enters a public four-year with no previous credits would pay roughly $12,480 in tuition and fees to earn a four-year degree, compared to a similar student at Open College who would pay $15,000. Of course, this total does not consider the cost of rent or room and board, which can be very expensive; but neither does Open College鈥檚 estimate, even though a student earning a degree through their program would presumably still be spending money to eat and live while earning a degree.

Second, employer doubts about the quality of an online degree may impact graduates鈥� employability. According to the released last fall, only 41 percent of hiring managers believe that online programs are of the same quality as traditional, in-person programs.

[1]

Rankings Abound

Posted on

The Equity Line, among others, how the recent of colleges by enrollment of Pell Grant recipients is a nice gesture, but lacking in many ways. The 天美影视传媒 (and most public institutions!) was not evaluated as part of the effort, though one-quarter of its undergraduate population received Pell Grant funding last year.

Equity Line contributor Jose Luis Santos notes that, “…the rankings only capture a tiny number of undergraduates enrolled in four-year colleges who receive Pell Grants (just 1.6 percent!), leaving out more than 4.2 million students. This , and it distracts the public and policymakers from the real problems with higher education access and success.”

US News & World Report released its much anticipated set of annual rankings this week; the UW fared better this year. Additional analysis about the UW’s position in US News will be posted to the blog as it becomes available.

AASCU States 鈥淧ay It Forward Is Not the Solution to Addressing College Affordability鈥�

Posted on

On Thursday, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) released examining the potential consequences of Pay It Forward (PIF) (please see our for background information). 听The AASCU brief summarizes other, similar approaches to paying for college and analyses PIF as a potential state approach to financing public higher education. 听

The report describes the following 鈥�13 Realities of PIF College Financing Proposals鈥�:

  1. Most students could pay more, not less, for college.
  2. Considerable uncertainty would be introduced into campus budgeting and planning efforts.
  3. The majority of college costs are not covered.
  4. Students from sectors with the heaviest student debt burdens would be ineligible to participate.
  5. The class divides in public higher education, and more broadly, in American society, could intensify.
  6. Costs borne by students pursuing privately financed degrees and higher-paying careers would increase dramatically.
  7. PIF is duplicative鈥攖here are existing public and private programs that calibrate student debt to earnings.
  8. PIF鈥檚 start-up costs would be enormous.
  9. Payment collection would be costly and challenging.
  10. Campus and state leaders would have strong incentives to promote programs leading to high-paying occupations, to the possible detriment of the liberal and applied arts, humanities, and public service careers.
  11. Underlying college cost drivers would not be addressed.
  12. Support for state and institutional student financial aid could dissipate.
  13. Support for maintaining existing state investment in public higher education would erode, creating a pathway to privatization.

In addition, the authors discuss 鈥淭he Unknowns of 鈥楶ay It Forward鈥欌��:

  1. How will institutional financing gaps be addressed?
  2. How would payments be collected?
  3. Who would control PIF funds?
  4. How would PIF鈥檚 structure and revenue generation differ from campus to campus?
  5. How would PIF complement or conflict with federal higher education programs?
  6. How would transfer students be integrated into PIF?
  7. What would be the consequences for noncompleters?
  8. How would college savings change under PIF?
  9. How would PIF affect campus philanthropic campaigns?

The report鈥檚 conclusion reads, 鈥淐reating a lifelong tax and privatizing public higher education through pay it forward is not the solution to addressing college affordability.鈥� 听

I recommend that readers review .

AASCU Releases Latest State Outlook

Posted on

On Thursday, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) released its most .听 According to the report, state operating support for public 听four-year colleges and universities is 3.6 percent higher for FY 2015 than it was for FY 2014. Of the 49 states that have passed a budget thus far, support for higher education increased in 43 states and decreased in only 6 states. Of those 6 states that reduced funding, all were under 3 percent: Alaska, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, Washington (0.8 percent decrease) and West Virginia.

There was a relatively small amount of variation between states in terms of their year-to-year funding changes. For FY 2015, the spread between the state with the largest gain and that with the largest cut was only a 24 percent鈥攖his is compared to 57 percent, 25 percent and 46 percent, respectively, in FYs 2012, 2013 and 2014. The report notes that this decreased volatility likely indicates 鈥渁 continued post-recession stabilization of states鈥� budgets.鈥�

Charitable contributions to U.S. colleges and universities increased 9 percent in 2013, to $33.8 billion鈥攖he highest recorded in the history of the Council for Aid to Education (CAE) Voluntary Support of Education (VSE) survey. In addition, college and university endowments grew by an average of 11.7 percent in FY 2013, according to a January 2014 study released by the National Association of College and University Business Officers and the Commonfund Institute.听 This represents a significant improvement over the -0.3 percent return in FY 2012.

The report also describes ten highlights/trends from states鈥� 2014 legislative sessions, those being:

  1. State initiatives linking student access to economic and workforce development goals.
  2. Tuition freezes or increase caps in exchange for state reinvestment鈥攖his occurred in Washington and another example is discussed in .
  3. Performance-based funding systems that attempt to align institutional outcomes with state needs and priorities.
  4. Governor emphasis on efforts to advance state educational attainment goals.
  5. Interest in policies related to vocational and technical education, including allowing community colleges to grant certain four-year degrees (as described in ).
  6. Efforts to develop a common set of expectations for what K-12 students should know in mathematics and language arts.
  7. STEM-related initiatives, including additional funding for STEM scholarships in Washington.
  8. Financial support for the renovating and/or constructing of new campus facilities鈥攗nfortunately, Washington鈥檚 legislature did not pass a capital budget.
  9. Bills allowing individuals to carry guns on public college and university campuses鈥攁s of March 2014, seven states had passed such legislation.
  10. Legislation that extends in-state tuition or, as occurred in Washington, state financial aid to undocumented students.

Other noteworthy policy topics described in the report include:

  • Student financial aid programs鈥攕ome states broadened their programs while others limited them;
  • Online and competency-based education reciprocity agreements;
  • 鈥淧ay It Forward鈥� Funding Schemes; and
  • Consumer protection as it pertains to student recruitment, advertising and financial aid at for-profit colleges.

Four Year Degrees and Tuition Freeze

Posted on

Posted by Corrin Sullivan, Intern at the Office of Planning & Budget and Educational Policy student through the month of July 2014. My focus is on higher education access and听policy. I look forward to sharing newsworthy events听in the higher ed world with you.

Let’s start with a quick听summary of two articles from this past week in higher ed news.

The California State Assembly Committee on Higher Education approved (SB850) this past week, which launches a pilot program offering fifteen community colleges the opportunity to offer a four-year degree program as soon as January 1, 2015. The Community College Board of Governors and chancellor, in consultation with the California State University (CSU) and University of California (UC) systems, will consider a variety of colleges and select fifteen districts based on four-year degree proposals that meet a variety of criteria; most notably, degrees not available at any of California鈥檚 four-year schools and that address the state鈥檚 unmet workforce needs. Although the UC system has yet to comment on SB850, California鈥檚 Community College Chancellor, Brice Harris, commends the Assembly Committee鈥檚 approval of legislation stating that it has the potential to broaden higher educational access and offer more job training opportunities for Californians.

The North Dakota Board of Higher Education recently approved its biennium budget request, which asks for an approximate 14 percent increase in funding in exchange for freezing tuition rates among its eleven colleges and universities for the coming biennium (2015-17). Based on a new funding formula instituted in the 2013 legislative session that relies largely on credit-hour completion, the budget鈥檚 $774 base request reflects a $94 million dollar increase from the previous year鈥檚 request. The $94 million dollar increase includes a $49 million dollar request to cover operating costs associated with additional credits taken at the state鈥檚 colleges and universities. In addition to the $94 million base increase, the board has also requested $9.5 million dollars to cover sums 鈥渟tudents would have to cover without a freeze,鈥� compounded with several smaller requests to meet institutional equipment and staffing needs. The Board states that they will freeze tuition rates at all colleges and universities from 2015 through 2017 if and only if, the legislature agrees to fully fund the base budget and increase employee salaries and benefits. Noting affordability as an issue in declining student enrollment numbers, the freeze aims to decrease tuition so that rates are competitive with the state鈥檚 regional counterparts.

While the Board has frozen tuition rates at the state鈥檚 two-year schools for four of the past six years, this request to freeze tuition for all North Dakota higher education institutions is unprecedented. The budget is before Governor Jack Dalrymple, pending recommendations, prior to advancing to the state鈥檚 legislature.

Congress Introduces Bills to Reauthorize Higher Education Act

Posted on

As the UW’s Office of Federal Relations reported on their , yesterday Senate Democrats released to reauthorize the Higher Education Act (HEA). Their proposal focuses on four main goals:

  • Increasing affordability and reducing college costs for students,
  • Tackling the student loan crisis by helping borrowers better manage debt,
  • Holding schools accountable to students and taxpayers, and
  • Helping students and families make informed choices.

In addition, today the House Committee on Education and the Workforce introduced reauthorization-related bills of their own, including:

For more information, check out the and a recent . 听We’ll post more information on OPBlog over the coming weeks.

“Degree Attainment Around the World (Cup)”

Posted on

On Monday, The Equity Line posted the following piece about how the U.S. compares to the other World Cup countries in terms of degree attainment.

Posted on June 16, 2014 by Kayl茅 Barnes and Joseph Yeado

“Defying commentators, critics, and prognosticators, the U.S. has already performed quite well against the other nations competing for the 2014 World Cup. Yes, the competition on the field only started last Thursday and the Yanks have yet to kick things off today, but the U.S. is beating most of the competition in another competition: college attainment.

Among the 32 teams competing in Brazil, the United States ranks third for the percentage of adults with a 2-year or 4-year college degree.

It may look like America has trounced the competition, but there are two important facts that put these figures into perspective.

In 1990 the United States soccer team qualified for its first World Cup after a 40-year drought. Though it failed to win a game and was sent home, the U.S. was ranked first in the world in four-year degree attainment among young adults. Since that time, our men鈥檚 national soccer team has steadily improved, but our college attainment rates have not. The United States now ranks 11th among developed nations for young adults with college degrees.

The U.S. may compare favorably to other World Cup countries, but the data still mean that only 2 in 5 adults have some kind of a college degree. In fact, just 59 percent of students at a 4-year college will earn a bachelor鈥檚 degree in six years 鈥� not to mention that black and Latino students complete at even lower rates (40 percent and 52 percent, respectively). Ranking well relative to other countries doesn鈥檛 mean much when we are leaving so many of our students behind.

Third place is not good enough. More important to our country鈥檚 well-being than winning the World Cup is whether we have an educated population prepared to face the challenges of the new global economy. Higher education leaders and policymakers should look to the example of the colleges and universities across the country that are leading the way to improve student success and proving that low graduation rates are not inevitable.

The expectations of American soccer supporters have risen steadily since 1990, and millions are tuning in to watch our boys play in Brazil. It鈥檚 time that we raise our expectations about college attainment and the equity in attainment levels.

Only then can the United States realize its gooooooaaaaals of being first in the world on the f煤tbol pitch and in degrees.”

Pew Center鈥檚 5 Facts About College Graduates

Posted on

With graduation season upon us, the Pew Research Center has created a roundup of 鈥�5 Facts About Today鈥檚 College Graduates.鈥� The article draws from several national databases and surveys, including the National Center for Education Statistics, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and Pew surveys.

1.听听听听听听 Only about 56% of students actually graduate within six years. Students at four-year, private, nonprofits schools have the highest graduation rates (72.9%) while those at public, two-year schools are least likely to complete their degree program (39.9 %) within six years.

2.听听听听听听 Business tops the list of most popular major, again. Since 1980-81, business has been the most common major. In 2011-12, one fifth of Americans earning bachelor鈥檚 degrees majored in business.

3.听听听听听听 Many recent graduates have trouble finding full-time jobs that require a college degree. In 2012, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that 44 percent of recent graduates were underemployed (i.e., working jobs that did not require a college degree). Of that group, only 36 percent made more than $45,000 per year.

4.听听听听听听 Despite this, college graduates continue to make more than people without degrees. A Pew study of Millennials who worked full-time found that the median salary for college graduates was $45,500, while those with some college made just $30,000 and those with a high school diploma made just $28,000. The gap has continued to widen over the years, as described in our recent .

5.听听听听听听 Graduates still say that college was worth it. 88 percent of Millennial college graduates believe their degree either has paid off (62 percent) or will pay off in the future (26 percent). Among those with advanced degrees, 96 percent say their education was worth the investment.

Read the full .

Higher Ed News Roundup

Posted on

Here’s a quick roundup of some of this week’s headlines in higher ed news.

听

According to a study commissioned by the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities, up to 44 percent of students at for-profit colleges could lose access to federal financial aid under the latest 鈥�鈥� proposal. The authors of the report鈥擩onathan Guryan, an economist at Northwestern University, and Matthew Thompson of Charles River Associates, a consulting firm鈥攁rgue that since for-profits tend to serve students who have fewer financial resources and less academic preparation, the proposed rules would leave students without other options. Additionally, the report asserts that the rules should not be based on short-term measures of earnings and student debt, as such metrics tell an incomplete story. The Department of Education the proposed rules in March. The window for public commenting closed on Tuesday. 听This report was part of a final lobbying campaign by both sides.

Several startups have begun serving as matchmakers between community college students and employers. One of the startups, called WorkAmerica, states that it will provide students with a legally binding job offer before they enroll at one of the startup鈥檚 partner colleges. WorkAmerica has already started placing students into trucking programs, and plans to expand to other 鈥渉igh churn鈥� employers, such as those that hire welders, IT technicians, and medical assistants.听 Another similar startup, called Workforce IO, connects employers with 鈥渢rainers鈥濃�攚hich can include community colleges, in addition to nonprofits and other mentoring agencies. The company uses a library of 275 job-skills 鈥渂adges鈥� to vouch for its workers鈥� skills. In an era when students are increasingly concerned with their post-graduation employment opportunities, it鈥檚 possible that such a model could be applied to some programs at four-year institutions.

Research shows that not only is a college degree is worth the time and money it takes to earn one; it鈥檚 worth more than ever.听 According to analysis of Labor Department statistics by the Economic Policy Institute, the pay gap between college graduates and those who either never went to college or never graduated from college, reached a record high last year. The NY Times article summarizes, 鈥淎mericans with four-year college degrees made 98 percent more an hour on average in 2013 than people without a degree. That鈥檚 up from 89 percent five years earlier, 85 percent a decade earlier and 64 percent in the early 1980s.鈥�