This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-568 
entitled 'College Completion: Additional Efforts Could Help Education 
with Its Completion Goals' which was released on June 23, 2003.

This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office 
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a 
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately.

Report to Congressional Requesters:

United States General Accounting Office:

GAO:

May 2003:

College Completion:

Additional Efforts Could Help Education with Its Completion Goals:

GAO-03-568:

GAO Highlights:

Highlights of GAO-03-568, a report to the Ranking Minority Members, 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, United States 
Senate, and Committee on Education and the Workforce, House of 
Representatives 

Why GAO Did This Study:

Because of concerns that not enough students who start college are 
completing a bachelors degree, we examined (1) the extent to which 
students who enroll in a 4-year college complete a bachelors degree 
and identify the factors that affect completion; (2) what states and 
4-year colleges and universities are doing to foster bachelors degree 
completion; and (3) what the Department of Education (Education) is 
doing to foster degree completion.

What GAO Found:

More than half of all students who enrolled in a 4-year college 
completed a bachelors degree within 6 years. Students were less 
likely to complete if neither parent had completed a degree, they were 
black, they worked 20 or more hours per week, or they transferred to 
another college. Students had a greater likelihood of completing if 
they were continuously enrolled, attended full-time, or had more 
rigorous high school curriculum. After controlling for other factors, 
GAO found that disadvantaged students were no less likely to complete 
a degree than other students. However, students from disadvantaged 
backgrounds are less likely to attend college in the first place.

States are beginning to hold colleges accountable for retaining and 
raduating their students, and Education has been discussing this with 
the higher education community. Many states are publishing retention 
and graduation rates for their colleges, and some have tied 
performance in these areas to funding. According to Education, 
providing information on colleges retention and graduation 
performance can help prospective students make informed decisions. 
However, the measure used by Education may not fully reflect an 
institutions performance because institutional goals and missions are 
not captured in the measure. In its strategic plan, Education has 
identified goals to reduce gaps in college completion and increase 
overall completion. It also has some evaluation and dissemination 
efforts related to retention and completion, however, these efforts 
do not systematically identify and disseminate promising retention 
and graduation practices to help states and institutions.

what GAO Recommends:

As Education moves forward with its plan to hold colleges and 
universities accountable for their performance in graduating their 
students, GAO recommends that the Secretary of Education 

* consider multiple measures that would help account for the other 
goals of higher education and differences among colleges and 

* take steps to identify and disseminate information about promising 
practices in the areas of retention and graduation.

Education agreed with GAOs recommendations, but expressed concerns 
with some aspects of the report. Among other things, Education was 
concerned with the scope of GAOs review and said that, for example, 
GAO should have included information on graduation rate trends; 
however, its suggested data would not be comparable for these 
purposes.

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-568.

To view the full report, including the scope and methodology, click on 
the link above. For more information, contact Cornelia M. Ashby at 
(202) 512-8403 or ashbyc@gao.gov.

[End of section]

Contents:

Letter:

Results in Brief:

Background:

Over Half of Students Enrolled in a 4-Year College or University 
Completed Their Degree within 6 Years, but Certain Factors Affect the 
Likelihood of Doing So:

States and 4-Year Institutions Had Various Methods to Foster Bachelor's 
Degree Completion:

Education Has Programs to Foster College Completion, but No Systematic 
Efforts to Identify and Disseminate Information on Promising Practices:

Conclusions:

Recommendations:

Agency Comments:

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:

Appendix II: Bachelor's Degree Completion Status of 1995-96 Beginning 
Postsecondary Students 6 Years after Enrolling:

Appendix III: Results of Regression Models for Bachelor's Degree 
Completion within 6 Years of Beginning College:

Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Education:

Appendix VGAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:

Contacts:

Acknowledgments:

Table:

Table 1: Overview of Education Programs That Have College Completion as 
a Primary Goal:

Figures:

Figure 1: Educational Attainment of Students Who Were in the Eighth 
Grade in 1988, 12 Years Later, by Income, Race/Ethnicity:

Figure 2: Status of Students 6 Years after Beginning in 1995-96 at a 4-
Year Institution:

Figure 3: Bachelor's Degree Completion Status for Students Enrolled at 
4-year Institutions, 6 Years after Beginning College:

Figure 4: Bachelor's Degree Completion by Number of Hours Worked Per 
Week:

Figure 5: Bachelor's Degree Completion by Type of First Institution 
Attended and Transfer Status:

Abbreviations:

BPS: Beginning Postsecondary Students:

GEAR UP: Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate 
Programs:

GRS: Graduation Rate Survey:

NPSAS:96: National Postsecondary Student Aid Study:

United States General Accounting Office:

Washington, DC 20548:

May 23, 2003:

The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy 
Ranking Minority Member 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
United States Senate:

The Honorable George Miller 
Ranking Minority Member 
Committee on Education and the Workforce 
House of Representatives:

A college degree is a key ingredient for success in the job market. 
Those with postsecondary degrees on average earn more than those 
without such degrees and bring important skills to the workplace. 
Completing college can serve as a means for disadvantaged 
students[Footnote 1] to improve their economic and social 
circumstances. Beyond the societal benefits, the federal government has 
additional interests in encouraging college completion. Research 
indicates that those who stay in college and advance toward a degree 
are less likely to default on a student loan--the federal government 
provided student borrowers with $35 billion in new loans in fiscal year 
2001.[Footnote 2] In addition to the investment the federal government 
makes in higher education, states, parents, and students make 
substantial investments. To help protect these investments, 
policymakers have begun to focus on accountability of colleges and 
universities, especially regarding college completion rates. The 
Department of Education (Education) has begun to discuss this issue 
with the higher education community.

Because of concerns that not enough students who start college are 
completing a bachelor's degree, you asked us to determine (1) the 
extent to which students--including those from lower socioeconomic 
backgrounds--who enroll in a 4-year college or university complete a 
bachelor's degree and the factors that affect bachelor's degree 
completion; (2) what states and 4-year colleges and universities are 
doing to foster bachelor's degree completion and what is known about 
the effectiveness of these efforts; and (3) what Education is doing to 
foster bachelor's degree completion.

To determine the extent to which students complete bachelor's degrees 
and the factors that affect completion, we conducted a logistic 
regression using data from Education's 1995-1996 Beginning 
Postsecondary Students study, which tracked over a 6-year period the 
academic progress and degree completion of individual students 
beginning with the time they first enrolled in postsecondary study in 
1995-1996. We analyzed data for those students who in 1995-1996 were 
enrolled in a 4-year institution or were enrolled at some other type of 
institution, but transferred to a 4-year institution at some point 
during the 6-year period. As a result, our analysis excludes other 
types of students, such as community college students who did not 
transfer to a 4-year institution. To identify what states and 4-year 
colleges and universities are doing to foster bachelor's degree 
completion, we conducted a survey of state higher education executive 
officer agencies representing all 50 states, the District of Columbia, 
and Puerto Rico.[Footnote 3] We received responses representing 48 of 
the 52 jurisdictions (92 percent). We also interviewed state officials 
and administrators at 11 public colleges and universities in Florida, 
Maryland, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia. We selected these states and 
institutions based on geographic dispersion and the variety of efforts 
reported to us by experts and in the survey. To identify what Education 
is doing to foster bachelor's degree completion, we talked with 
Education officials and reviewed program and planning documents. A more 
detailed explanation of our methodology is included in appendix I. We 
conducted our work between April 2002 and May 2003 in accordance with 
generally accepted government auditing standards.

Results in Brief:

More than half of all students who enroll in a 4-year college or 
university complete a bachelor's degree within 6 years of beginning 
postsecondary education. On the basis of our analysis, select 
background characteristics, work and college attendance patterns, as 
well as academic preparation and performance are correlated with 
bachelor's degree completion. Specific factors associated with a lower 
likelihood of completing a bachelor's degree include coming from a 
family in which neither parent had earned a bachelor's degree, being 
black, working 20 or more hours per week, or transferring to another 
institution. Students were more likely to complete their degree work if 
they were continuously enrolled during the 6-year period or attended 
full-time. The likelihood of a student graduating within 6 years also 
increased as rigor of their high school curriculum, high school grade 
point average, and first-year college grade point average increased. 
After controlling for other factors, we found that disadvantaged 
students were no less likely to complete a bachelor's degree than other 
students. Notwithstanding this fact, students from disadvantaged 
backgrounds are less likely to attend college in the first place.

States and 4-year colleges and universities are employing various 
methods to foster bachelor's degree completion, but information on the 
effectiveness of these efforts is limited. Over two-thirds of the 
states responding to our survey reported having at least one effort in 
place to foster bachelor's degree completion. Most of these efforts 
fell into three categories: (1) increasing the number of students 
entering postsecondary education; (2) helping colleges improve their 
performance in retaining and graduating students; and (3) helping 
individual students remain in college and encouraging timely completion 
for these students. For example, in an attempt to increase the number 
of students entering college, Kentucky has aligned high school 
graduation standards with college admissions standards by creating a 
single high school curriculum for all students. Also, in an effort to 
help students remain in college, seven states reported efforts to 
facilitate transfer from one college to another. Officials in Florida 
told us that establishing policies that help students transfer from 
community colleges to 4-year institutions was important because the 
community college system is considered the point of entry for most 
college students in the state. States reported that almost half of 
these efforts have been evaluated, but provided few specific evaluation 
results. As a way to foster bachelor's degree completion, 4-year 
colleges and universities we visited were engaged in activities 
designed to improve the learning experience for students by creating 
smaller learning communities that foster greater connections to the 
institution, along with strengthening support of students to promote 
academic success. For example, some colleges have created residential 
learning opportunities for students. These "living-learning" 
communities are operated through the residence halls where students 
live together and take a class together. In some cases, officials 
attributed increases in retention to their efforts.

Education fosters bachelor's degree completion by making financial aid 
available to students and providing support services for students who 
are low-income, come from families in which neither parent has a 
bachelor's degree, or are disabled. Education administers the federal 
student aid programs, primarily through grants and loans to help 
students finance college. In September 2002, we reported that little 
information is available on the relative effectiveness of federal 
grants and loans on completion. Education also administers programs 
that provide support services, such as tutoring, at the pre-college and 
college levels to help ensure successful outcomes for students who are 
low-income, come from families in which neither parent has earned a 
bachelor's degree, or are disabled. Information on the effectiveness of 
these programs in fostering college completion is still being 
collected. Through its strategic plan, Education has identified 
priorities for reducing gaps in college completion among certain 
student populations and increasing completion overall. Its strategic 
plan also identifies strengthening the accountability of postsecondary 
institutions to ensure colleges are graduating their students in a 
timely manner as a priority. According to Education, providing 
prospective students with information on graduation and retention rates 
to help them make informed choices about where to attend college is one 
way to hold institutions accountable for their performance. Education 
has some evaluation and dissemination efforts related to retention and 
completion; however, it does not have a systematic way to identify and 
share promising practices in these areas with states and colleges that 
are looking for strategies to help them better retain their students.

In this report, we make recommendations to the Secretary of Education 
to (1) consider multiple measures in holding institutions accountable 
for their performance in graduating their students and (2) identify and 
disseminate promising practices in the areas of retention and 
graduation.

In written comments on a draft of this report, Education agreed with 
our recommendations, but expressed concerns with some aspects of the 
report. Among other things, Education had concerns with the scope of 
our review and commented that, for example, we should have provided 
information on trends in graduation rates; however, the studies it 
suggested we use are not comparable and should not be used for these 
purposes. Education also provided technical comments, which we 
incorporated where appropriate.

Background:

Many factors affect why some students graduate from college and our 
review would not be complete without first considering the extent to 
which students with different characteristics advance to higher levels 
of education. Many students will complete their education without ever 
having enrolled in college. Figure 1 shows some of the differences in 
educational participation and attainment for a group of students who 
were followed over a 12-year period starting in the eighth grade.

Figure 1: Educational Attainment of Students Who Were in the Eighth 
Grade in 1988, 12 Years Later, by Income, Race/Ethnicity:

[See PDF for image]

Note: GAO analysis of Education's National Educational Longitudinal 
Study of 1988.

[End of figure]

We reported in February 2002 that low-income, black, and Hispanic 
students complete high school at lower rates than other 
students.[Footnote 4] Students from these groups who graduate from high 
school also enroll in college at lower rates than their peers, even 
though the overall rate at which students enter college directly from 
high school has been increasing. According to research, factors such as 
family income and parents' educational attainment influence students' 
expectations about college. Low-income students and students from 
families in which neither parent has earned a bachelor's degree were 
less likely to expect to finish college and ultimately enrolled at 
lower rates than other students. Academic preparation was also cited as 
a factor affecting postsecondary enrollment. Low-income, black, and 
Hispanic high school graduates were less likely to be well prepared 
academically to attend a 4-year college. Even among those who were 
qualified for college, however, low-income and Hispanic students were 
less likely to take college entrance examinations and apply for 
admission, two necessary steps for enrolling in a 4-year institution.

There are a variety of postsecondary options for students after high 
school. Over 15 million students were enrolled in some type of higher 
education in the fall of 2000. Most students were enrolled in degree-
granting 2-year or 4-year institutions.[Footnote 5] After considering 
their academic qualifications, students can choose to apply to 
institutions with varying levels of selectivity. Community colleges, 
for example, provide postsecondary opportunities for students who might 
not have the qualifications to start at most 4-year institutions. 
Additionally, students may wish to choose an institution based on its 
mission. For example, Minority Serving Institutions are recognized by 
statute, in part, for their mission to educate minority students.

The institutions students attend have differing graduation rates. 
Institutional graduation rates may vary based upon such factors as the 
mission, selectivity, and type of institution. For example, 
institutions that focus on providing postsecondary opportunities to 
disadvantaged students--addressing Education's goal of increasing 
participation in higher education--may have lower graduation rates than 
institutions that do not serve many disadvantaged students. To ensure 
that students and their parents have some information about how 
colleges are performing with respect to graduating their students, 
Congress passed the Campus Security and Student Right-to-Know 
Act.[Footnote 6] This act, as amended, requires that institutions 
participating in any student financial assistance program under Title 
IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 disclose to current and 
prospective students information about the graduation rates of first-
time, full-time undergraduate students. The law requires that 
institutions report the percentage of students who graduate or complete 
within 150 percent of the normal program completion time. This would 
mean that 4-year institutions would track groups of entering students 
over a 6-year period, and 2-year institutions would track groups of 
entering students over a 3-year period. While information collected as 
part of this act is the principal federal measure available to hold 
institutions accountable for their performance in graduating their 
students, there are currently no federal sanctions or incentives 
associated with college graduation rates. As part of discussions with 
the higher education community, Education has held panel discussions 
with student-aid experts, state officials, and business leaders, among 
other participants, about improving accountability.

Four-year institutions calculate their graduation rate by determining 
the proportion of first-time, full-time students who enroll in a given 
year and have graduated from the same institution within a 6-year 
period.[Footnote 7] Students who have not graduated from the 
institution where they first enrolled by the end of the 6-year period 
are classified as not having finished a degree, even if they 
transferred and completed a degree at another institution. Data from 
Education's 1995-96 Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS) study--a 
longitudinal study[Footnote 8] which followed the retention and degree 
completion of students from the time they enrolled in any postsecondary 
institution over a 6-year period--illustrates how graduation rates are 
understated due to this treatment of transfer students. Figure 2 shows 
the completion status of the nearly 1.4 million students who started 
their postsecondary education at a 4-year institution in 1995-96 (no 
transfers into 4-year institutions from 2-year institutions or 
certificate programs were included). Over one-quarter of the students 
who started at a 4-year institution transferred from their first 
institution to another institution. If only those who completed a 
bachelor's degree at the first institution of attendance are 
considered, the graduation rate is 51 percent. However, an additional 8 
percent transferred to another institution and completed a bachelor's 
degree within the 6-year period.

Figure 2: Status of Students 6 Years after Beginning in 1995-96 at a 4-
Year Institution:

[See PDF for image]

Note: GAO analysis of BPS 1995-96 data.

[End of figure]

Over Half of Students Enrolled in a 4-Year College or University 
Completed Their Degree within 6 Years, but Certain Factors Affect the 
Likelihood of Doing So:

Over half of students who enrolled in a 4-year college or university 
completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years of beginning postsecondary 
education, according to our analysis of BPS data. However, background 
characteristics such as being black or a first-generation college 
student[Footnote 9] were associated with lower rates of completion. 
Whereas students were more likely to complete a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years if, among other things, they had a more rigorous 
curriculum in high school, attended college full-time, were 
continuously enrolled, worked less than 20 hours per week, or did not 
transfer. After controlling for other factors, we found that 
disadvantaged students were no less likely to complete a bachelor's 
degree than other students. Notwithstanding this fact, as we have 
noted, students from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to 
attend college in the first place.

For various reasons, not all students who enroll in college will 
ultimately attain a degree. Based on Education's 1995-96 BPS study, 52 
percent of the estimated 1.8 million students who enrolled in a 4-year 
institution at some point during the subsequent 6-year period 
(including approximately 450,000 students who transferred from a less 
than 4-year institution[Footnote 10]) completed their bachelor's 
degree.[Footnote 11] Of the 48 percent of students who had not attained 
a bachelor's degree, nearly 14 percent were still enrolled in a 4-year 
institution at the end of the 6-year period, as shown in figure 3. See 
appendix II for completion rates by characteristics and appendix III 
for descriptions of the variables used in our analysis and a discussion 
of their levels of significance.

Figure 3: Bachelor's Degree Completion Status for Students Enrolled at 
4-year Institutions, 6 Years after Beginning College:

[See PDF for image]

Note: GAO analysis of Education's BPS 1995-96 data.

[End of figure]

Of the background characteristics we analyzed, being black or a first-
generation college student was associated with lower completion rates. 
Students with either of these characteristics were about a third less 
likely to complete college as students without these characteristics. 
The completion rate for black students was 38 percent compared with 55 
percent for both white and Asian students. As for students who had at 
least one parent with a bachelor's degree, their rate of completion was 
59 percent compared with 43 percent for students who were first-
generation college students. Being a first-generation student affected 
completion regardless of race. For example, first-generation white 
students were no more likely to complete college than first-generation 
black students.

Students who had a more rigorous high school curriculum and achieved 
better grades in high school and during the first year of college were 
more likely to complete college.[Footnote 12] About 80 percent of 
students who had the most rigorous high school curriculum completed 
college compared with 47 percent who had the least rigorous curriculum. 
Additionally, the higher the grades a student earned both in high 
school and in the first-year of college, the higher the likelihood of 
completion. Regarding first-year college grade point average, about 71 
percent of students who earned higher than a 3.0 had completed college 
compared with 51 percent who earned between a 2.0 and 3.0. Students 
were more than twice as likely to complete college for every one-point 
increase in first-year college grade point average.

Decisions students make regarding attendance, participation in 
collegiate clubs, and work had varying effects on completion. Students 
who were continuously enrolled during their studies were more than 6 
times as likely to graduate than students who experienced one or more 
breaks from enrollment[Footnote 13] Additionally, students who attended 
college full-time were more than twice as likely to graduate as 
students who attended part-time or some combination of part-time and 
full-time, all other factors equal. Students who reported participating 
in collegiate clubs were one and one-half times as likely to graduate 
as students who did not participate. Less than half of students 
reported such participation. Students who worked 20 or more hours per 
week were less likely to complete a bachelor's degree than students who 
did not work. However, working less than 20 hours per week was not 
associated with lower completion rates. Figure 4 illustrates bachelor's 
degree completion rates by the number of hours worked per week.

Figure 4: Bachelor's Degree Completion by Number of Hours Worked Per 
Week:

[See PDF for image]

Note: GAO analysis of Education's BPS 1995-96 data.

[End of figure]

Transferring between institutions was also associated with a lower 
likelihood of completion in that students who transferred were a little 
less than half as likely to complete as students who did not. About 69 
percent of students who started at a 4-year institution and did not 
transfer attained a bachelor's degree compared with 47 percent of 
students who started at a 4-year institution and transferred to another 
4-year institution. The rate of completion for students who started at 
a 2-year institution and transferred to a 4-year institution was 
roughly half of those who started at a 4-year institution and did not 
transfer.[Footnote 14] Figure 5 illustrates the bachelor's degree 
completion rate after 6 years according to type of institution first 
attended and transfer status.

Figure 5: Bachelor's Degree Completion by Type of First Institution 
Attended and Transfer Status:

[See PDF for image]

Note: GAO analysis of Education's BPS 1995-96 data.

[End of figure]

After controlling for other factors, we found that disadvantaged 
students were no less likely to complete a bachelor's degree than other 
students. However, as we have noted, students from disadvantaged 
backgrounds are less likely to attend college in the first place.

States and 4-Year Institutions Had Various Methods to Foster Bachelor's 
Degree Completion:

While states and 4-year colleges and universities are employing various 
methods to foster bachelor's degree completion, information on the 
effectiveness of these efforts is limited. Over two-thirds of the 
states responding to our survey reported having at least one effort in 
place to foster bachelor's degree completion. Half the states indicated 
additional actions they would like to take to foster bachelor's degree 
completion, but cited state budget constraints as a factor preventing 
them from moving forward. As a way to foster bachelor's degree 
completion, 4-year colleges and universities we visited were engaged in 
activities designed to improve the learning experience for students and 
strengthen support of students. In some cases, officials attributed 
increases in retention to their efforts to foster completion.

States Are Using a Variety of Efforts to Foster Bachelor's Degree 
Completion, but Would Like to Do More:

Thirty-four of the 48 states responding to our survey, including the 5 
states we visited--Florida, Maryland, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia--
reported having at least one effort in place to foster bachelor's 
degree completion. Most of these states reported efforts that fell into 
three broad categories: (1) efforts to increase the overall number of 
college graduates by increasing the number of students entering 
postsecondary education; (2) efforts to help colleges improve their 
performance in retaining and graduating students; and (3) efforts to 
help individual students remain in college and to encourage timely 
completion for these students. While states reported that almost half 
of their approaches have been evaluated, the instances where states 
provided specific evaluation results were limited. Half of the states 
indicated that there were additional actions they would like to take to 
foster bachelor's degree completion, but cited state budget constraints 
as a factor preventing them from moving forward.

States Seek to Increase the Number of Students Entering Postsecondary 
Education:

Nineteen states have efforts to increase the number of bachelor's 
degrees awarded by increasing the number of students enrolling in 
postsecondary education. This approach includes efforts such as 
increasing the number of students ready for college, educating students 
and parents about college requirements and costs, and providing 
financial assistance to help cover college costs.

Increasing student readiness for college. Some states have efforts to 
improve the academic readiness of students so that more students have 
the opportunity to attend college. Kentucky has a P-16 partnership that 
focuses on aligning standards between high school and college to ensure 
students are academically prepared for college.[Footnote 15] Kentucky 
reported in our survey that the state had aligned high school 
graduation standards with college admissions standards by creating a 
single high school curriculum for all students. The state has adopted 
an online diagnostic test designed for sophomores and juniors to test 
their readiness for college mathematics in time to improve these skills 
and avoid remedial placement in college. Oregon has implemented 
proficiency-based admissions standards that specify certain knowledge 
and skills students should demonstrate for admission to its public 
universities. The standards are intended to provide more accurate 
information about student readiness for college and encourage students 
to choose challenging coursework that will prepare them for college. 
Oklahoma uses assessments in the eighth and tenth grades to provide 
students feedback on their progress in preparing for college. In 
addition to student feedback, colleges use assessment results to 
improve curricula and instruction. The state reported that since this 
effort began 10 years ago there have been increases in the number of 
high school students taking college preparatory courses, particularly 
among black students.

Educating students and parents about college. To increase the numbers 
of students enrolling in postsecondary education and ultimately 
completing a bachelor's degree, some states are focusing on raising 
awareness among students and parents about the benefits and costs of 
postsecondary education. Texas, for example, has a plan that centers on 
counseling students and their parents about what is necessary to enroll 
in postsecondary education. The state provides information on the 
benefits of postsecondary education, the academic preparation necessary 
for enrolling, and the costs of attending, including information about 
available financial aid and how to qualify. These efforts are designed 
to support its goal of increasing its enrollment from just under 1 
million students in 2000 by adding 500,000 new college students by 
2015.

Providing financial aid for college. Financial assistance is another 
way states seek to increase the number of students enrolling in 
college. Several states have programs that provide monetary assistance 
to academically qualified students based on academic merit, financial 
need, or some combination of the two. For example, Oklahoma provides 
free tuition at public institutions for students whose families have 
incomes below $50,000 and meet other requirements, including completing 
a prescribed high school course of study with at least a 2.5 grade 
point average. Oklahoma reported that the performance of students in 
this program has exceeded that of the general student population. 
Another example is the West Virginia Higher Education Grant Program, 
which provides assistance to academically qualified, but needy students 
who attend college in West Virginia or Pennsylvania. West Virginia's 
evaluation of the program revealed that grant recipients had higher 
graduation rates than students receiving other types of financial aid 
and students who received no financial aid.

State Efforts to Help Colleges Improve Their Performance in Retaining 
and Graduating Students:

Many states reported efforts to improve the performance of colleges in 
the areas of retaining and graduating their students. Such efforts 
include promoting accountability for colleges by collecting and, in 
some instances, publishing retention and graduation rates. States also 
promote accountability by tying funding--mainly for public colleges--to 
performance. States are also sharing information with colleges about 
retention strategies to foster increased rates of bachelor's degree 
completion.

Promoting accountability for colleges. In order to hold colleges and 
universities accountable for their performance in the areas of student 
retention and graduation, states must first collect consistent 
information from these institutions. Three-fourths of the states that 
responded to our survey reported that they collect data that allow them 
to calculate and track retention and graduation rates for individual 
institutions and across the state. Specifically, 24 of these states 
reported that they collect enrollment and graduation data on individual 
students from public institutions only, and 9 states reported 
collecting these data from both public and private institutions in 
their states.[Footnote 16] Having these data allows the state to 
calculate retention and graduation rates for each institution and the 
system as a whole. Additionally, because the institutions provide the 
state with individual student records, the state can track the 
educational progress of a student who attends more than one 
institution. This enables the states to include transfer students in 
their graduation rate. The data are limited to student transfers within 
the state.

Eighteen states reported that they promote accountability by publishing 
the performance of their colleges and universities on measures, 
including retention and graduation rates because some officials believe 
that this motivates colleges to improve their performance in those 
areas. In Virginia, a state that uses multiple accountability measures, 
officials told us that institutions are not compared with other 
institutions in the state with respect to the various performance 
measures. Rather, each institution works with the state to identify a 
national peer group of institutions with similar characteristics with 
which to be compared. In this way, institutions can see whether their 
performance is on par with institutions that have similar missions and 
serve similar types of students. In addition to measuring retention and 
graduation rates, Virginia requires its public institutions to measure 
and report on certain student learning outcomes to demonstrate the 
value of each institution to its students.

Nine states reported accountability efforts that have financial 
implications for colleges and universities to encourage them to 
graduate their students in a timely manner. These efforts include 
linking a portion of state funding to an institution's performance on 
multiple measures or making incentive payments to institutions based on 
their performance in the areas of retention and completion. Tennessee 
has a performance-funding program in which institutions earn about 5 
percent of their state funding for performance on multiple indicators, 
such as retention and graduation. In another variation, Pennsylvania 
provides a financial bonus to any 4-year institution in the state, 
whether public or private, that graduates more than 40 percent of in-
state students within 4 years.[Footnote 17]

Sharing retention strategies. Five states reported efforts to improve 
institutional performance by sharing information among state and 
college officials about strategies to help students remain in college. 
For example, the Oregon University System formed a retention work group 
to provide a forum for developing and sharing campus initiatives to 
enhance retention. The group has used annual systemwide and 
institutional data on retention and graduation to identify areas that 
need to be addressed to increase retention. The group looks at 
retention efforts that seem to be working on specific campuses and 
shares information with other campuses. As a result of its work with 
tribal governments to increase retention of Native American students, 
the system developed a Native American resource guide that includes 
information about topics such as outreach and retention efforts of 
colleges, financial assistance, childcare programs, and community 
college transfer procedures. Officials in Oregon attribute the 
increases in graduation rates at most campuses in the system to the 
work of this group.

State Efforts to Help Individual Students Remain in College and to 
Encourage Timely Completion:

Twenty-two states reported efforts directly aimed at helping students 
remain in college and encouraging timely completion for these students. 
Many such state-level programs provided funding to support efforts 
carried out by individual colleges, such as programs that provide 
academic and social support directly to students. Other efforts seek to 
ease student transfers among colleges, utilize technology to help 
students complete their degree, or include financial incentives to 
encourage students to complete their bachelor's degrees in a timely 
manner.

Funding college programs that provide support services for students. 
Several states provide funding for college-run programs designed to 
support students in need of assistance. For example, through its Access 
and Success program, the Maryland Higher Education Commission provides 
funds to colleges and universities[Footnote 18] for the operation of 
programs to increase retention and graduation rates of their 
undergraduates. The colleges have used these funds to, among other 
things, operate summer bridge programs that acclimate students to 
college the summer before they enroll and provide advising, tutoring, 
and counseling services to students who are already enrolled. New 
York's Collegiate Science and Technology Entry Program, aimed at 
increasing the number of low-income students who pursue careers in 
math, science, technology, or health-related fields, provides funding 
for services such as enriched science and math instruction, graduate 
school test preparation, and career awareness.

Facilitating transfer among institutions. Seven states reported efforts 
to facilitate transfer from one college to another as an approach to 
foster bachelor's degree completion. Officials in Florida told us that 
establishing policies that help students transfer from community 
colleges to 4-year institutions was important because the community 
college system is considered the point of entry for most college 
students in the state. Florida has common course numbering for all 
public institutions in the state and requires public institutions to 
accept transfer credits for any course they offer that a student 
completes at another institution. Officials told us this policy 
prevents students from needlessly duplicating coursework, saving both 
the state and students money, along with reducing the time it takes to 
complete a degree. Florida also has a statewide policy that guarantees 
admission to the state university system as a junior for any student 
who completes an Associate of Arts degree. Officials in Florida told us 
that without these policies it would be difficult for community college 
students or other transfer students to complete their degrees. They 
acknowledged, however, that these policies could be at odds with 
encouraging timely degree completion because they make it easier for 
students to exit and reenter postsecondary education.

Using distance learning. A few states reported using technology to 
enhance access and make it easier for students to complete a degree. 
Kentucky, for instance, has a virtual university and library that 
offers credit courses and academic advising for those who work or have 
family situations that may not allow them to come to campus. This also 
aids on-campus students who need greater course availability. Students 
taking advantage of these electronic offerings have grown from fewer 
than 300 students in 1999 to nearly 10,000 in 2002.

Using financial incentives to encourage students' timely completion. 
Some states have financial aid programs to encourage timely degree 
completion. These programs may have time limits and/or may require 
students to earn a minimum number of credits each year for 
participation. For example, the University of Alaska Scholars Program, 
targeted at the top 10 percent of high school graduates, offers 
financial aid for eight semesters provided that the scholar remains in 
good standing. Other states have programs that impose financial 
penalties if students repeat coursework or take too long to graduate. 
Florida's in-state students must pay the full tuition rate--without 
state subsidies--for any courses they repeat more than once. Utah 
requires that students who enroll for credits in excess of 135 percent 
of what is usually needed for a degree pay higher tuition for the 
excess credits. Texas passed a law designed to encourage students to 
minimize the number of courses they take to complete their degree. 
State residents who complete their coursework and degrees in the state 
with no more than three attempted hours in excess of the minimum 
required for graduation are eligible to apply for a $1,000 tuition 
rebate from their institution. Officials told us that about 1,500 
students received tuition rebates in the 2001-2002 academic year.

Half the States Would Like to Do More to Foster Bachelor's Degree 
Completion:

Twenty-four states listed at least one area in which they would like to 
do more to increase bachelor's degree completion rates. Many of these 
desired actions dealt with increasing financial aid for students and 
increased financial support to colleges to help their students succeed. 
Some wanted to offer special funding for colleges that perform well in 
certain areas related to retention and college completion. Others 
wanted to improve preparation of high school graduates for college or 
improve transitions from one level of education to another. Almost 
without exception, the states cited state budget constraints as a 
significant factor preventing them from moving forward with these 
actions.

Four-Year Institutions Foster Completion by Improving Learning and 
Support of Students:

Our visits to 11 colleges and universities in five states showed that 
initiatives in these institutions cluster around two main approaches to 
foster bachelor's degree completion: (1) enhancing the learning 
experience by creating smaller learning communities that foster greater 
connections to the institution and (2) strengthening support of 
students to promote academic success. In some cases, officials 
attributed increases in retention rates or higher retention rates for 
certain groups of students to these approaches.

Enhancing the Learning Experience:

Nearly all of the colleges and universities we visited were engaged in 
efforts designed to enhance the learning experience for students, 
primarily by creating smaller communities that foster greater 
connections to the institution. These approaches aim to increase 
students' engagement in academics and provide them with a network of 
faculty and other students who can support them academically and 
socially. These approaches are employed both in and out of the 
classroom, and most focus on easing the transition from high school to 
college for first-year college students.

Linking courses. Several of the colleges we visited are trying to 
enhance the learning environment by giving students a small classroom 
experience that will provide them greater opportunities to connect with 
faculty and their peers, not unlike the experience they would have had 
in high school. For example, Texas A & M University at Corpus Christi, 
a Hispanic Serving Institution,[Footnote 19] requires all full-time, 
first-year students to enroll in learning communities--clusters of 
three or four classes in which the course content is linked. Students 
are typically enrolled in a large lecture course with 150 or more 
students and two other courses with 25 or fewer students from the 
lecture course. In addition to covering course content, instructors 
help students learn how to succeed in their first year of college, 
helping with topics such as study skills on an as needed basis.

Portland State University provides its students smaller learning 
communities in the freshman and sophomore years through its University 
Studies program. According to officials there, the university developed 
the program in 1994 to address disappointing retention rates from the 
freshman to sophomore year. Officials told us that, because few 
students live on campus, the university has to create opportunities for 
students to connect to the campus via the classroom. The required 
freshman and sophomore courses are comprised of 35-40 students who meet 
as a whole with faculty and in smaller mentor sessions, led by upper-
level or graduate students. Officials told us they think the upper-
level students who serve as peer mentors for the freshman classes are 
particularly helpful for many first-generation college students who 
attend the university and may find college more difficult to navigate.

Officials at both universities reported positive outcomes for these 
learning programs. Specifically, at Texas A & M students withdrew from 
the large lecture courses at lower rates and had higher grades in these 
courses when taken as part of the learning community. They also 
attributed retention rates for first-year minority students that are on 
par with other first-year students to the learning communities. At 
Portland State, officials attributed increases in retention from the 
freshman to sophomore year, as well as from the sophomore to junior 
year, to its University Studies program.

Using service learning. Connecting classroom learning to the community 
is another approach colleges are taking to enhance the learning 
experience and create a sense of belonging. The Regional Ecosystem 
Applied Learning Corps was established in 1997 through partnership 
between Southern Oregon University in Ashland, Oregon, and community 
and government organizations. This AmeriCorps[Footnote 20] program 
engages students in the classroom and through community-based projects 
dealing with land management issues. One student, who went to college 
directly from high school but left after 2 years, told us that the 
Regional Ecosystem Applied Learning Corps played a large part in his 
decision to finish his bachelor's degree because it allowed him to 
connect his studies to the community while working. He noted that it 
was difficult to return after a 4-year break because college life felt 
unfamiliar to him.

Providing residential learning opportunities. For those students who 
live on campus, some colleges are aiming to improve the learning 
experience by enhancing educational opportunities available to students 
in the residence halls. Florida State University in Tallahassee, 
Florida, instituted its first "living-learning community" in a 
residence hall in the fall of 1997 as a way to provide freshmen with a 
smaller community that would facilitate connections with faculty and 
students. An official at the institution told us that the size of the 
institution is an obstacle in retaining students because it is easy for 
students at a large research university with over 36,000 students to 
feel lost. Students live in a residence hall together and have to take 
at least one class in the building. Required weekly meetings help 
students navigate services available to them on the campus. Florida 
State reported that 5 years after the freshman class of 1997 entered 
the institution, 77 percent of students who participated in the first 
living-learning community had graduated, while the graduation rates of 
other on-campus students and those living off campus was around 60 
percent.[Footnote 21]

Promoting Scholarship. The University of Maryland-Baltimore County 
established the Meyerhoff Scholars Program to increase the numbers of 
minorities pursuing doctoral study in math, science, engineering, and 
computer science.[Footnote 22] In addition to the academic 
requirements, the scholars participate in activities designed to expose 
them to scientific careers, such as field trips and research 
experiences. University officials credit the program with much of the 
success the university has had with minority students--the 6-year 
graduation rate is higher for black students than for white. Officials 
attribute part of this success to the role Meyerhoff scholars play in 
motivating other minority students at the institution.

Strengthening Support of Students:

All of the colleges and universities we visited were engaged in efforts 
to strengthen support of their students to ensure their academic 
success and retention. Colleges support their students by providing 
services such as academic advising, financial aid counseling, and 
academic support services such as tutoring. Colleges also provide 
supports designed to ease the transition from high school or community 
college to a 4-year institution. In some cases, colleges are changing 
how they deliver support services to ensure the needs of students are 
met. For example, colleges may colocate many of their support services 
to make it easy for students to access them.

Colocating support services. During our site visits, we found that 
several of the institutions we visited are colocating support services 
to make it easier for students to access those services. In 2000, 
Prairie View A & M University, a historically black institution in 
Prairie View, Texas, implemented a comprehensive support system for 
freshmen. By groups of 100-125 students, freshmen are assigned to 1 of 
12 academic teams. These teams consist of a professional adviser, 
residence hall staff, and a faculty fellow. The groups generally live 
together in residence halls close to all the services they might need, 
such as advising, academic support services such as tutoring, and 
financial aid counseling. Advisers work closely with the learning 
community manager and two community assistants, professional staff who 
reside in each hall. Officials think having advisers and residence hall 
staff working together provides many opportunities to intervene with 
students in time to get them connected with the services they need.

Consolidating offices. Some of the institutions have also made 
organizational changes to ensure that most of the offices providing 
support to students are working together. The University of Central 
Florida, for example, merged the student affairs office with the 
enrollment management office and, according to officials, having this 
one office responsible for recruitment and retention ensures that a 
wide range of efforts can be coordinated across the cycle of student 
life.

Improving academic advising. Most of the colleges we visited had made 
changes to improve academic advising services provided to students with 
the idea that students need consistent and accurate advisement to stay 
on the path to graduation. To respond to student complaints that 
advisers in their majors did not know enough about general graduation 
requirements, Florida State University centrally hired a total of 40 
full-time advisers to work in the individual departments. According to 
one official, when individual departments hired advisers, the amount of 
time spent advising students declined over time as other 
responsibilities were assigned to those advisers. Retaining central 
control of the advisers ensures that advising is consistently available 
to students and that students receive advisement on both departmental 
and nondepartmental issues. Portland State University developed a 
system that allows students to stay abreast of where they are in terms 
of graduating. Advisers can use the system to help students develop a 
course plan and identify any remaining coursework they need for 
graduation.

Using proactive intervention strategies. Many of the institutions we 
visited have approaches designed to proactively intervene with students 
in an effort to retain them to graduation. Several of the institutions 
reported that they have a warning system in place to identify students 
whose mid-term grades or cumulative grade point averages drop below a 
certain level. These students are contacted and encouraged to meet with 
an adviser and to make them aware of the different services available 
to help them. Contacting students by telephone is an approach some of 
the smaller institutions we visited employ to intervene with students. 
For example, Southern Oregon University, in Ashland, Oregon, is 
proactive in calling students who are not attending classes based on 
faculty reports. To improve its 6-year graduation rate, Coppin State 
College, an historically black institution, in Baltimore, Maryland, has 
been contacting those students who have not pre-registered for the fall 
semester, but are within reach of graduating within 6 years of when 
they started. Officials believe calling students lets them know that 
someone at the college is interested in them as an individual and 
reinforces their commitment to return.

Providing academic support services. Most institutions cited academic 
support services as an approach to retaining students. Examples of 
these services include tutoring, walk-in centers that provide 
assistance with areas like writing and math, and programs that support 
special populations such as low-income and first-generation college 
students. Over half of the institutions we visited provide these types 
of services to students before they have enrolled in college to ease 
the transition from high school to college. In these summer bridge 
programs, students typically take a couple of courses, along with 
seminars that cover topics designed to help them succeed in college, 
such as time management and study skills. Generally, fewer than 100 
students participate in these programs, which allows the institution to 
provide more intensive and personalized services. Institutions 
generally reported that the retention rate from the freshman to 
sophomore year for these students is comparable to or higher than the 
general population. A couple of institutions reported higher graduation 
rates for these students, but some officials noted that their 6-year 
graduation rates may lag because some of these students take longer to 
graduate.

Easing the transition for transfer students. Some institutions are 
engaged in efforts to encourage and ease the transition of students 
from a 2-year institution to a 4-year institution. For example, the 
University of Central Florida has forged relationships with area 
community colleges and has established satellite campuses at community 
colleges in Orlando and the surrounding area. The university's 
satellite campuses are designed for those students for whom 
transferring to a 4-year college may be difficult because of work and 
family commitments. The university has dedicated faculty and staff at 
these satellite campuses to ensure students receive the same education 
and services they would at the main campus. Advisers who travel among 
the satellite campuses ensure that students can obtain academic 
advising without traveling to the main campus.

Education Has Programs to Foster College Completion, but No Systematic 
Efforts to Identify and Disseminate Information on Promising Practices:

Education fosters bachelor's degree completion through programs that 
provide financial and academic support to students, but little is known 
about the effects of these programs on college completion. Education 
has also established goals for increasing college completion and 
strengthening the accountability of colleges. While Education has some 
dissemination efforts--mainly through its academic support programs and 
through its Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education 
program--it does not have systematic efforts in place to identify and 
share promising practices in the areas of retention and graduation with 
states and colleges that are looking for strategies to help them better 
retain their students.

Programs Provide Financial Resources and Academic Support to Students, 
but Little Is Known about Their Effectiveness:

In order to help students pay for a college degree, the federal student 
aid programs provide billions of dollars to help students finance 
college with the objective that students will complete their programs. 
The Federal Family Education Loan Program and the William D. Ford 
Federal Direct Loan Program, two major federal student loan programs 
authorized in Title IV of the Higher Education Act, together provided 
student borrowers with about 9 million new loans totaling $35 billion 
in fiscal year 2001. The Pell Grant Program, designed to help the 
neediest undergraduate students, expended $8 billion to provide grants 
to nearly 4 million students in 2000-2001. To be eligible for these 
programs, students must be enrolled in a degree-or certificate-granting 
program. While Education has made these funds available, we reported in 
September 2002 that little information is available on the relative 
effectiveness of Title IV grants and loans in promoting postsecondary 
attendance, choice, and completion, or their impact on college 
costs.[Footnote 23] Among other things, we noted that data and 
methodological challenges make it difficult to isolate the impact of 
grants and loans.

Education administers three academic support programs aimed at students 
who are low-income, first-generation, or disabled that have college 
completion as a primary goal. Student Support Services provides 
academic support to students at the college level, while the Upward 
Bound program and Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for 
Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) serve students before they enter 
college.[Footnote 24] GEAR UP differs from Student Support Services and 
Upward Bound, which identify and invite individual students to 
participate. GEAR UP serves an entire grade of students at 
participating schools beginning no later than the seventh grade and 
follows them through high school. According to program officials, the 
program begins no later than the seventh grade because high school is 
too late to begin working with students on the preparation that leads 
to college. Table 1 provides an overview of the three programs.

Table 1: Overview of Education Programs That Have College Completion as 
a Primary Goal:

Program: TRIO Student Support Services; Purpose: Increase graduation 
and retention rates; Target population: Low-income, first-generation, 
or disabled college students; Services provided: Counseling, tutoring, 
supplemental grants for qualifying students; FY 2002 funding: (in 
millions): $263; Students served: 198,551.

Program: TRIO Upward Bound; Purpose: Increase postsecondary enrollment 
and success.[A]; Target population: High school students who are from 
low-income families or from families where neither parent has a college 
degree; Services provided: Instruction required in subjects such as 
math, science, and composition. Services such as counseling, tutoring, 
mentoring, assistance completing financial aid and college entrance 
applications; information on postsecondary opportunities, and work 
study positions; FY 2002 funding: (in millions): $264; Students 
served: 56,324.

Program: GEAR UP; Purpose: Increase the number of low-income students 
who are prepared to enter and succeed in postsecondary education; 
Target population: Entire grades of students at participating low-
income schools starting no later than the seventh grade; Services 
provided: Relies on participating schools and partners to provide 
services that promote academic preparation and an understanding of 
college costs, provide professional development, and continuously build 
capacity to sustain projects beyond the grant term. Also provides 
scholarships for participants who enroll in postsecondary education; 
FY 2002 funding: (in millions): $285; Students served: 1,236,606.

Source: Department of Education.

[A] Education interprets success as graduating from institutions of 
postsecondary education.

[End of table]

In 2001, Student Support Services added a financial assistance 
component as a tool to increase retention and graduation of student 
participants. Specifically, Student Support Services permits the use of 
grant aid for current Student Support Services participants who are 
already receiving federal Pell Grants. These funds are intended to 
increase retention and graduation by reducing the amount of financial 
need or money eligible participants have to borrow in their first 2 
years of study.[Footnote 25]

Student Support Services is the only program for which information on 
the effectiveness of the program on college completion is available. 
Specifically, a preliminary evaluation of the program found that 
participants had higher bachelor's degree completion rates as compared 
to a control group of similar students not receiving those services. 
However, it is too early to determine the impact of the grant aid 
component of the program, given that it was first implemented in the 
2001-2002 academic year. According to Education officials, it is also 
too early to determine the impact of Upward Bound and GEAR UP on 
college completion because students are not expected to have completed 
college yet.[Footnote 26]

Education Has Identified Priorities for Increasing College Completion 
and Strengthening Accountability of Institutions:

In its 2002-2007 strategic plan, Education has established goals of 
reducing the gaps in college participation and completion among certain 
student populations and increasing completion rates overall. Education 
has identified some strategies for meeting these goals, such as 
focusing on improving the K-12 system, improving the readiness of low-
income and minority students for college, and improving the 
effectiveness of support services for low-income and minority students. 
The performance measure--institutional graduation rates--Education 
uses for assessing its progress toward the goal of increasing 
completion rates understates the percentage of students who actually 
complete bachelor's degrees, because the measure does not account for 
students who transfer and complete their degrees at institutions 
different from where they started. However, this is the only 
information available on an annual basis. Other longitudinal studies, 
such as BPS, provide more information but are costly to administer. 
Education has not established other performance measures for assessing 
progress toward its college completion goal.

Education has also established a goal for strengthening accountability 
of postsecondary institutions in its strategic plan. Specifically, 
Education is looking to ensure that colleges are graduating their 
students in a timely manner. Education thinks making information on 
student achievement and attainment available to the public is one way 
to hold institutions accountable for their performance because 
prospective students can use this information to make informed choices 
about where to attend college. Education has begun to discuss this 
issue with the higher education community and asked the community for 
ideas on how to strengthen accountability of postsecondary 
institutions. As part of its efforts, Education has held panel 
discussions with student financial aid experts, state officials, and 
business leaders, among other participants, about improving 
accountability. Additionally, Education is considering "performance-
based grants" to provide incentives to colleges for timely graduation. 
In one state, however, where this was tried, there were concerns that 
the grant created perverse incentives to increase graduation rates, 
such as reducing the number of credits required for graduation.

Education Has Some Evaluation and Dissemination Efforts:

Education has some efforts to disseminate information on retention and 
completion; however, it does not have a systematic effort in place to 
identify and disseminate promising practices in these areas. Education 
has commissioned studies on the factors that affect college completion, 
and it has some evaluations on student retention--for example, one 
study dealing with retention strategies for students with disabilities 
and one on Hispanic students. It has not, however, systematically 
conducted research to determine what strategies have been effective in 
helping colleges and universities retain their students. Additionally, 
Education has some retention and completion dissemination efforts in 
place. For example, GEAR UP and TRIO grantees have the opportunity to 
share information with each other at annual conferences organized by 
private groups. Education facilitates information sharing through the 
TRIO Dissemination Partnership Program, which provides funding for TRIO 
grantees with promising practices to work with other institutions and 
community-based organizations that serve low-income and first-
generation college students but do not have TRIO grants. The program is 
intended to increase the impact of TRIO programs by reaching more low-
income, first-generation college students. Only a small number of 
grantees are disseminating information through this program--in fiscal 
year 2002, Education provided $3.4 million to 17 grantees. In these 
instances, only institutions and organizations that formally partner 
with grantees are likely to have the opportunity to learn about 
promising practices. Furthermore, promising practices that are employed 
by institutions outside these programs are not captured.

According to agency officials, another effort in which dissemination 
occurs is within the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary 
Education's Comprehensive Program. This 30-year old program seeks to 
help improve access and quality of postsecondary institutions by 
funding small promising practices grants. According to an official of 
the Comprehensive Program, the grants are for a 3-year period, with an 
average annual award amount of between $50,000 and $200,000. Last year, 
the program awarded $31 million for grant activities--including new 
awards of about $10 million. The grants cover all aspects of 
postsecondary improvement, and within the areas of retention and 
completion there are grants for, among other things, creating learning 
communities, reviewing remedial and introductory courses to find more 
effective approaches, and developing innovative methods of delivering 
support services. Dissemination efforts include a searchable project 
database on its Web site; four published volumes of promising practices 
(the most recent publication was in 2000); specific dissemination 
grants expressly aimed at replicating particularly promising practices 
for retention and completion; dissemination plans built into the actual 
grants; and annual meetings where project information is shared. Each 
grant has an evaluation component and the Comprehensive Program is 
currently being reviewed for, among other things, the efficacy of these 
evaluation efforts.

Conclusions:

As policymakers and others consider what is necessary to ensure 
accountability in higher education, the issue of how to measure 
performance becomes more important. While some states have used 
graduation rates to promote accountability, such measures may not fully 
reflect an institution's performance. Graduation rates do not capture 
differences in mission, selectivity, programmatic offerings, or student 
learning outcomes. Nor do they account for another goal of higher 
education, increasing participation. In other words, a college or 
university could have a low rate of completion, but still be providing 
access. As policymakers consider ways to hold colleges and universities 
accountable for their performance, it may be possible to use multiple 
measures that capture an institution's performance in regard to how 
well its students are educated through the use of student learning 
outcomes, in addition to its performance in graduating them.

States, institutions of higher education, and Education are engaged in 
a variety of efforts to retain and graduate students. Education does 
have some efforts to evaluate and disseminate information related to 
retention and completion; however, it does not systematically identify 
and disseminate information on those practices that hold promise for 
increasing retention and graduation rates across all sectors of higher 
education. Such information could benefit colleges and universities 
that are looking for new approaches to better serve their students and 
seek to avoid duplicating unsuccessful efforts. As policymakers 
consider new ways to hold postsecondary institutions accountable for 
retaining and graduating their students, it becomes more important to 
widely disseminate promising practices in these areas. Having Education 
identify and disseminate promising practices in the areas of retention 
and graduation would help ensure that all colleges and universities 
have access to the same level of information and can readily draw on 
those practices they think might help them better serve their students.

Recommendations:

As Education moves forward with its plan to hold colleges and 
universities accountable for their performance in graduating their 
students, we recommend that the Secretary of Education consider 
multiple measures that would help account for other goals of higher 
education, such as increasing participation, as well as differences in 
mission, selectivity, and programmatic offerings of postsecondary 
institutions. Education should work with states and colleges to 
determine what would be most helpful for strengthening the 
accountability of institutions and ensuring positive outcomes for 
students.

We also recommend that the Secretary of Education take steps to 
identify and disseminate information about promising practices in the 
areas of retention and graduation across all sectors of postsecondary 
education.

Agency Comments:

In written comments on a draft of this report, the Department of 
Education agreed with our recommendations but had some concerns about 
certain aspects of the draft report. Education commented that we could 
have included trend data on, for example, whether retention and 
completion are increasing or decreasing. While such information might 
have been interesting to include, we were specifically focusing on the 
current status of college completion. Education suggested in its letter 
that we could have used its two BPS studies for such an analysis. It 
would not be appropriate to use these two studies for identifying 
trends because they covered different time periods. For example, using 
the first BPS study--which tracked students for 5 years--Education 
reported that 53 percent of students who began at a 4-year institution 
in 1989-90 earned a bachelor's degree. Using the second BPS study--
which tracked students for 6 years--we reported that 59 percent of 
students who began at a 4-year institution in 1995-96 earned a 
bachelor's degree. While the increase in graduation rates might have 
resulted from any number of factors, the most likely reason is because 
an additional year was included in the calculation.

The Department correctly noted that we did not address student 
financial aid in our analysis. We have addressed this issue in our 
discussion of the report's objectives, scope, and methodology section 
(see app. I).

With respect to Education's comment about how the effects of being 
disadvantaged are accounted for in our analysis, we agree that 
performing a more sophisticated analysis to account for the indirect 
effects of being disadvantaged on completion may have yielded a more 
complete picture of college completion. However, our analysis was 
designed to provide overall descriptive information on completion rates 
while taking into account certain differences among students.

Education had concerns that our report did not sufficiently recognize 
the role of its Graduation Rate Survey (GRS). While we did not directly 
discuss GRS, we did explain the legislative requirements regarding 
institutional reporting of graduation rates. Education developed GRS to 
help institutions comply with this requirement. Additionally, with 
respect to GRS, we sought clarification of Education's statement that 
GRS is the basis for state efforts to track graduation rates; however, 
officials did not provide us with information that would support this 
statement. In looking at this issue, it is clear that the type of data 
states collect is different from the GRS data. Specifically, GRS 
collects only summary data from institutions on graduation rates, 
whereas by using data on individual students, the states we highlighted 
have the ability to not only calculate graduation rates but to track 
student transfers across the state. Furthermore, officials in two 
states we visited told us that they have had the ability to track 
individual students for over 10 years, long before information from the 
GRS would have been available--making it impossible for GRS to be the 
basis of these systems as Education suggested. We also believe that 
Education's statement that we do not acknowledge the limitations of the 
state systems with respect to tracking student transfers is inaccurate. 
Our draft clearly stated that tracking is limited to student transfers 
within the state.

Finally, with regard to Education's concern that our report does not 
recognize its efforts to identify and disseminate information on 
retention and completion, we believe Education may have misunderstood 
our discussion about their efforts. We clearly highlight Education's 
efforts to identify and disseminate information through studies on the 
factors that affect retention and completion. However, we conclude that 
Education does not systematically identify and disseminate information 
on those practices that hold promise for increasing retention and 
graduation rates across all sectors of higher education.

Education also provided technical comments, which we incorporated where 
appropriate. Education's comments appear in appendix IV.

As arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce its 
contents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 
30 days from its issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this 
report to appropriate congressional committees, the Secretary of 
Education, and other interested parties. Copies will also be made 
available to others upon request. In addition, this report will be 
available at no charge on GAO's Web site at http://www.gao.gov.

If you have any questions about this report, please contact me on (202) 
512-8403. Other contacts and acknowledgments are listed in appendix V.

Cornelia M. Ashby 
Director, 
Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues:

Signed by Cornelia M. Ashby:

[End of section]

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:

You asked us to determine (1) the extent to which students--including 
those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds--who enroll in a 4-year 
college or university complete a bachelor's degree and the factors that 
affect bachelor's degree completion; (2) what states and 4-year 
colleges and universities are doing to foster bachelor's degree 
completion and what is known about the effectiveness of these efforts; 
and (3) what the U.S. Department of Education is doing to foster 
bachelor's degree completion.

To determine the extent to which students--including those from lower 
socioeconomic backgrounds--who enroll in a 4-year college or university 
complete a bachelor's degree and to identify the factors that affect 
bachelor's degree completion, we analyzed Education's 1995-96 Beginning 
Postsecondary Students (BPS) study. BPS is a longitudinal 
study[Footnote 27] that followed the retention and degree completion of 
students from the time they enrolled in any postsecondary institution 
over a 6-year period. It is based on a sample of students who were 
enrolled in postsecondary education for the first time in 1995-1996 and 
participated in Education's 1995-96 National Postsecondary Student Aid 
Study (NPSAS:96). NPSAS:96 consisted of a nationally representative 
sample of all students enrolled in postsecondary education during the 
1995-96 academic year. Information for NPSAS:96 was obtained from more 
than 830 postsecondary institutions for approximately 44,500 
undergraduate and 11,200 graduate and first-professional students. The 
sample of undergraduates represented about 16.7 million students, 
including about 3 million first-time beginning students, who were 
enrolled at some time between July 1, 1995 and June 30, 1996. This BPS 
study began with a sample of approximately 12,000 students who were 
identified in NPSAS: 96 as having entered postsecondary education for 
the first time in 1995-1996. Education followed up with these students 
via computer-assisted telephone interviews in both 1998 and 2001. In 
addition to obtaining data from students through these interviews, data 
were obtained from other sources, including institutions and the 
Educational Testing Service, which administers standardized tests, such 
as the SAT I and Advanced Placement tests. Education has published 
reports that provide information about student enrollment and the rates 
of persistence, transfer, and degree attainment for students.

For our purposes, we analyzed a subset of these data. We only included 
students who in 1995-96 were enrolled in a 4-year institution or were 
enrolled at another type of institution, but transferred to a 4-year 
institution at some point during the 6-year period. Our analysis 
excluded other types of students, such as community college students 
who did not transfer to a 4-year institution because the focus of our 
study was on bachelor's degree completion. We first grouped students 
into three categories: those who, after 6 years (1) had completed a 
bachelor's degree; (2) had not completed a bachelor's degree, but were 
still enrolled in a 4-year institution; and (3) had not completed a 
bachelor's degree and were no longer enrolled in a 4-year institution. 
We then calculated the percentage of our population in each group 
overall and by various characteristics relating to personal background, 
academic preparation and performance, college attendance and work 
patterns, and social integration as shown in appendix II.

We focused on factors that affect whether or not students completed a 
bachelor's degree by the end of the 6-year period and looked at the 
effect of the various characteristics mentioned above on college 
completion. We did not include student aid variables in our analysis. 
Resource constraints and the timing of the release of the BPS data made 
it difficult to examine the effect of student aid variables given their 
complexity and year-to-year variation. We first examined the 
independent effect of each characteristic on completion without 
controlling for differences among individuals. Each of these 
independent effects, with the exception of delaying entry into college, 
was statistically significant. However, because of the strong 
relationships among these characteristics, it is more accurate to 
explain the variance in completion rates using multivariate analysis, 
which tests the effect of each characteristic on completion while 
controlling for the effects of all the other characteristics.

Logistic regression is a standard procedure used to estimate the effect 
of a characteristic on a particular outcome. The model uses odds ratios 
to estimate the relative likelihood of completing a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years of beginning postsecondary education. The odds ratios 
for various characteristics are shown in appendix III. For a particular 
characteristic, if there were no difference between students who 
completed within 6 years and those who did not, the odds would be 
equal, and the ratio of their odds would be 1.00. The more the odds 
ratio differs from 1.00 in either direction, the larger the effect on 
completion. For example, an odds ratio below 1.00 indicates a lower 
likelihood of completion for a student with that particular 
characteristic, all else being equal. The odds ratios were generally 
computed in relation to a reference group; for example, if the odds 
ratio refers to being a dependent student, then the reference group 
would be independent students. Some characteristics, such as grade 
point average and age, are continuous in nature. In these cases, the 
odds ratio can be interpreted as representing the increase in the 
likelihood of completing college given a 1-unit increase in the 
continuous variable. An odds ratio that is statistically significant is 
denoted with the superscript a. The characteristics we used in our 
model explain 38 percent of the variance in bachelor's degree 
completion.

Because the estimates we use in this report are based on survey data, 
there is some sampling error associated with them. This occurs because 
observations are made on a sample of students rather than the entire 
student population. All percentage estimates we present from the BPS 
data have sampling errors of 3 percentage points or less, unless 
otherwise noted. Furthermore, tests of statistical significance were 
performed using software to take into account the complex survey design 
and sampling errors. In addition to the reported sampling errors, the 
practical difficulties of conducting any survey may introduce other 
types of errors, commonly referred to as nonsampling errors. For 
example, differences in how a particular question is interpreted, in 
the reliability of data self reported by students, or the types of 
students who do not respond can introduce unwanted variability into the 
survey results.

To identify what states and 4-year colleges and universities are doing 
to foster bachelor's degree completion, we conducted a survey of the 59 
state higher education executive officer agencies in all 50 states, the 
District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico and visited 5 states and 11 
public colleges and universities within those states.[Footnote 28] We 
received completed questionnaires from 48 of the 52 states and 
territories we surveyed, a response rate of 92 percent. We took steps 
in the development of the questionnaires, the data collection, and the 
data editing and analysis to minimize nonsampling errors. For example, 
we pretested the questionnaire with 3 states to refine the survey 
instrument, and we called individual respondents, if necessary, to 
clarify answers.

We conducted site visits in Florida, Maryland, Oregon, Texas, and 
Virginia. We chose states and colleges to visit based upon our 
discussions with experts and preliminary information from our survey. 
Additionally, we selected these states and institutions based on 
geographic dispersion and the variety of efforts reported to us by 
experts and in the survey. In each state, we met with state higher 
education officials to discuss college completion in general and 
specific efforts taking place in their states. In each of these states, 
we also visited colleges that were viewed by state officials as doing 
particularly well in working with their students to help them complete 
a bachelor's degree. We met with college officials to discuss their 
efforts to improve retention and help students attain a bachelor's 
degree.

To identify what Education is doing to foster bachelor's degree 
completion, we talked with Education officials and reviewed program and 
planning documents. We conducted our work between April 2002 and May 
2003 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 
practices.

[End of section]

Appendix II: Bachelor's Degree Completion Status of 1995-96 Beginning 
Postsecondary Students 6 Years after Enrolling:

Numbers in percent:

Characteristic: Overall percentage;  
Completed bachelor's: 52; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 48; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 14; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
34.

Characteristic: Background characteristics:

Characteristic: Sex:

Characteristic: Female; Student 
population by characteristic: 52; Completed 
bachelor's: 57; Did not complete bachelor's: 43; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 18; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 25.

Characteristic: Male; Student 
population by characteristic: 48; Completed 
bachelor's: 47; Did not complete bachelor's: 53; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 25; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 29.

Characteristic: Race:

Characteristic: White, non-Hispanic; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 73; 
Completed bachelor's: 55; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 45; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 20; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
25.

Characteristic: Black, non-Hispanic; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 10; 
Completed bachelor's: 38; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 62; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 23; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
40.

Characteristic: Hispanic; 
Student population by characteristic: 10; Completed 
bachelor's: 40; Did not complete bachelor's: 60; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 28; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 32.

Characteristic: Asian/Pacific Islander; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 6; 
Completed bachelor's: 55; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 45; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 25; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
20.

Characteristic: Other; Student 
population by characteristic: 1; Completed 
bachelor's: 58; Did not complete bachelor's: 42; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 11; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 30.

Characteristic: Age when first enrolled:

Characteristic: 18 and under; 
Student population by characteristic: 77; Completed 
bachelor's: 59; Did not complete bachelor's: 41; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 19; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 22.

Characteristic: 19; Student 
population by characteristic: 12; Completed 
bachelor's: 36; Did not complete bachelor's: 64; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 30; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 34.

Characteristic: 20-23; Student 
population by characteristic: 6; Completed 
bachelor's: 21; Did not complete bachelor's: 79; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 33; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 46.

Characteristic: 24-29; Student 
population by characteristic: 2; Completed 
bachelor's: 27; Did not complete bachelor's: 73; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 33; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 40.

Characteristic: 30 and over; 
Student population by characteristic: 3; Completed 
bachelor's: 15; Did not complete bachelor's: 85; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 33; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 52.

Characteristic: Socioeconomic status disadvantaged index:

Characteristic: Not disadvantaged; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 58; 
Completed bachelor's: 58; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 42; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 20; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
22.

Characteristic: Disadvantaged; 
Student population by characteristic: 42; Completed 
bachelor's: 44; Did not complete bachelor's: 56; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 23; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 33.

Characteristic: Dependent status[B]:

Characteristic: Dependent; 
Student population by characteristic: 90; Completed 
bachelor's: 56; Did not complete bachelor's: 44; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 20; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 25.

Characteristic: Independent, no children; Numbers 
in percent: Student population by characteristic: 4; Numbers in 
percent: Completed bachelor's: 22; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 78; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 35; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
43.

Characteristic: Independent, married with children; 
Student population by characteristic: 3; Numbers in 
percent: Completed bachelor's: 23; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 77; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 36; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
41.

Characteristic: Independent, not married, with 
children; Student population by characteristic: 3; 
Completed bachelor's: 21; Did 
not complete bachelor's: 79; No bachelor's, still 
enrolled at 4-year: 36; No bachelor's, not enrolled 
at 4-year[A]: 43.

Characteristic: First generation to attend college:

Characteristic: No; Student 
population by characteristic: 57; Completed 
bachelor's: 59; Did not complete bachelor's: 41; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 21; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 19.

Characteristic: Yes; Student 
population by characteristic: 43; Completed 
bachelor's: 43; Did not complete bachelor's: 57; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 22; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 35.

Characteristic: Academic preparation & performance:

Characteristic: High school completion:

Characteristic: Diploma; 
Student population by characteristic: 97; Completed 
bachelor's: 53; Did not complete bachelor's: 47; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 21; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 25.

Characteristic: GED/Other; 
Student population by characteristic: 3; Completed 
bachelor's: 27; Did not complete bachelor's: 73; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 27; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 46.

Characteristic: High school curriculum; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: [Empty]; Numbers in 
percent: Completed bachelor's: [Empty]; Did not 
complete bachelor's: [Empty]; No bachelor's, still 
enrolled at 4-year: [Empty]; No bachelor's, not 
enrolled at 4-year[A]: [Empty].

Characteristic: Did not meet new basics; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 27; 
Completed bachelor's: 47; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 53; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 23; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
30.

Characteristic: Met new basics, not rigorous; 
Student population by characteristic: 7; Numbers in 
percent: Completed bachelor's: 48; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 52; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 19; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
33.

Characteristic: Slightly rigorous; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 30; 
Completed bachelor's: 55; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 45; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 18; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
28.

Characteristic: Moderately rigorous; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 19; 
Completed bachelor's: 65; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 35; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 18; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
17.

Characteristic: Highly rigorous; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 16; 
Completed bachelor's: 81; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 19; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 8; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
11.

Characteristic: High school grades:

Characteristic: A to A; Student 
population by characteristic: 26; Completed 
bachelor's: 78; Did not complete bachelor's: 22; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 11; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 11.

Characteristic: A-to B; Student 
population by characteristic: 21; Completed 
bachelor's: 60; Did not complete bachelor's: 40; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 18; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 23.

Characteristic: B to B-; 
Student population by characteristic: 11; Completed 
bachelor's: 39; Did not complete bachelor's: 61; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 25; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 36.

Characteristic: B-to C; Student 
population by characteristic: 7; Completed 
bachelor's: 33; Did not complete bachelor's: 67; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 26; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 41.

Characteristic: C to D; Student 
population by characteristic: 36; Completed 
bachelor's: 37; Did not complete bachelor's: 63; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 29; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 35.

Characteristic: SAT score[C]:

Characteristic: Lowest quartile (<800); Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 41; 
Completed bachelor's: 32; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 68; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 30; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
38.

Characteristic: Middle quartiles (800-1100); 
Student population by characteristic: 41; Numbers 
in percent: Completed bachelor's: 60; Did not 
complete bachelor's: 40; No bachelor's, still 
enrolled at 4-year: 18; No bachelor's, not enrolled 
at 4-year[A]: 22.

Characteristic: Highest quartile (>1100); Numbers 
in percent: Student population by characteristic: 18; Numbers in 
percent: Completed bachelor's: 79; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 21; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 9; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
12.

Characteristic: First-year college GPA:

Characteristic: > 3.0; Student 
population by characteristic: 34; Completed 
bachelor's: 71; Did not complete bachelor's: 29; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 16; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 13.

Characteristic: 2.0 to 3.0; 
Student population by characteristic: 39; Completed 
bachelor's: 51; Did not complete bachelor's: 49; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 22; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 27.

Characteristic: < 2.0; Student 
population by characteristic: 27; Completed 
bachelor's: 29; Did not complete bachelor's: 71; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 27; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 44.

Characteristic: Attendance & work patterns:

Characteristic: Delayed college after high 
school[D]:

Characteristic: No; Student 
population by characteristic: 82; Completed 
bachelor's: 59; Did not complete bachelor's: 41; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 18; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 23.

Characteristic: Yes; Student 
population by characteristic: 18; Completed 
bachelor's: 24; Did not complete bachelor's: 76; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 35; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 41.

Characteristic: College attendance:

Characteristic: Part-time or mix of part-and full-
time; Student population by characteristic: 43; 
Completed bachelor's: 34; Did 
not complete bachelor's: 66; No bachelor's, still 
enrolled at 4-year: 35; No bachelor's, not enrolled 
at 4-year[A]: 32.

Characteristic: Full-time; 
Student population by characteristic: 57; Completed 
bachelor's: 66; Did not complete bachelor's: 34; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 11; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 23.

Characteristic: Continuous enrollment:

Characteristic: No; Student 
population by characteristic: 27; Completed 
bachelor's: 15; Did not complete bachelor's: 85; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 45; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 40.

Characteristic: Yes; Student 
population by characteristic: 73; Completed 
bachelor's: 66; Did not complete bachelor's: 34; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 12; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 22.

Characteristic: Work during college:

Characteristic: Did not work; 
Student population by characteristic: 31; Completed 
bachelor's: 61; Did not complete bachelor's: 39; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 16; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 24.

Characteristic: Less than 10 hours; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 15; 
Completed bachelor's: 61; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 39; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 14; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
25.

Characteristic: Between 10 and 19 hours; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 17; 
Completed bachelor's: 63; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 37; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 16; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
22.

Characteristic: Between 20 and 31 hours; Numbers in 
percent: Student population by characteristic: 24; 
Completed bachelor's: 41; Did not complete 
bachelor's: 59; No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-
year: 30; No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 
29.

Characteristic: Full-time (32 hours or more); 
Student population by characteristic: 13; Numbers 
in percent: Completed bachelor's: 28; Did not 
complete bachelor's: 72; No bachelor's, still 
enrolled at 4-year: 34; No bachelor's, not enrolled 
at 4-year[A]: 38.

Characteristic: Transferred to a 4-year institution:

Characteristic: No; Student 
population by characteristic: 55; Completed 
bachelor's: 69; Did not complete bachelor's: 31; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 9; Numbers 
in percent: No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 22.

Characteristic: Yes; Student 
population by characteristic: 45; Completed 
bachelor's: 32; Did not complete bachelor's: 68; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 36; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 32.

Characteristic: Social integration:

Characteristic: Participated in study groups:

Characteristic: No; Student 
population by characteristic: 33; Completed 
bachelor's: 40; Did not complete bachelor's: 60; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 27; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 33.

Characteristic: Yes; Student 
population by characteristic: 67; Completed 
bachelor's: 59; Did not complete bachelor's: 41; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 18; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 23.

Characteristic: Participated in collegiate clubs:

Characteristic: No; Student 
population by characteristic: 58; Completed 
bachelor's: 41; Did not complete bachelor's: 59; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 26; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 32.

Characteristic: Yes; Student 
population by characteristic: 42; Completed 
bachelor's: 68; Did not complete bachelor's: 32; 
No bachelor's, still enrolled at 4-year: 14; 
No bachelor's, not enrolled at 4-year[A]: 18.

Source: Department of Education.

Note: GAO analysis of Education's BPS 1995/96 data.

[A] This includes students who were not enrolled in postsecondary 
education and those who were enrolled at a 2-year institution or less 
at the end of the 6-year period . These student may have earned an 
associate's degree or certificate.

[B] Student dependency status for federal financial aid during 1995-96. 
Students age 23 or younger were assumed to be dependent unless they met 
the independent student criteria, including being married or having 
legal dependents, other than a spouse.

[C] Student's SAT I combined score. This variable was derived as either 
the sum of SAT I verbal and mathematics test scores or the ACT 
Assessment (American College Testing program) composite score converted 
to an estimated SAT combined score using a concordance table. The 
primary source of data were from a match with the SAT files from the 
Educational Testing Service and the ACT test files of the American 
College Testing programs, supplemented by postsecondary institution 
reported and student-reported information. The quartiles were derived 
from the distribution of the test scores among the BPS cohort sample 
students.

[D] Indicates whether student delayed enrollment in postsecondary 
education, as determined by receipt of a high school diploma prior to 
1995 or reaching the age of 20 before December 31, 1995.

[End of table]

[End of section]

Appendix III: Results of Regression Models for Bachelor's Degree 
Completion within 6 Years of Beginning College:

Characteristic: Background characteristics:

Characteristic: Sex:

Characteristic: Female; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 57; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Male; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 47; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.66[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 0.83.

Characteristic: Race:

Characteristic: White, non-Hispanic; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 55; Odds ratio-independent 
effect: Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: 
Background characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Black, non-Hispanic; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 38; Odds ratio-independent 
effect: Background characteristics: 0.48[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.62[B].

Characteristic: Hispanic; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 40; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.53[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 0.68.

Characteristic: Asian/Pacific Islander; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 55; Odds ratio-independent 
effect: Background characteristics: 0.99; Odds ratio-net effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.76.

Characteristic: Other; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 58; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 1.12; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 0.52.

Characteristic: Age:

Characteristic: 18 and under; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 
years: Background characteristics: 59; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.86[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 0.93.

Characteristic: 19; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 36.

Characteristic: 20-23; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 21.

Characteristic: 24-29; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 27.

Characteristic: 30 and over; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 
years: Background characteristics: 15.

Characteristic: Socioeconomic status disadvantaged index:

Characteristic: Not disadvantaged; Completed a bachelor's degree within 
6 years: Background characteristics: 58; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Disadvantaged; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 
years: Background characteristics: 44; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.56[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 1.06.

Characteristic: Dependent status[C]; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: [Empty]; Odds ratio-
independent effect: Background characteristics: [Empty]; Odds ratio-
net effect: Background characteristics: [Empty].

Characteristic: Dependent; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 
years: Background characteristics: 56; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Independent, no children; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 22; Odds ratio-independent 
effect: Background characteristics: 0.22[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.52.

Characteristic: Independent, married with children; Completed a 
bachelor's degree within 6 years: Background characteristics: 23; Odds 
ratio-independent effect: Background characteristics: 0.24[B].

Characteristic: Independent, not married, with children; Completed a 
bachelor's degree within 6 years: Background characteristics: 21; Odds 
ratio-independent effect: Background characteristics: 0.21[B].

Characteristic: First generation to attend college:

Characteristic: No; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 59; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Yes; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 43; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.51[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 0.66[B].

Characteristic: Academic preparation & performance:

Characteristic: High School Completion; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years:

Characteristic: Diploma; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 53; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: GED/Other; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 
years: Background characteristics: 27; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.32[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 0.63.

Characteristic: High school curriculum; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: [Empty]; Odds ratio-
independent effect: Background characteristics: [Empty]; Odds ratio-
net effect: Background characteristics: [Empty].

Characteristic: Did not meet New Basics; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 47; Odds ratio-independent 
effect: Background characteristics: 1.39[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: 
Background characteristics: 1.14[B].

Characteristic: Met New Basics, not rigorous; Completed a bachelor's 
degree within 6 years: Background characteristics: 48.

Characteristic: Slightly rigorous; Completed a bachelor's degree within 
6 years: Background characteristics: 55.

Characteristic: Moderately rigorous; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 65.

Characteristic: Highly rigorous; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 
years: Background characteristics: 81.

Characteristic: High school grades:

Characteristic: A to A-; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 78; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 2.08[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 1.17[B].

Characteristic: A-to B; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 60.

Characteristic: B to B-; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 39.

Characteristic: B-to C; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 33.

Characteristic: C to D; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 37.

Characteristic: SAT Score[D]:

Characteristic: Lowest quartile (<800); Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 32; Odds ratio-independent 
effect: Background characteristics: 1.41[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: 
Background characteristics: 1.03.

Characteristic: Middle quartiles (800-1100); Completed a bachelor's 
degree within 6 years: Background characteristics: 60.

Characteristic: Highest quartile (>1100); Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 79.

Characteristic: First-year college GPA:

Characteristic: > 3.0; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 71; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 2.45[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 2.24[B].

Characteristic: 2.0 to 2.9; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 
years: Background characteristics: 51.

Characteristic: < 2.0; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 29.

Characteristic: Work & attendance patterns:

Characteristic: Delayed college after high school[E]:

Characteristic: No; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 59; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Yes; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 24; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.99; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 1.01.

Characteristic: College attendance:

Characteristic: Part-time or mix of part-and full-time; Completed a 
bachelor's degree within 6 years: Background characteristics: 34; Odds 
ratio-independent effect: Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-
net effect: Background characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Full-time; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 
years: Background characteristics: 66; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 3.89[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 2.31[B].

Characteristic: Continuous enrollment:

Characteristic: No; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 15; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Yes; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 66; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 10.81[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: 
Background characteristics: 6.22[B].

Characteristic: Work during college:

Characteristic: Did not work; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 
years: Background characteristics: 61; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Worked Less than 10 hours; Completed a bachelor's 
degree within 6 years: Background characteristics: 61; Odds ratio-
independent effect: Background characteristics: 1.00; Odds ratio-net 
effect: Background characteristics: 0.86.

Characteristic: Between 10 and 19 hours; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 63; Odds ratio-independent 
effect: Background characteristics: 1.09; Odds ratio-net effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.79.

Characteristic: Between 20 and 31 hours; Completed a bachelor's degree 
within 6 years: Background characteristics: 41; Odds ratio-independent 
effect: Background characteristics: 0.45[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.62[B].

Characteristic: Full-time (32 hours or more); Completed a bachelor's 
degree within 6 years: Background characteristics: 26; Odds ratio-
independent effect: Background characteristics: 0.25[B]; Odds ratio-
net effect: Background characteristics: 0.49[B].

Characteristic: Transferred to a 4-year institution:

Characteristic: No; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 69; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A]: 

Characteristic: Yes; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 32; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 0.21[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 0.41[B].

Characteristic: Social integration:

Characteristic: Participated in study groups:

Characteristic: No; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 40; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Yes; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 59; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 2.17[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: 0.99.

Characteristic: Participated in collegiate clubs:

Characteristic: No; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 41; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: [A]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: [A].

Characteristic: Yes; Completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years: 
Background characteristics: 68; Odds ratio-independent effect: 
Background characteristics: 3.04[B]; Odds ratio-net effect: Background 
characteristics: 1.54[B].

Source: Department of Education.

Note: GAO analysis of Education's BPS 1995/96 data.

[A] denotes referent category.

[B] Odds ratio is statistically significant at p<=0.05.

[C] Student dependency status for federal financial aid during 1995-96. 
Students age 23 or younger were assumed to be dependent unless they met 
the independent student criteria, including being married or having 
legal dependents, other than a spouse.

[D] Student's SAT I combined score. This variable was derived as either 
the sum of SAT I verbal and mathematics test scores or the ACT 
Assessment (American College Testing program) composite score converted 
to an estimated SAT combined score using a concordance table. The 
primary source of data were from a match with the SAT files from the 
Educational Testing Service and the ACT test files of the American 
College Testing programs, supplemented by postsecondary institution 
reported and student-reported information. The quartiles were derived 
from the distribution of the test scores among the BPS cohort sample 
students.

[E] Indicates whether student delayed enrollment in postsecondary 
education, as determined by receipt of a high school diploma prior to 
1995 or reaching the age of 20 before December 31, 1995.

[End of table]

[End of section]

Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Education:

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION:

OFFICE OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION:

MAY 21 2003:

THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY:

Ms. Cornelia M. Ashby Director:

Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues General Accounting 
Office:

Washington, DC 20548:

Dear Ms. Ashby:

The Department of Education (ED) appreciates the opportunity to review 
the General Accounting Office's (GAO's) draft report (GAO-03-568), 
College Completion-Additional Efforts Could Help Education With its 
Completion Goals. The Department wants to note, however, that while GAO 
has been working on this study for 13 months, the Department has been 
asked to respond within 6 working days to the draft report.

The Department does want to comment on the report because it addresses 
important issues of retention and baccalaureate degree completion among 
college students at 4-year institutions of higher education. These 
issues are reflected in our strategic plan for 2002-2007 and have long 
been of a matter of focus by the Department.

The Department is concerned, however, that the draft GAO report does 
not provide the information needed by policymakers to understand 
current patterns of college retention and completion. The report also 
does not account for all activities that the Department has undertaken 
to track and foster college retention and completion.

The Department notes first that the GAO report does not include 
contextual data on trends and patterns in college retention and 
completion, including, for example, whether retention and completion 
are increasing or decreasing overall and among different demographic 
subgroups. This information is available in publications of the 
Department's National Center for Education Statistics (LACES), 
including data from the Beginning Postsecondary Students longitudinal 
study and two reports based on the study, issued on December 16, 2002, 
and May 20, 1996. The GAO report does not reflect changes over time, 
but says, on page 2, that: "More than half of all students who enroll 
in a 4-year college or university complete a bachelor's degree within 6 
years of beginning postsecondary education.":

Second, the draft says on pages 26-27 that "While [the Department of] 
Education has made these [student financial aid] funds available, we 
reported in September 2002 that little information is available on the 
relative effectiveness of Title IV grants and loans in promoting 
postsecondary attendance, choice, and completion, or their impact on 
college costs." The Department notes that the logistic regression on 
college completion
performed by GAO (Appendix II) using Education's data from the 
Beginning Postsecondary Students Study, 1995-96, did not include any 
student aid variables as determinants of completion. GAO might indicate 
why that is the case.

The Department also notes that GAO's logistic regression results 
indicate that, "After controlling for other factors, we found that 
disadvantaged students were no less likely to complete a bachelor's 
degree than other students." However, GAO's regression analysis only 
takes into account the direct effect of being disadvantaged on college 
completion, not the total effects. Examining indirect as well as direct 
effects of being disadvantaged on completion would require a more 
sophisticated analysis, but also one that would provide Congress a more 
comprehensive and accurate picture.

The GAO draft report also does not exhibit an understanding of the 
strategic character of the Department's activities in generating data 
and information on college retention and completion. An important 
example is that the role of the Graduation Rate Survey (GRS) sponsored 
by NCES is not reflected in the report. GAO reports on page 17 that 
"Three-fourths of the states that responded to our survey reported that 
they collect data that allow them to calculate and track retention and 
graduation rates for individual institutions and across the state." GAO 
does not indicate that, even though GRS reporting was not mandatory 
until this year, the Department's GRS data collection is the basis for 
state system designs. Nor does GAO note that GRS data are available on 
institutions in all the other states, even though in those states the 
GRS data are not reported through state coordinators. GRS data are not 
perfect, admittedly, because they cannot account for all transfer 
students. But even the nine states with unit student record systems 
covering public and private institutions of higher education cannot do 
that, which GAO also does not report.

The draft GAO report also does not recognize many of the systematic 
efforts of the Department to identify and disseminate useful 
information on retention and completion. NCES, for example, has a 
postsecondary education descriptive analysis report series. A number of 
those have addressed issues concerning retention and completion-and 
reported findings similar to those in GAO's draft report. The 
Department has also issued other reports using longitudinal data that 
it has collected on these topics. These reports have helped to focus 
national attention on issues of retention and completion and have been 
widely cited by many other researchers.

Although the Department has concerns with some aspects of the GAO's 
draft report, it is supportive of its recommendations. The Department 
does believe that in holding institutions of higher education 
accountable for their performance in graduating students, multiple 
measures of institutional performance are needed to get a comprehensive 
understanding of how well postsecondary institutions are doing. The 
Department also agrees that working with institutions and states is 
essential in strengthening accountability and in ensuring positive 
outcomes for students, and it is doing so as it prepares for the 
reauthorization of the Higher Education Act.

Finally, the Department is considering ways to improve information on 
college retention and completion and to disseminate it widely. One 
possibility, to ensure that all useful information is considered, would 
be having this topic researched as part of the "what works" 
clearinghouse sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences within 
the Department.

Again, we appreciate having the opportunity to comment on the draft 
report.

Sincerely,

Sally L. Stroup

Attachment (1):

TECHNICAL COMMENTS ON GAO-03-568 COLLEGE COMPLETION:

On the discussion about the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary 
Education on pages 30-31-:

* The "average award amount of between $50,000 and $200,000" is per 
year, not the 3-year grant total.

* The grants awarded addressing retention cover a much greater range of 
approaches than is described by "creating learning communities, 
reviewing remedial and introductory courses to find more effective 
approaches, and developing innovative methods of delivering support 
services." FIPSE funds a wide array of other curricular efforts, 
school-college collaborations, 2-year to 4-year transfer strategies, 
technology applications, service learning, and consortial efforts 
focused on access and retention/completion.

* In addition, FIPSE has funded some important projects in the areas of 
assessment and accountability that particularly relate to the 
discussion on pp. 29-30; e.g., a current grant with the South Carolina 
Commission on Higher Education (involving 5 states) is identifying and 
sharing information on best practices for accountability measures 
beyond mere graduation/completion rates.

* In the FY 2003 application priorities for the Comprehensive Program, 
a specific call for proposals disseminating proven innovations relating 
to access and retention/completion was highlighted. This priority is 
continuing over the next several years, and applications are being 
funded on this basis.

[End of section]

Appendix V: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:

Contacts:

Kelsey Bright, Assistant Director (202) 512-9037:

Debra Prescott, Analyst-in-Charge (202) 512-2972:

Acknowledgments:

In addition to those named above, Rebecca Ackley, Avrum Ashery, Patrick 
diBattista, Kopp Michelotti, John Mingus, Luann Moy, Doug Sloane, and 
Wendy Turenne made important contributions to this report.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Disadvantaged students are identified by the socioeconomic 
diversity index, which is based on three indicators: (1) family income 
as percentage of 1994 federal poverty level, (2) highest education by 
either parent, and (3) proportion of students in high school eligible 
for free/reduced price lunch.

[2] These loans were provided through two major federal student loan 
programs, the Federal Direct Loan Program and the Federal Family 
Education Loan Program. Under the Direct Loan Program, students or 
their parents borrow money directly from the federal government through 
the schools the students attend. Under the Family Education Loan 
Program, money is borrowed from private lenders such as banks, and the 
federal government guarantees repayment if the borrowers default.

[3] We used the membership list of the State Higher Education Executive 
Officers, a nonprofit, national association that represents statewide 
postsecondary education interests. 

[4] U.S. General Accounting Office, School Dropouts: Education Could 
Play a Stronger Role in Identifying and Disseminating Promising 
Prevention Strategies, GAO-02-240 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 1, 2002).

[5] About 2 percent of students were enrolled at nondegree-granting, 
Title IV-eligible, postsecondary institutions. These included 
vocational and technical programs designed to prepare students for 
specific careers.

[6] Pub. L. No. 101-542, Nov. 8, 1990.

[7] For the purpose of calculating a graduation rate, an institution 
may exclude from the original cohort students who have left school to 
serve in the military; to serve on official church missions; to serve 
with a foreign aid service of the federal government, such as the Peace 
Corps; are totally and permanently disabled; or are deceased.

[8] The first BPS study tracked the educational attainment of a group 
of students who first enrolled in postsecondary education in 1989-90. 
The next scheduled BPS study will follow students who first enroll in 
postsecondary education in the 2003-04 school year.

[9] First-generation college students come from families in which 
neither parent has earned a bachelor's degree.

[10] These institutions include 2-year schools and certificate programs 
at less than 2-year schools.

[11] Students in our population are counted as bachelor's degree 
completers if they had attained their degree by the end of the 6-year 
study. Our analysis included students enrolled in public or private, 
not for profit, 4-year institutions.

[12] BPS includes five categories for curriculum rigor, which are based 
on the number and level of courses completed. The "highly rigorous" 
category includes 4 years each of English and math; 3 years each of 
foreign language, science, and social science; 1 advanced placement or 
honors class or 1 advance placement test score in any subject; and 
student had taken pre-calculus, biology, chemistry, and physics.

[13] A "break" includes not being enrolled for more than 4 months at a 
time.

[14] Since our population includes only 2-year students who 
transferred, we tested to see if the effect of transferring was instead 
an effect of starting at a 2-year institution. We found that it is 
transferring that accounts for the variance in completion, not type of 
first institution.

[15] The terms "K-16" or "P-16" describe a movement by educators, 
political officials, and business leaders to work together in a more 
systemic way to strengthen educational achievement from kindergarten or 
pre-school through completion of the college degree.

[16] Additional states may collect summary data on graduation and 
retention rates from individual institutions, rather than collecting 
enrollment and graduation data for individual students that can be 
tracked across institutions.

[17] Students who graduate within 5 years also count toward the bonus 
if they are in 5-year baccalaureate programs. 

[18] Historically Black Colleges and Universities are defined as, among 
other things, any college or university that was established prior to 
1964 and whose principal mission was, and is, the education of black 
Americans.

[19] Hispanic Serving Institutions are defined as having at least 25 
percent of their full-time equivalent students who are Hispanic, of 
which no less than 50 percent are low-income individuals.

[20] AmeriCorps is a network of national service programs that engage 
about 50,000 Americans each year in intensive service to meet critical 
needs in education, public safety, health, and the environment. 

[21] Florida State reported that the comparison groups were randomly 
selected and there was no difference among the three groups in terms of 
SAT scores. However, because students decide whether to participate in 
a living-learning community, the effects of self-selection cannot be 
ruled out.

[22] The scholarship program is open to students of any race.

[23] U.S. General Accounting Office, Student Aid and Tax Benefits: 
Better Research and Guidance Will Facilitate Comparison of 
Effectiveness and Student Use, GAO-02-751 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 13, 
2002).

[24] Student Support Services and Upward Bound are part of TRIO, a 
cluster of six educational opportunity outreach programs designed to 
motivate and support students from disadvantaged backgrounds through 
the educational pipeline. The other TRIO programs have goals for, among 
other things, increasing enrollment in postsecondary education, 
encouraging students to pursue undergraduate degrees in mathematics and 
science, and increasing the attainment of doctoral degrees among 
certain groups of students. While increasing college completion is not 
an explicit goal of these programs, increases in completion for 
participating students may be an indirect result of the services the 
programs provide.

[25] Institutions can award funds to students who have completed their 
first 2 years of study if they can demonstrate that the students are at 
high risk for dropping out and the needs of students in the first 2 
years of study have been met.

[26] A 1999 review of Upward Bound conducted for Education concluded 
that while the program did not increase enrollments among participants, 
it did have positive results for students who enrolled in college. 
Among other things, Upward Bound participants at 4-year colleges earned 
more nonremedial credits than a control group. The study authors 
stressed, however, that these results should be interpreted with 
caution because only about one-fourth of the students in the study had 
entered college at the time they were last contacted, and one-third 
were still in high school. Results from a more recent followup were not 
available in time to be included in this report.

[27] The first BPS study tracked the educational attainment of a group 
of students who first enrolled in postsecondary education in 1989-90. 
The next scheduled BPS study will follow students who first enroll in 
postsecondary education in the 2003-04 school year.

[28] The population for our survey was the membership list of the State 
Higher Education Executive Officers association, a nonprofit, national 
association of the chief executive officers serving statewide 
coordinating and governing boards of postsecondary education. Seven 
states have two association agencies, and we received responses from 
both agencies in four states. In none of these cases did the responses 
conflict with one another. We combined multiple responses from one 
state into a single unified response for that state. We checked with 
each respondent to obtain approval for this procedure.

GAO's Mission:

The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, 
exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability 
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use 
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides 
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make 
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to 
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, 
integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains 
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an 
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search 
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You 
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other 
graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its 
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document 
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to 
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order 
GAO Products" heading.

Order by Mail or Phone:

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to:

U.S. General Accounting Office

441 G Street NW,

Room LM Washington,

D.C. 20548:

To order by Phone: 	

	Voice: (202) 512-6000:

	TDD: (202) 512-2537:

	Fax: (202) 512-6061:

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:

Public Affairs:

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.

General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.

20548: