Federal Policy and Latinos in Higher Education

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview ................................................................................................................1
Policy Context: The Costs of Higher Education.......................................................1
Current Status of Latino Participation and Achievement in Higher Education .........2
Latinos in Undergraduate Education ............................................................3
Latinos in Graduate Education .....................................................................5
Federal Programs That Support Access and Persistence in Higher Education.......6
Institutional Support......................................................................................6
Student Financial Assistance........................................................................8
Student Support Programs ...........................................................................9
Graduate Education .....................................................................................11
State and Local Level Programs that Influence Federal Programs .........................12
GEAR UP (Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs) .....12
HOPE (Helping Outstanding Pupils Educationally) scholarship ..................................12
Conclusion .............................................................................................................13
Endnotes ................................................................................................................15
This brief was produced, in part, with funds from Lumina Foundation for Education. The
views expressed are the authors? and do not necessarily reflect the perspectives of
Lumina Foundation or the Pew Hispanic Center.
1
OVERVIEW
Latinos are the largest minority group in the United States, yet lag behind other major
racial and ethnic groups in higher education attainment. Improving the extent and
quality of higher education for Latinos will indisputably raise their economic prospects
and civic engagement, and contribute to the long-term economic and civic health of the
entire nation.
The purpose of this brief is to describe federal legislation and programs that support
higher education and to assess Latino participation in these programs. While there are
many programs at the state, institutional, and community levels that facilitate access to
higher education for Latinos, the Higher Education Act (HEA), due for reauthorization
this year, is the main policy vehicle for postsecondary education programs at the federal
level. These programs provide concrete examples of educational activities that can
inform?and be informed by?local activities and programs to facilitate Latino student
access, persistence, and completion of higher education.
The current context of the reauthorization of the HEA is set within recent studies and
political attention on the costs and financing of postsecondary education. Thus, this brief
begins by addressing the cost of higher education and the impact on Latino
participation, followed by a statistical summary of Latino achievement in higher
education, including college enrollment and completion rates. All of the data cited are
from public sources, including analysis by the U.S. Department of Education. Following
the statistical review is a discussion of several programs in the Higher Education Act
and Latino student participation in these programs.
Effective state and local programs may influence the creation and expansion of some
federal programs. Therefore, this brief offers an example of a state program and several
community-based programs that stimulated the creation of federal programs. While the
programs were not developed solely to serve Latinos, many Latinos participate. The
brief concludes with a set of questions that decision-makers may use in considering the
potential impact of federal programs or policies on Latino students and as a guide for
decisions concerning the creation of new programs in other sectors.
POLICY CONTEXT: THE COSTS OF HIGHER EDUCATION
Latinos represented almost 13 percent of the U.S. population in the 2000 Census.
About 11 percent of Latinos now have a college education, while the national average
for adults is over 25 percent.1 For Latino students, as with many students, college costs
and available financial aid are among the most significant factors that influence their
decision to enroll in college.2
Over the last 10 years (1993-2003), average tuition and fees have risen almost 50
percent at public baccalaureate colleges and universities and 22 percent at community
colleges. In the last year alone (2003-04), average tuition and fees increased almost 15
percent for students at both public baccalaureate and community colleges.3 To pay for
their education, most college students receive some form of financial aid. According to a
College Board report, Trends in College Pricing, almost 60 percent of undergraduate
2
students receive some form of financial aid to help them pay for their education. This
financial aid includes grants, loans, work-study and tax credits from federal, state, local,
and institutional sources. However, while the basic premise for financial aid is to lower
the financial barriers for eligible students to have access to higher education, data show
that a decreasing portion of federal aid is distributed according to need. Further, in
recent years, low-income students received a declining share of grants for financial aid.4
As many Latino students come from low-income families, the limited availability of
financial aid, the increasing costs of higher education, and the mismatch of aid levels to
actual costs impede Latino participation in higher education.
This growth in college costs is due, in part, to decreases in the rate of state funding for
higher education. At the same time, state budget crises have compelled institutions of
higher education to make large cuts in expenditures. These cuts have had serious
implications for institutional capacity as well as for student access to higher education.
Intensifying the challenge are directives to shrink or limit enrollment at many institutions
as a cost-control strategy. Institutions of higher education are dealing with rising tuition
costs, slowing state funding for higher education, and budget-driven directives, while
experiencing increases in applications from students eligible for enrollment.
CURRENT STATUS OF LATINO PARTICIPATION AND ACHIEVEMENT IN HIGHER
EDUCATION
Data on Latino higher education access and completion provide a context for
understanding the impact of public policies and programs. The following section
includes an overview and then a more detailed profile of Latinos in undergraduate and
graduate education.
Overview
Latinos are the fastest growing college enrollment group and currently represent 10
percent of students in higher education. The ?traditional? college student enrolls full-time
upon high school graduation, is financially dependent, lives on campus, and either
works part-time or not at all. However, traditional students represent only 40 percent of
students in higher education today,5 The majority of students in higher education are
?non-traditional,? including many Latino students. As the following statistics will illustrate,
Latinos are enrolled in community colleges near where they live, attend college parttime,
commute to college, work, are first-generation college students, are low-income,
have less academic preparation than their peers, and are concentrated geographically
in a small number of states and institutions of higher education throughout the nation.
Almost half of Latino students in higher education begin at a nearby community college
but do not transfer to a baccalaureate-granting institution. Many who do enroll for the
first-time at a baccalaureate institution do not graduate.6 Only about 11 percent of
Latinos in the U.S. over 25 had a bachelor?s degree in 2002. In comparison, about 29
percent of whites and 25 percent of other non-Hispanics had a bachelor?s degree.7
3
Hispanic Enrollment in 5 States (2000)
36%
17% 8%
7%
5%
27%
CA TX FL NY IL All Others
College Enrollment Growth
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
1976 1980 1990 1995 1996 1998 1999 2000
% Enrollment
African American Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander
Latinos in Undergraduate Education
Undergraduate education is an important path to ensuring a better future in the U.S.
economy. Hispanics currently represent 15 percent (4.1 million) of the total traditional
college-age population (18 to 24 years). By the year 2020, Latinos will constitue almost
25 percent of that population.8
Enrollment
The representation of Hispanics in higher education continues to grow. In 2000,
Hispanic students represented almost 10 percent of the total student enrollment in
higher education (1.5 million),
compared to only 4 percent in 1976
(383,800).9 In fact, in just four
years (between 1996 and 2000),
the number of Latinos enrolled in
undergraduate education increased
25 percent, compared with only 2
percent for whites, 15 percent for
blacks, and 18 percent for
Asian/Pacific Islanders.10 Despite
increases in enrollment, however,
only 22 percent of college-age Latinos were enrolled in college, compared to close to 40
percent of whites, 30 percent of blacks, and 56 percent of Asian/Pacific Islanders.11
While Latinos are enrolled at institutions of higher education in every state, the majority
of Latinos in higher education are concentrated in a few states. Just over 50 percent of
all Latinos enrolled in higher education are in California and Texas. Almost 75 percent
of Latinos in higher education are in five states: California, Texas, New York, Florida,
and Illinois.12 Further, most Latino undergraduate
students are concentrated in a small number of institutions.
About 45 percent of Hispanic undergraduate students are
enrolled in about 230 institutions of higher education
identified as Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs). These
230 institutions represent seven percent of all
postsecondary institutions. HSIs are defined in the HEA as
accredited degree-granting public or private nonprofit
institutions of higher education with low educational and
general expenditures, a high enrollment of needy students,
and at least 25 percent total undergraduate Hispanic fulltime-
equivalent student enrollment, of which at least 50
percent of Hispanic students are low-income.13
The majority of Latinos in higher education are enrolled in two-year institutions, while
the majority of white, black and Asian/Pacific Islander students are enrolled in four-year
institutions.14 In conjunction with community colleges, a higher percentage of Latino
students are enrolled in higher education as part-time students compared to either
white, black or Asian/Pacific Islander students.15
4
Race/Ethnicity
% Enrolled
in Two-Year
Institutions
%
Enrolled
Part-time
White 46 40
Black 43 43
Hispanic 58 51
Asian/Pacific Islander 41 40
Close to 60 percent of Latino undergraduates receive some form of aid to pay for
college. However, Latinos are less likely to take loans to pay for college (25 percent)
than whites (29 percent) or blacks (36 percent).16 This is in part due to the fact that
many Latino students are enrolled in community colleges and/or enrolled part time.
Community colleges are less expensive than baccalaureate institutions so Latino
students would need to borrow less to pay for college.
Educational Attainment
Latino students are less likely to complete college through the traditional path (enroll
within one year of high school graduation, and attain the bachelor?s degree within six
years). Only 4 percent of Hispanics completed a postsecondary credential through the
traditional path, compared to 15 percent of whites and 23 percent of Asians (based
upon students in 8th grade in 1988).17
Latinos increased undergraduate degree attainment, although their levels are still below
other groups. In 2000, Hispanic students earned 9 percent of associate?s and 6 percent
of bachelor?s degrees awarded. In comparison, whites earned 72 percent of associate?s
and 75 percent of bachelor?s degrees, blacks earned 11 percent and 9 percent, and
Asian/Pacific Islanders earned 5 percent and 6 percent of associate?s and bachelor?s
degrees.18
Enrollment and Degrees Conferred: 2000
Race/ Ethnicity
% of
Enrollment
in 4-year
Institutions
% of
Enrollment
in 2-year
Institutions
% of
Bachelor
Degrees
Conferred
% of
Associate
Degrees
Conferred
Hispanic 6.6 14.2 6.1 9.1
White 71.1 64.0 75.1 72.4
Black 10.6 12.4 8.7 10.7
Asian/Pacific Islander 6.2 6.8 6.3 4.9
The top three disciplines in which Hispanics earned bachelor?s degrees were business,
social sciences and psychology. The top three disciplines for associate?s degrees
conferred to Latinos were liberal arts, business and the health professions.19
5
Graduate Enrollment, 2000
68%
9%
5%
5%
13%
White African American Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander Nonresident Alien
Latinos in Graduate Education
Graduate education provides the means to advance to the professional level of a
discipline and to become an expert in a field of study.
Enrollment
In 2000, Hispanics represented 5
percent of graduate students, while
whites represented 68 percent,
blacks represented 9 percent,
Asian/Pacific Islanders represented
5 percent, and nonresident aliens
represented 13 percent. In 1990,
Hispanics represented 3 percent of
graduate students.20 Hispanic
women have surpassed Hispanic
men in graduate enrollment. In
2000, over 60 percent of Latinos
enrolled in graduate education were women.21
Educational Attainment
Master?s: Latinos earned 5 percent of master?s degrees in 2001 (21,500 degrees).
White students earned 70 percent, blacks earned 8 percent, Asian/Pacific Islanders
earned 5 percent, and nonresident aliens earned 12 percent of all master?s degrees.22
The top three master?s degrees earned by Latinos were education, business, and public
administration. These fields represent over 70 percent of all degrees awarded.23
First-Professional: Latinos earned 5 percent of first-professional degrees in 2001 (3,800
degrees). White students earned 74 percent, blacks earned 7 percent, and Asian/Pacific
Islanders earned 12 percent.24 The top three first- professional degrees earned by
Latinos were law, medicine, and pharmacy. Over 75 percent of first-professional
degrees earned by Latinos were in law or medicine.25 Further, men earned 52 percent
of first-professional degrees obtained by Latinos (1,977). 26
Doctoral: More Latinos are earning doctoral degrees than before, but overall the
numbers are still small. In 2001, Latinos earned 3 percent of doctoral degrees
(1,500). In comparison, whites earned 61 percent, blacks earned 5 percent,
Asian/Pacific Islanders earned 6 percent, and nonresident aliens earned 24
percent of doctoral degrees.27 The top three doctoral degrees earned by Latinos
were education, psychology, and biological/life sciences.28
6
Graduate and First-Professional Enrollment and Degrees Conferred
2000-01 Graduate First Professional
Race/ Ethnicity
% of
Enrollment
% of
Master's
Degrees
% of
Doctoral
Degrees
% of
Enrollment
% of
Degrees
Hispanic 5.2 4.2 2.9 5.0 4.8
White 68.0 70.1 62.1 71.8 74.5
Black 8.5 7.8 5.0 7.7 6.9
Asian/Pacific Islander 5.2 5.1 5.4 12.0 10.7
Nonresident Alien 12.6 12.2 24.2 2.7 2.3
FEDERAL PROGRAMS THAT SUPPORT ACCESS AND PERSISTENCE IN HIGHER
EDUCATION
The Higher Education Act (HEA) authorizes the major federal programs supporting
postsecondary education in the United States. HEA is reauthorized every five years,
and will be reauthorized again this year. The programs contained in the HEA reflect the
evolution of the federal role in higher education. Programs in the HEA target many
diverse stakeholders in higher education: students, parents, teachers, not-for-profit
organizations, and institutions of higher education. These programs include financial aid
to students, support for improving colleges and universities, investment in research, and
promotion of collaborations between community organizations and institutions
supporting the academic preparation of students.
Programs in the HEA are authorized through federal legislation and then separately
funded through the Congressional appropriations process. To demonstrate the process
and underscore the distinction between authorizing a program and funding it through
appropriations, note that the Developing Hispanic Serving Institutions program was
originally created through authorization in 1992, yet funding for the program was not
provided until 1995. The funding of programs is a political process and determined by
policymakers who specify who is eligible and how to distribute the funds. Most funding
for higher education programs is discretionary, meaning that the level of funding for
each program is not set at a specific level and may be adjusted or eliminated every year
by Congress. Applicants are required to compete for funding with other eligible
organizations for the limited funds distributed through funded HEA programs.
Several HEA programs were selected to examine the impact on Latino student access
and achievement in higher education for the purposes of this brief. The programs
featured here provide for institutional support, student financial assistance, student
support services, and graduate education. While the selected programs were not
created specifically or solely to serve Hispanic students, their impact on Latino student
achievement provides critical information for decision-makers wishing to support
improved educational outcomes in higher education.
7
Institutional Support
The HEA authorizes eight institutional aid and development programs. Among them, the
two that more directly serve Latino students in higher education are the Developing
Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) Program, which provides five-year grants for
institutional development to institutions serving a large percentage of Hispanic students,
and the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP), which
provides grants to institutions to recruit and educate minority students towards
bachelor?s degrees in science and engineering.
The Developing HSIs program supports institutional development for a wide range of
activities to improve the quality of education at these institutions, including faculty
development, endowment enhancement, student services, technology efforts, and
curriculum development. The HEA defines HSIs as public or private not-for-profit
accredited institutions of higher education with high enrollments of needy students, low
education and general expenditures, and 25 percent or more full-time-equivalent (FTE)
undergraduate Hispanic students with 50 percent or more of these students being lowincome.
While these institutions were not created with missions to serve Latinos
specifically, these institutions do enroll a large percentage of Latinos.
The Developing HSIs program was first authorized in 1994, when about 130 institutions
met the criteria for eligibility. In the last ten years, the number of institutions meeting the
criteria has almost doubled, reflecting the large increase in Latino enrollment in higher
education. More than 200 grants averaging about $375,000 per year have been
awarded to these institutions of higher education.
About 45 percent of Latinos in higher education are enrolled in Hispanic-Serving
Institutions (HSIs). Therefore, one avenue for targeting services to large numbers of
Latino students is through HSIs. In 2002, there were approximately 230 HSIs located in
12 states and Puerto Rico.29 This represents about 7 percent of all institutions of higher
education. California has the most HSIs (with 68), followed by Texas (37), New Mexico
(18), and New York (12). Further, 50 percent (114) of HSIs are public community
colleges and 20 percent (47) are public baccalaureate institutions. Overall, HSIs
represent 10 percent of all public community colleges and 7 percent of all public
baccalaureate institutions. The remaining 30 percent of HSIs are private institutions.
While annual reports to the Department of Education show progress in institutional
development as a result of this program, many of these colleges and universities have
not reported on the direct impact of their services on the Latino students on their
campuses.
The Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP) was created to
address the underrepresentation of Latino and other ethnic groups in science and
engineering. In 2002, $8.5 million was available for institutional grants, and funding has
been level for at least five years. Institutions receive grants to increase their recruitment
and support of these students. In 2000-01, less than 10 percent (7,100) of Latinos who
earned bachelor?s degrees received degrees in science and engineering.30 While the
number of Latino graduates in science and engineering is not large, it has grown since
8
the inception of MSEIP. Many participating institutions credit the program with helping
them to develop effective recruiting mechanisms to identify interested Latino, black, and
Native American students and to diversity their student body in these disciplines.
Student Financial Assistance
The HEA authorizes the majority of grant and loan programs to provide financial aid for
student access to higher education. The grant programs to students include the Pell
Grants, Federal supplemental educational opportunity grants (SEOG) [part of the
campus-based programs], and special programs for students whose families are
engaged in migrant and seasonal farm work. In addition, the HEA authorizes the
Federal Family Education Loan Programs such as the PLUS loans for parents of
dependent student federal consolidation loans, unsubsidized loans, loan forgiveness for
teachers, loan forgiveness for child care providers, College Work Study, Direct Loans,
and Perkins Loans.
There are four main ways to pay for a college education: grants, loans, work-study, and
personal contributions. These four options are not mutually exclusive, and most
students use a combination to pay for their college education. While financial aid is
available outside of the federal sector, approximately two-thirds of all student financial
aid comes from federal programs administered by the U.S. Department of Education.
In addition to the four options mentioned, the federal government also has a tax credit
that provides some reimbursement for postsecondary expenses. The federal Hope
Scholarship program is a credit of up to $1,500 per student for qualified tuition and
related expenses per year, covering the first two years of postsecondary education. The
credit covers 100 percent of the first $1,000 of qualifying expenses plus 50 percent of
the next $1,000.
Latinos receive the lowest average amount of financial aid awarded?by type and
source of aid?of any ethnic group. Full-time, full-year undergraduate degree-seeking
Latino students received the least financial aid of any major racial/ethnic group
(including federal aid or non-federal aid).31 Latinos also received the smallest federal
grants of any ethnic group, except whites. Latinos received larger loans than blacks or
Asian/Pacific Islanders and the lowest work-study awards of any group.
Financial Aid to Full-time, Full-Year Undergraduate Degree-Seeking Students
Race/Ethnicity Any Aid Grants Loans Work
Study
Total Federal Nonfederal
Total Federal Nonfederal
Total Federal Nonfederal
Total
Hispanic $5,999 $4,644 $3,328 $3,486 $2,113 $3,017 $4,168 $4,137 $2,235 $1,152
White, non-Hispanic 6,836 5,549 3,848 3,762 1,894 3,541 4,437 4,366 2,912 1,367
Black, non-Hispanic 6,945 5,262 3,739 3,904 2,122 3,533 4,070 4,046 2,197 1,370
Asian/Pacific Islander 8,099 5,106 5,200 5,477 2,164 5,028 4,073 4,053 2,414 1,618
American Indian/Alaska
Native $6,591 $5,046 $3,792 $3,961 $2,301 $3,658 $4,278 $4,244 --- ---
9
For part-time, less-than-full-year undergraduate students, Latinos also received the
lowest average total financial aid award of any ethnic group. Latinos were second only
to Native Americans in receiving the least federal aid. Latinos did receive slightly larger
federal grants than blacks or whites; however, Latinos received the smallest work-study
awards of any ethnic group and the smallest loans of any ethnic group except Native
Americans.
Financial Aid to Part-time, Less than Full-Year Undergraduate Students
Race/Ethnicity Any Aid Grants Loans Work
Study
Total Federal Nonfederal
Total Federal Nonfederal
Total Federal Nonfederal
Total
Hispanic $2,526 $2,740 $985 $1,431 $1,352 $829 $3,434 $3,437 $1,646 $1,372
White, non-Hispanic 2,869 3,436 1,347 1,378 1,238 1,132 3,620 3,629 1,362 1,537
Black, non-Hispanic 2,889 3,166 1,320 1,524 1,315 1,119 3,491 3,500 1,259 1,570
Asian/Pacific Islander 3,563 3,592 1,817 2,038 1,526 1,549 3,842 3,777 --- 1,612
American Indian/Alaska
Native $2,552 $2,459 $1,296 $1,772 $1,553 $1,166 $2,938 $2,938 --- ---
Among full-time master?s degree students, Latinos also received less overall aid than
other groups. Only 65 percent of Latino students received any aid, compared to 76
percent of whites and 90 percent of blacks. Specifically, Latinos studying for master?s
degrees received less grant aid and work more than either white or black students. Only
about 20 percent of Latino students received grants, compared to more than 30 percent
of both white and black students. Twenty percent of Latinos received assistantships,
compared to 10 percent for blacks and 9 percent for whites.32 Some studies have
shown that working may prolong or limit the completion of a graduate education.
The average aid for Latino master?s degree students is only $8,729, compared to
$13,875 for blacks and $12,566 for whites. For first-professional degree students, the
average aid for Latinos is only $16,766, compared to $21,440 for blacks, $18,182 for
whites, and $18,416 for Asian/Pacific Islanders.33
Student Support Programs
The HEA also authorizes several programs to help prepare students for higher
education starting in middle school, including the TRIO programs, and Gaining Early
Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR-UP). The GEAR UP
program was authorized in 1998 to increase the number of low-income students who
are prepared to enter and succeed in postsecondary education. GEAR UP provides
five-year grants to states and partnerships to provide services at high-poverty middle
and high schools. GEAR UP grantees serve an entire cohort of students beginning no
later than the seventh grade and follow the cohort through high school. Once identified,
colleges form partnerships with middle schools in low-income neighborhoods to provide
college preparation and raise the educational expectations of whole classes of students.
Such assistance continues through high-school graduation. Many of the partnerships
give college scholarships to the students they serve.
10
Since 1999, the GEAR UP program has awarded 265 grants to partnerships in 45
states and in Guam, Micronesia, and Puerto Rico. Each partnership gets enough money
to spend $800 per student. The U.S. Department of Education estimates that the
program served approximately 1.3 million students in 2003. While the GEAR UP
program was not explicitly created to serve Latino students, general studies have shown
that large numbers of Latino students are being served through these partnerships.
Given that many Latino students who enroll in higher education do so at institutions
near where they live (and thus attended high school), the GEAR UP program offers a
continual support mechanism as they make the transition to college.
Within TRIO, eight outreach and support programs are authorized and targeted to help
the academic progress of low-income, first-generation students from middle school to
post-baccalaureate programs. In 2002, $802 million was provided for these programs.
1. Talent Search: program to provide academic, career, and financial counseling to
support high school completion and college-going.
2. Upward Bound: program to provide tutoring, mentoring, academic support and
development of skills needed for college preparation and entrance.
3. Upward Bound-Math/Science: program to strengthen the math and science skills of
participating students and encourage college study in these areas.
4. Student Support Services: program to provide academic development, assist with
basic college requirements, and motivate students to complete postsecondary
education.
5. Educational Opportunity Centers: program to provide counseling and information
on college admissions to those who want to enter or continue higher education.
6. Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate: grants to institutions to prepare students for
doctoral studies.
7. TRIO Dissemination Partnership: program designed to encourage the replication of
successful practices of TRIO programs by partnership with existing grantees and
other institutions or community-based organizations.
8. Training Program for Federal TRIO Programs: program to enhance the skills and
expertise of the TRIO programs? project directors and staff.
Census data show that there is a large and growing number of college-age Latinos in
the U.S. Many Latino students are low-income and potentially first-generation college
students without direct access to information about higher education or what is required
to prepare academically for higher education. Under the TRIO programs, colleges and
community agencies identify qualified elementary and secondary school students from
low-income families and help them pursue higher education. Participants receive
academic and career counseling as well as help in applying to colleges and obtaining
student aid.
The three main TRIO programs are Upward Bound, Talent Search, and Student
Support Services. The participating students in the TRIO Talent Search program are in
grades 6 to 12. Further, two-thirds of the students in each local program must be from
families in which neither parent attended college. Each Talent Search program gets
11
about $365 per student, and in fiscal year 2002, there were 475 programs nationwide
serving about 390,000 students with an appropriation of $142 million.
Upward Bound works with low-income students in all four high-school grades whose
parents do not have a bachelor's degree. Students take after-school classes in core
academic subjects, such as English, mathematics, science, and a foreign language, and
receive free tutoring in the same subjects on weekends. They also get help applying to
colleges and pursuing financial aid, and they live in a college dormitory for six weeks
during the summer for a summer-school session. According to the most current
available data, Upward Bound participants are 50 percent African-American, 22 percent
Hispanic, 21 percent white, 4 percent Asian or Pacific Islander, and 3 percent American
Indian or Native Alaskan.
The Student Support Services (SSS) program provides opportunities for academic
development, assists students with basic college requirements, and serves to motivate
students toward the successful completion of their postsecondary education. The SSS
program may also provide grant aid to current SSS participants who are receiving Pell
Grants. The goal of SSS is to increase the college retention and graduation rates of its
participants and facilitate the process of transition from one level of higher education to
the next. In 2002, $267 million was provided for 937 programs across the nation serving
about 198,000 students at an average cost of $1,320 per student.
Evaluations of Upward Bound and Student Support Services programs in TRIO have
shown that these programs significantly improve the academic preparation of Latino
students who participate. Specifically, a national evaluation showed that Latino students
routinely gained more course credits from participating in these programs than other
ethnic groups in several subjects (math, English, foreign languages, and social
studies).34 However, a later study has also that found Upward Bound had virtually no
effect on the college-going rates of many of its participants.
Graduate Education
The HEA authorizes several national graduate fellowship programs that support
education in the humanities, disciplines of national need, and law. The Jacob K. Javits
Fellowship Program provides fellowships for students to pursue graduate study in the
arts, humanities, and social sciences based on a student?s demonstrated achievement
and financial need. The Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need program
provides grants to institutions that offer a graduate degree in an area of national need,
as defined by the Secretary of Education. A third program, the Thurgood Marshall Legal
Educational Opportunity Program, provides a grant/contract with the Council on Legal
Education Opportunity to provide low-income minority, or disadvantaged college
students with information, preparation and financial aid to access and complete law
school.
12
STATE AND LOCAL-LEVEL PROGRAMS THAT INFLUENCE FEDERAL PROGRAMS
Just as there are federal programs developed to influence state and institutional policy,
there are also programs at the local and state levels that, having shown a level of
effectiveness, have influenced the development of federal policy. The GEAR UP
program and the HOPE scholarship program are two federal programs modeled after
state or local educational programs.
GEAR UP (Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs)
The federal GEAR UP program was modeled after three existing programs located in
multiple communities throughout the country: 1) The AVID (Advancement Via Individual
Determination) program, 2) Project GRAD (Graduation Really Achieves Dreams), and,
3) ?I Have a Dream.?
1) AVID is an in-school academic support program for grades 5-12 that prepares
students for college eligibility and success. AVID places academically average students
in advanced classes in an effort to address the de facto ?tracking? that tends to keep
low-income and minority students out of college preparatory programs and that results
in lower levels of academic achievement.
2) Project GRAD is a nonprofit K-16 school reform model that is currently under way in
ten school districts across the country. The mission of the program is to ensure a quality
public education for all children in economically disadvantaged communities, to increase
high school graduation rates, and to prepare graduates to be successful in college.
Project GRAD works with students from kindergarten through college within feeder
systems of schools?all the elementary and middle schools that ?feed? individual high
schools. The project focuses its efforts on low-performing schools in low-income
neighborhoods. Over 90 percent of the students in Project GRAD schools meet the
federal poverty guidelines for special assistance.
3) The third program that influenced the creation of the federal GEAR UP program is
The "I Have a Dream"? Program. This program helps children from low-income areas
reach their education and career goals by providing a long-term program of mentoring,
tutoring, and enrichment and assuring an opportunity for higher education. Local "I Have
a Dream"? projects adopt an entire grade from an elementary school or an entire age
group from a public housing development. They work with this group of children (the
"Dreamers") and their families year-round from their elementary school years through
college. With more than 180 Projects in 64 cities across 27 states (75 of which are
currently active), "I Have a Dream"? has now served more than 13,500 students during
its more than two decades of operation.
HOPE (Helping Outstanding Pupils Educationally) scholarship
The federal HOPE scholarship?created in 1997?was inspired by Georgia?s HOPE
scholarship program, begun in 1993. This state program rewards eligible students with
financial assistance in degree, diploma, and certificate programs at eligible Georgia
public and private colleges and universities and public technical colleges. The intended
13
purpose of the program is to make college an affordable reality for all state residents,
regardless of income.
In the first five years of the federal scholarship program, reports show that the main
beneficiaries of the program have been students from middle-income families. In 2000,
more than 50 percent of credits from the HOPE program went to people whose families
had annual incomes of $30,000 to $75,000. Students from families with incomes of less
than $30,000 collected about 30 percent of the credits. Students from the poorest
families took less advantage of the program and received the least financial help from it.
Students whose families made less than $10,000 received only 1 percent of the credits,
or a credit of about $230. Those who made $10,000 to $19,999 received fewer than 15
percent of the credits, with an average of about $620.35 Therefore, on its face the focus
on low income would make the HOPE scholarship program of potential importance to
Latino students and their families.
C
ONCLUSION
By improving the extent and quality of higher education for Latinos, their economic
prospects, civic engagement, and ability to contribute to the long-term economic and
civic health of the nation indisputably increases. Yet meeting the educational needs of
the growing Latino population in today?s economy is challenging. When educational
choices are made in the context of limited resources and growing numbers of students,
analysis that provides decision-makers with the data to assess the impact on Latino
participation is an important step in addressing the disparity in Latino higher educational
attainment and the consequent shortage of skilled workers and professionals.
This brief provides the means to examine Latino student achievement within the context
of programs supported by the Higher Education Act. By providing both the statistics
about Latino access and achievement in higher education and a description of some of
the programs in HEA, the brief supports decision-makers as they make critical choices.
To further this guide, decision-makers and other stakeholders may use the following
questions as they consider the potential impact of federal as well as state and local
programs and policies on Latino students and their academic achievement.
Institutional Capacity Building
With the opportunity to create programs that can improve postsecondary education,
what specific programs or activities on campuses can help to ensure Latino students
receive a quality education? Are there demonstration projects addressing Latino
students that can be ?brought to scale??
Are there institutions or whole communities that currently graduate larger numbers of
Latinos in specific disciplines, such as science and engineering or teaching? If so, which
are they and what are the practices that yield these results?
Financial Aid
Federal financial aid for higher education was originally designed to provide students
access to an array of different types of higher education institutions, i.e. regional, state,
and private institutions. Given that data show that Latino students still tend to be
14
concentrated in a small number of institutions (HSIs), and that one of the reasons for
their choice of institutions is cost, in what ways can federal or non-federal financial aid
programs be improved to enhance greater mobility, and thus options, for Latino
students?
Student Support
Data show that Latinos are more likely to attend institutions in their communities, and a
?K-16? approach can be effective to facilitating academic preparation and services. How
can community-based organizations link with high schools enrolling large numbers of
Latinos and institutions of higher education to ensure their academic preparation and
access to quality institutions of higher education?
Graduate Education
Data show that Latino representation within full-time instructional faculty in higher
education has not increased since 1992 and remains at 3 percent. Further, data show
that Latino doctoral recipients are concentrated in education, psychology, and
biological/life sciences. Recognizing that today?s doctoral students are the talent for
tomorrow?s faculty, what do graduate programs offer to promote successful pathways to
faculty appointments for Latino candidates?
15
ENDNOTES
1 Ramirez, R. and del la Cruz, P. (2003). The Hispanic Population in the United States:
March 2002. U.S. Census Bureau. Current Population Reports.
2 The College Board. (2003). Trends in College Pricing: 2003. College Entrance
Examination Board. Washington, DC.
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid.
5 American Council on Education (2002). Access and Persistence: Findings from 10
years of Longitudinal Research on Students. Washington, DC.
6 Fry, R. (2002). Latinos in Higher Education: Many Enroll, Few Graduate. Washington,
DC: Pew Hispanic Center.
7 U.S. Census Bureau, 2003. Current Population Survey, March 2002, Detailed Tables
(PPL-169), Table 7.2. Ethnic and Hispanic Statistics Branch, Population Division.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce.
8 Bureau of the Census, (NP-T4-B) Projections of the Total Resident Population by 5-
Year Age Groups, Race, and Hispanic Origin with Special Age Categories: Middle
Series, 2001 to 2005 and NP-T4, 2016 to 2020, Population Projections Program.
9 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES), Digest
of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 206. Washington, D.C.
10 Ibid.
11 U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey. Table 1. Enrollment Status of the
Population 3 Years Old & Over, by Age, Sex, Race, Hispanic Origin, Nativity, &
Selected Educational Characteristics: October 2000. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Commerce.
12 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 209. Washington, D.C.
13 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
IPEDS, 2001 Fall Enrollment. Higher Education Amendments of 1965, as amended,
1998.
14 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 206.
15 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 207.
16 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 316.
17 NCES, Issue Brief: Racial/Ethnic Differences in the Path to a Postsecondary
Credential, June 2003.
18 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 261 and 264.
19 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 262 and 265.
20 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 207.
21 Ibid.
16
22 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 267.
23 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 260.
24 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 273.
25 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 274.
26 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 273.
27 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 270.
28 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 271.
29 Institutional Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 2001-02. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education.
30 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, Table 265.
31 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Student Financing of Graduate and First-Professional Education, 1995-96, May, 1998
Table 2.4
32 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Student Financing of Graduate and First-Professional Education, 1995-96, May, 1998
Table 2.3a
33 U.S. Department of Education, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES),
Student Financing of Graduate and First-Professional Education, 1995-96, May, 1998
Table 2.4.
34 U.S. Department of Education, The National Evaluation of Upward Bound, The Short-
Term Impact of Upward Bound: An Interim Report. 1997.
35 Arnone, M. Education Tax Credits Fall Short, Study Finds, The Chronicle of Higher
Education. Volume 50, Issue 9, Page A27.