Eight in 10 U.S. high schools reported that students were enrolled ...]]>

In a first-ever convening of New England dual-credit programs, UConn Early College Experience and National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships (NACEP) will host a one-day conference on Wednesday, May 29 from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. in Storrs, Conn.  For more information, please click here.

Eight in 10 U.S. high schools reported that students were enrolled in “dual-credit” courses in 2010-11, according to the U.S. Department of Education.

Defined as courses where high school students can earn both high school and postsecondary credits for the same course, dual-credit course offerings vary in content, structure and funding.

Dual-credit courses include those focused on academic subjects as well as career and technical subjects. In some cases, these courses are offered solely at high schools, taught by high school faculty; in others, these courses are offered at a college campus to both high school and college students. Dual-credit courses, as defined by the U.S. Education Department study, have also been referred to as "dual-enrollment," "concurrent-enrollment," and "early college" courses.

Whether academically focused or career-focused, concurrent enrollment or early college, many of these dual-credit programs have been connected with higher student postsecondary enrollment and success rates.

It should go without saying that data is tricky (or is it are tricky?).

Take the issue of student aid as one example. Some states have annual budgets; some have biennial. Some states report all kinds of aid in one place; others leave it to observers to patch together the ...]]>

Introducing NEBHE's new Trends & Indicators ...

It should go without saying that data is tricky (or is it are tricky?).

Take the issue of student aid as one example. Some states have annual budgets; some have biennial. Some states report all kinds of aid in one place; others leave it to observers to patch together the hodgepodge of merit and need-based programs from the state’s general fund and various state agencies. Different people have different definitions of “grant” and “scholarship.” And all know that this state gift aid is dwarfed by federal sources and by “loans.”

As musician David Byrne once sang, "Facts don’t do what I want them to/Facts just twist the truth around.”

For more than half a century, NEJHE has been publishing tables and charts exploring "Trends & Indicators” (T&I) in New England’s demography, high school performance and graduation, college enrollment, college graduation rates and degree production, higher education financing and university research.

In the past, we have drawn the data from a variety of sources, including the U.S. Department of Education, the National Science Foundation, the College Board, the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems and NEBHE’s own Annual Survey of New England Colleges and Universities.

It’s a pleasure to join this year with NEBHE colleague, Director of Policy & Research Monnica Chan, to expand our sources and inaugurate a more robust T&I feature.

As part of the plan, we will post short trend-related Newslink items within our T&I section. So, for example, if a new report is issued on net tuition, we’ll connect our brief coverage of the report to the T&I sidebar on our homepage—adding a bit of color to our valuable, but sometimes gray, tabular T&I data and better connecting similar topics via searches.

Ultimately, we seek to build a substantive back and forth among readers to create a vibrant living T&I whose figures, with your help, will be as accurate and useful as possible.

Click here for our latest relevant Newslink items.

For the full charts and figures for each of our T&I topic areas, please use the tabs at the top of the newly formatted T&I page.

Check back periodically as we continue to update new trend data. And many thanks,

John O. Harney is executive editor of The New England Journal of Higher Education.

The MOE provisions require states to maintain a minimum level of state aid to public and private higher education institutions in order for states to ...]]>

Federal maintenance of effort (MOE) provisions play an important role in state funding of higher education, according to a new report by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU).

The MOE provisions require states to maintain a minimum level of state aid to public and private higher education institutions in order for states to receive federal funds. In most cases, the minimum level of state aide required is tied to past state appropriations. For example, a state must provide support for higher education equal to or greater than the level of higher education appropriations in 2006 to qualify for certain federal funds in FY2010. The three recent federal spending bills utilizing this provision are:

• College Access Challenge Grants, a formula-based grant initiative focused on supporting low-income entry and success in postsecondary education;
• The State Fiscal Stabilization Fund, a part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, meant to support states during the 2008 economic downturn; and
• The Education Jobs Fund, meant to support states in maintaining some of their k-12 workforce.

By analyzing state applications for federal funds and/or waivers of the MOE provision, AASCU found many examples where states cut funding to higher education to the exact (or very close to exact) minimum threshold required by each of the MOE provisions. Based on these trends, AASCU believes that states design higher education with federal funding requirements in mind.

Indeed, state funding for higher education was heavily supported by federal funds. When many federal stimulus funds expired at the end of FY2011, states were unable to fill the gap. In FY2012, only nine states were able to increase total state support (including any remaining federal stimulus funds) for higher education from the year before. Rhode Island was the only New England state among the nine, even though three of the six New England states increased state appropriations overall between FY11 and FY12. Federal funds and MOE provisions thus may incentivize states to maintain certain levels of funding and simultaneously provide needed relief.

In recent remarks at a New England Council Breakfast Roundtable, U.S. Congressman John F. Tierney (D-Mass) stressed the need for continued smart investments in education, transportation and infrastructure improvements that would move the economy forward. The only New England member of House Committee on Education & the Workforce, Tierney played an integral part of shaping the MOE provisions in the last re-authorization of the Higher Education Act.

In the letter, SHEEO President Paul Lingenfelter asks the next presidential candidate to sustain federal investment in research and development (R&D) and provide necessary levels of federal need-based financial aid. ...]]>

The State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO) group issued an open letter to President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney in Change Magazine’s September/October edition.

In the letter, SHEEO President Paul Lingenfelter asks the next presidential candidate to sustain federal investment in research and development (R&D) and provide necessary levels of federal need-based financial aid. The letter also emphasizes the collaboration necessary between federal and state governments to raise degree-attainment rates and support the nation’s civic and economic development.

For its part, New England universities performed 7.3% of the R&D from all sources across all U.S. universities in 2009 , capturing more than $4 billion in research funds. In New England, more than 70% of those R&D dollars comes from Washington, D.C., a much higher percentage than in other U.S. regions. While the region’s research universities have been overly reliant on federal research funds, they have been underfunded by the New England states.

 “Virtually all the basic research in the United States is done in public and private universities, supported principally with federal dollars,” wrote Lingenfelter. States, he noted, "have been stretched beyond their capacity to finance higher education enrollment growth, spiraling healthcare and pension costs, and increasing corrections expense. While we understand that federal resources are also limited, there is no other source to replace the federal role in research and development.”

In addition to supporting R&D, federal dollars support hundreds of thousands of New England students through student financial aid programs. Total state need-based grant aid in New England was equal to only 21% of total federal need-based Pell Grant aid disbursed to New England students.

Although state need-based grant aid pales compared with the total federal financial aid available to students, public higher education systems across the country have found other ways to minimize the cost to students and support degree completion.

For example, the University of Maine agreed to freeze tuition rates at current levels in exchange for state funding, as did the University of New Hampshire. Massachusetts is piloting a “completion incentive grant fund” that links need-based grant aid to students’ academic progress.

Between 2007 and 2010, the number of Pell Grant recipients increased 51% and the average Pell Grant award increased 46%. As in the case of R&D, the states cannot hope to replace federal student financial aid. As diminishing college affordability butts up against the call for higher degree-attainment levels, state and federal governments must work with higher education institutions to enhance postsecondary opportunities for students.

The department invites submissions from institutions of higher education, nonprofit organizations, states, systems of higher education, adult education providers, researchers, and institutional faculty and staff, or consortia of these groups.

The aim is to collect strategies that could ...]]>

The U.S. Department of Education released a Request for Information on promising and practical strategies to increase postsecondary success.

The department invites submissions from institutions of higher education, nonprofit organizations, states, systems of higher education, adult education providers, researchers, and institutional faculty and staff, or consortia of these groups.

The aim is to collect strategies that could be replicated or scaled-up to meet national college-completion goals. In addition to information about the program or strategy, submissions should include information on the factors perceived as most important to successful implementation, a relevant context that enables successful practice, and any evidence available on the impact of the program or strategy.

This is the second round of requests; responses from the first round have been posted along with outcomes data.

New England submissions posted from the first round include:

• Boston College, “Learning to Learn”
• Cape Cod Community College, “College Reading and Study Skills Embedded in Learning Communities”
• Eastern Connecticut State University, “Predictive Analytics to Target Appropriate Resources to At-Risk Students”
• Eastern Connecticut State University/Quinebaug Valley Community College, “Dual Enrollment Program”
• Rhode Island College, “Paul V. Sherlock Center on Disabilities”
• Southern Vermont College, “Pipelines in Partnership”
• Western Connecticut State University, “Building a Bridge to Improve Student Success”

For more information, please contact Federick Winter at 202-502-7632 or frederick.winter[at]ed.gov.

The policy guide cites Connecticut Public Act 04-212 as a low-cost way to coordinate workforce training and professional ...]]>

Policies to foster college completion in three New England states are cited in The College Completion Agenda 2011 Progress Report and State Policy Guide, new national reports published by the College Board and National Conference of State Legislatures.

The policy guide cites Connecticut Public Act 04-212 as a low-cost way to coordinate workforce training and professional advancement ladders for early-childhood providers.

The guide also profiles Rhode Island’s requirement that the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education department work with schools districts that have dropout rates higher than 15%. The College Board also cites Rhode Island’s focus on revamping teacher-evaluation metrics to include student academic growth.

And it refers to the Massachusetts Education Reform Act of 1993, which aligns academic standards, curriculum frameworks, assessments, high school accountability measures, and teacher certification requirements, as one way to better coordinate K-12 education systems and college admissions expectations. Massachusetts is also cited for legislation requiring that all public colleges report annually to the governor and Legislature on measures including student college-completion rates.

The College Board outlines strategies for state legislators to adopt in increasing college completion in 10 categories:

1. Provide a program of voluntary preschool education;
2. Improve middle and high school college and career counseling;
3. Implement research-based dropout prevention programs;
4. Align K-12 education systems with international standards and college admissions expectations;
5. Improve teacher quality and focus on recruitment and retention;
6. Clarify and simplify the admission process;
7. Provide more need-based grant aid while simplifying and making financial aid processes more transparent;
8. Keep college affordable;
9. Dramatically increase college-completion rates; and
10. Provide postsecondary opportunities as an essential element of adult education programs.