U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

94–315 PDF 2016

IMPROVING COLLEGE ACCESS AND 

COMPLETION FOR LOW–INCOME 

AND FIRST–GENERATION STUDENTS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION 

AND WORKFORCE TRAINING 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION 

AND THE WORKFORCE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, APRIL 30, 2015 

Serial No. 114–13 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: 

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/committee.action?chamber=house&committee=education 

or 

Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota, Chairman 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Duncan Hunter, California 

David P. Roe, Tennessee 

Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania 

Tim Walberg, Michigan 

Matt Salmon, Arizona 

Brett Guthrie, Kentucky 

Todd Rokita, Indiana 

Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania 

Joseph J. Heck, Nevada 

Luke Messer, Indiana 

Bradley Byrne, Alabama 

David Brat, Virginia 

Buddy Carter, Georgia 

Michael D. Bishop, Michigan 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Carlos Curbelo, Florida 

Elise Stefanik, New York 

Rick Allen, Georgia 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Ranking Member 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Joe Courtney, Connecticut 

Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio 

Jared Polis, Colorado 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 

Northern Mariana Islands 

Frederica S. Wilson, Florida 

Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon 

Mark Pocan, Wisconsin 

Mark Takano, California 

Hakeem S. Jeffries, New York 

Katherine M. Clark, Massachusetts 

Alma S. Adams, North Carolina 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

Juliane Sullivan, Staff Director 

Denise Forte, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE TRAINING 

VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina, Chairwoman 

David P. Roe, Tennessee 

Matt Salmon, Arizona 

Brett Guthrie, Kentucky 

Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania 

Joseph J. Heck, Nevada 

Luke Messer, Indiana 

Bradley Byrne, Alabama 

Carlos Curbelo, Florida 

Elise Stefanik, New York 

Rick Allen, Georgia 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Ranking Minority Member 

Hakeem S. Jeffries, New York 

Alma S. Adams, North Carolina 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Joe Courtney, Connecticut 

Jared Polis, Colorado 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on April 30, 2015 .............................................................................. 1 

Statement of Members: 

Foxx, Hon. Virginia, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Higher Education 

and Workforce Training ............................................................................... 1 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3 

Hinojosa, Hon. Rube ́n, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training .................................................................... 3 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 5 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Alexander, Dr. Charles J., Associate Vice Provost for Student Diversity, 

Director, Academic Advancement Program, Associate Adjunct Professor, 

University of California, Los Angeles, CA .................................................. 22 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 24 

Cooper, Dr. Michelle A., President, Institute for Higher Education Policy, 

Washington, DC ............................................................................................ 35 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 37 

May, Dr. Joe D., Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, 

Dallas, TX ...................................................................................................... 49 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 51 

Perna, Dr. Laura, Riepe, James S., Executive Director, Alliance for Higher Education and Democracy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 

PA ................................................................................................................... 7 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 10 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(1) 

IMPROVING COLLEGE ACCESS AND 

COMPLETION FOR LOW–INCOME 

AND FIRST–GENERATION STUDENTS 

Thursday, April 30, 2015 

U.S. House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee on Higher Education and 

Workforce Training, 

Committee on Education and the Workforce, 

Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:02 a.m., in Room 

2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Virginia Foxx [chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Foxx, Curbelo, Allen, Hinojosa, Jeffries, 

Adams, DeSaulnier, and Polis. 

Also present: Representative Scott. 

Staff present: Lauren Aronson, Press Secretary; Alex Azer, Intern; Janelle Belland, Coalitions and Members Services Coordinator; Amy Raaf Jones, Director of Education and Human Resources Policy; Nancy Locke, Chief Clerk; Brian Melnyk, Professional Staff Member; Daniel Murner, Deputy Press Secretary; 

Brian Newell, Communications Director; Jenny Prescott, Legislative Assistant; Alex Ricci, Legislative Assistant; Mandy 

Schaumburg, Education Deputy Director and Senior Counsel; 

Emily Slack, Professional Staff Member; Alissa Strawcutter, Deputy Clerk; Tylease Alli, Minority Clerk/Intern and Fellow Coordinator; Austin Barbera, Minority Staff Assistant; Eamonn Collins, 

Minority Education Policy Advisor; Denise Forte, Minority Staff Director; Tina Hone, Minority Education Policy Director and Associate General Counsel; Tracie Sanchez, Minority Education Policy 

Fellow. 

Chairwoman FOXX. A quorum being present, the Subcommittee 

on Higher Education and Workforce Training will come to order. 

Good morning, and welcome to today’s subcommittee hearing. 

I would like to thank our witnesses for joining us to discuss 

strategies for improving postsecondary access and completion for 

low-income and first-generation students. We appreciate the opportunity to learn from you as Congress works to reauthorize the 

Higher Education Act. 

This is a very personal issue for me. As someone who grew up 

in extreme poverty, I know firsthand what it takes to earn a degree 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

2 

in difficult circumstances as well as what that degree means for 

one’s opportunity for advancement. 

Some of the most rewarding experiences I have had as an educator involved helping disadvantaged students overcome obstacles to 

reach their goals and achieve success. Fortunately, I have lots of 

stories like that. 

The Education and Workforce Committee has held more than a 

dozen hearings about how to strengthen America’s higher education system for all those who choose to pursue a degree or credential, regardless of age, background, or circumstances. 

Research shows students who attain advanced levels of education 

are more likely to succeed in today’s economy. For example, students who earn an associate’s degree are expected to earn 27 percent more than their peers with a high school diploma over the 

course of a lifetime. 

For many students, however, the idea of graduating feels like a 

distant dream. Higher cost, confusing financial aid system, and insufficient academic preparation disproportionately deter low-income 

and first-generation students from accessing and completing a 

higher education. 

Recognizing the challenges facing these students, the federal government invests in numerous programs geared toward identifying 

and supporting disadvantaged students and the institutions that 

serve them. In addition to providing students need-based financial 

assistance such as Pell Grants, the federal government also provides early outreach and support services to help students progress 

from middle school through college. 

Programs such as GEAR UP and Upward Bound receive more than $1 billion of taxpayer dollars to support tutoring, family financial counseling, internships, research opportunities, and other 

preparatory and motivational services, all with the goal of improving access for low-income and first-generation students. 

And our efforts don’t stop there. Because improving the education outcomes for disadvantaged students is an important priority, the federal government directly supports institutions that 

focus on serving underrepresented students in an effort to help 

them complete a higher education. 

While these efforts are well intentioned, there is a growing concern they are not reaching their goals. For example, according to 

a study published earlier this year by one of our witnesses, Dr. 

Laura Perna, the percentage of low-income students who have attained a bachelor’s degree has increased by just 3 percent since 

1970. By comparison, the percentage of the wealthiest students 

who attained a bachelor’s degree has increased by 40 percent. 

In other words, despite the federal government’s growing investment in access and completion programs over the last 5 decades, 

graduation rates for the most disadvantaged students have barely 

budged. We have a responsibility to students, families, and taxpayers to ensure all of our spending in higher education deliver the 

intended results. Understanding how to strengthen these efforts for 

low-income and first-generation students is why our witnesses are 

here today. 

As we work to reauthorize the Higher Education Act, we want 

to learn about your efforts to pioneer new strategies and study the 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

3 

effectiveness of existing strategies so that more disadvantaged students can achieve the dream of a higher education. 

With that, I now recognize my ranking member, Congressman 

Hinojosa, for his opening remarks. 

[The statement of Chairwoman Foxx follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on 

Higher Education and Workforce Training 

I’d like to thank our witnesses for joining us to discuss strategies for improving 

postsecondary access and completion for low-income and first-generation students. 

We appreciate the opportunity to learn from you as Congress works to reauthorize 

the Higher Education Act. 

This is a very personal issue for me. As someone who grew up in extreme poverty, 

I know firsthand what it takes to earn a degree in difficult circumstances as well 

as what that degree means for one’s opportunity for advancement. Some of the most 

rewarding experiences I have had as an educator involved helping disadvantaged 

students overcome obstacles to reach their goals and achieve success. 

The Education and the Workforce Committee has held more than a dozen hearings about how to strengthen America’s higher education system for all those who 

choose to pursue a degree or credential – regardless of age, background, or circumstances. 

Research shows students who attain advanced levels of education are more likely 

to succeed in today’s economy. For example, students who earn an associate’s degree 

are expected to earn 27 percent more than their peers with a high school diploma 

over the course of a lifetime. 

For many students, however, the idea of graduating feels like a distant dream. 

Higher costs, a confusing financial aid system, and insufficient academic preparation disproportionately deter low-income and first-generation students from accessing and completing a higher education. 

Recognizing the challenges facing these students, the federal government invests 

in numerous programs geared toward identifying and supporting disadvantaged students and the institutions that serve them. In addition to providing students needbased financial assistance, such as Pell Grants, the federal government also provides early outreach and support services to help students progress from middle 

school through college. 

Programs such as GEAR UP and Upward Bound receive more than one billion 

of taxpayer dollars to support tutoring, family financial counseling, internships, research opportunities, and other preparatory and motivational services – all with the 

goal of improving access for low-income and first-generation students. 

And our efforts don’t stop there. Because improving the educational outcomes for 

disadvantaged students is an important priority, the federal government directly 

supports institutions that focus on serving underrepresented students in an effort 

to help them complete a higher education. 

While these efforts are well intentioned, there is a growing concern they are not 

reaching their goals. For example, according to a study published earlier this year 

by one of our witnesses, Dr. Laura Perna, the percentage of low-income students 

who have attained a bachelor’s degree has increased by just 3 percent since 1970. 

By comparison, the percentage of the wealthiest students who attained a bachelor’s 

degree has increased by 40 percent. 

In other words, despite the federal government’s growing investment in access 

and completion programs over the last five decades, graduation rates for the most 

disadvantaged students have barely budged. 

We have a responsibility to students, families, and taxpayers to ensure all of our 

investments in higher education deliver the intended results. Understanding how to 

strengthen these efforts for low-income and first-generation students is why our witnesses are here today. As we work to reauthorize the Higher Education Act, we 

want to learn about your efforts to pioneer new strategies and study the effectiveness of existing strategies so that more disadvantaged students can achieve the 

dream of a higher education. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx. 

Today’s hearing will focus on how our nation can improve college 

access and completion for low-income and first-generation college 

students. I want to join the chairwoman in welcoming our witCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

4 

nesses, Dr. Michelle Cooper, Dr. Charles Alexander, Dr. Laura 

Perna, and Dr. Joe May—and I am proud to say, from my home 

state of Texas. 

Preparing all students for good, family-sustaining jobs and careers and a bright future must be a guiding principle for HEA reauthorization. A highly skilled 21st century workforce is key to 

strengthening our nation’s economy and to reducing income inequality and poverty. 

The Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce found 

that 63 percent of all jobs will require workers with at least some 

postsecondary education by 2018. If our nation is going to compete 

in the global economy we must be sure that all these students are 

reaching their full potential and obtaining postsecondary education. 

Low-income and first-generation students face substantial hurdles in applying to college and receiving financial aid they need. 

Too often, they enter unprepared and they struggle to persist in 

their studies and ultimately graduate. 

Meanwhile, college costs have continued to rise while student debt now tops $1.2 trillion. 

First-generation students like myself are older, more likely to be 

independent students and to have families of their own. They are 

more likely to be enrolled part-time and to withdraw and reenroll 

over and over again the course of their education. 

First-generation students are most likely to be enrolled in associate degree programs, and many transfer between community colleges and 4-year institutions over the course of their education. 

This process needs to be seamless so time and money are not wasted retaking coursework. 

We also know that too many students enter postsecondary education unprepared for college-level coursework. According to the 

National Center for Education Statistics, in 2011 through 2012, 36 

percent of college students whose parents had a high school diploma or less reported needing to take remedial coursework, compared to only 28 percent of students whose parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher. 

Forty percent of Pell Grant recipients need to take remedial 

courses to improve their basic skills. Unfortunately, according to 

Complete College America, 70 percent of students who begin in remedial math never enroll in the next level college course. 

While we need to bolster our K–12 system to ensure that students are entering college prepared, we should also encourage innovative practices to increase success rates. Instead of prerequisite 

remedial courses, some institutions are experimenting with co-requisites, where students enroll in college-level courses but also take 

an additional support class or stay for extra tutoring after class. 

MSIs, which are minority-serving institutions, enroll and graduate significant proportions of minority students and play a vital 

role in higher education for low-income and first-generation students. Through innovative practices, many are boosting graduation 

rates. 

Between the years of 2000 and 2012, University of Texas at El 

Paso, an HSI in my home state of Texas, increased the total number of undergraduate degrees awarded by 79 percent while enrollment only grew by 26 percent. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

5 

So what did they do? At U.T. Center for Institutional Evaluation, 

Research, and Planning created a data tool for deans to track students’ term-to-term enrollment status, allowing advisors to contact 

students who do not reenroll and help them get back on track. We 

need to maintain strong funding levels for these institutions like El 

Paso’s University of Texas. 

Pell Grants are another critical tool to keep college in reach for 

these students. Just last week I introduced four bills—H.R. 1956, 

H.R. 1957, H.R. 1958, and H.R. 1959—with our former colleague, 

Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii. She introduced her legislation 

that mirrors mine last week, as I did. 

That, ladies and gentlemen, will strengthen Pell and restore the 

summer Pell program, which has—which was key in helping students graduate on time and with much less debt. I hope this committee, members on both sides of the aisle, will approve these bills 

when they come before us. 

Finally, federal investments in GEAR UP, HEP/CAMP, and 

TRIO programs are transforming the lives of millions of disadvantaged students by providing them with academic support and services they need to success in school. The GEAR UP program in my 

district—congressional district number 15 in Texas—has had great 

success by adding a financial literacy component, which is helping 

parents and students understand the financial resources available 

to help them finance their higher education. 

I look forward to hearing from each one of you what other recommendations you as panelists may have to make a college education accessible and affordable to greater numbers of low-income, 

minority, and first-generation college students. 

And with that, Madam Chair, I yield back. 

[The testimony of Mr. Hinojosa follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Rube ́n Hinojosa, Ranking Member, 

Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training 

Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx. Today’s hearing will focus on how our nation can 

improve college access and completion for low-income and first generation college 

students. I want to join the chairwoman in welcoming our witnesses, Dr. Michelle 

Cooper, Dr. Charles Alexander, Dr. Laura Perna and Dr. Joe may from my home 

state of Texas. 

Preparing all students for good family sustaining jobs and careers and a bright 

future must be a guiding principle for h-e-a reauthorization. 

A highly skilled 21st century workforce is key to strengthening our nation’s economy and to reducing income inequality and poverty. The Georgetown Center on education and the workforce found that 63 percent of all jobs will require workers with 

at least some postsecondary education by 2018. 

If our nation is going to compete in the global economy, we must make sure that 

all these students are reaching their full potential and obtaining postsecondary education. 

Low-income and first generation students face substantial hurdles in applying to 

college and receiving the financial aid they need. 

Too often they enter unprepared, and struggle to persist in their studies and ultimately graduate. Meanwhile, college costs have continued to rise, with student debt 

now topping 1.2 trillion dollars. 

First generation students are older, more likely to be independent students and 

to have families of their own. They are more likely to be enrolled part time and to 

withdraw and re-enroll over the course of their education. First-generation students 

are most likely to be enrolled in associate’s degree programs and many transfer between community colleges and four-year institutions over the course of their education. This process needs to be seamless so time and money are not wasted retaking coursework. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

6 

We also know that too many students enter postsecondary education unprepared 

for college-level coursework. According to the national center for education statistics, 

in 2011–2012, 36 percent of college students whose parents had a high school diploma or less reported needing to take remedial coursework, compared to 28 percent 

of students whose parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher. 40 percent of Pell grant 

recipients need to take remedial courses to improve their basic skills. 

Unfortunately, according to complete college America, 70% of students who begin 

in remedial math never enroll in the next-level college course. 

While we need to bolster our k-12 system to ensure that students are entering 

college prepared, we should also encourage innovative practices to increase success 

rates. Instead of ‘‘pre-requisite’’ remedial courses, some institutions are experimenting with ‘‘co-requisites’’ where students enroll in college-level courses, but also 

take an additional support class or stay for extra tutoring after class. 

Msi’s enroll and graduate significant proportions of minority students and play a 

vital role in higher education for low-income and first-generation students. Through 

innovative practices, many are boosting graduation rates. 

Between 2000 and 2012, the University of Texas at El Paso, an hsi in my home 

state, increased the total number of undergraduate degrees awarded by 79 percent 

while enrollment only grew by 26 percent. Utep’s center for institutional evaluation 

research and planning created a data tool for deans to track students term-to-term 

enrollment status, allowing advisors to contact students who do not re-enroll and 

help them get back on track. Pell grants are another critical tool to keep College 

in reach for these students. 

Just last week, I introduced four bills, (H.R. 1956, H.R. 1957, H.R. 1958 and H.R. 

1959) with our former colleague, Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, that will 

strengthen Pell and restore the summer Pell program which was key in helping students graduate on time with less debt. I hope this committee will approve these 

bills. 

Finally, federal investments in gear-up, hep-camp, and trio programs are transforming the lives of millions of disadvantaged students by providing them with the 

academic support and services they need to succeed in school. 

The gear-up program in my district has had great success by adding a financial 

literacy component which is helping parents and students understand the resources 

available to help finance higher education. 

I look forward to hearing what other recommendations our panelists may have to 

make a college education accessible and affordable to greater numbers of low income, minority and first generation college students. 

With that, I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much, Mr. Hinojosa. 

Pursuant to committee rule 7(c), all members will be permitted 

to submit written statements to be included in the permanent 

hearing record. Without objection, the hearing record will remain 

open for 14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous 

material referenced during the hearing to be submitted for the official hearing record. 

It is now my pleasure to introduce our distinguished witnesses. 

Dr. Laura Perna is a James S. Riepe professor and founding executive director of the Alliance for Higher Education and Democracy at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. She is currently president of the Association for the Study 

of Higher Education. 

Dr. Perna’s scholarship focuses on the way social structures, educational purposes, and public policies promote and limit college access and success and has been published in books, journals, and 

policy reports. 

Dr. Charles Alexander is the associate vice provost for student 

diversity and director of the Academic Advancement Program, 

AAP, at UCLA in Los Angeles, California. He also serves as adjunct associate professor in the Division of Public Health and Community Dentistry at the UCLA School of Dentistry. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

7 

Prior to joining UCLA, he oversaw student admissions, outreach, 

and recruitment, academic support programs, and student services 

at U.C. San Francisco. 

Dr. Michelle Asha Cooper is the president of the Institute for 

Higher Education Policy here in Washington, D.C. Dr. Cooper previously served as the deputy director for the advisory committee on 

student financial assistance at the Department of Education and 

has held various leadership positions at the Association of American Colleges and Universities, Council for Independent Colleges, 

and King’s College. 

Dr. Joe May is chancellor of the Dallas County Community College District in Dallas, Texas. Prior to this, Dr. May served 7 years 

as president of the Louisiana Community and Technical College 

System, where enrollment increased from 71,000 to more than 

160,000 students under his tenure. He is known nationally and 

internationally for his advocacy for the role of community colleges 

in solving today’s pressing social issues. 

I now ask our witnesses to stand and raise your right hand. 

[Witnesses sworn.] 

Let the record reflect the witnesses answered in the affirmative. 

You may take your seat. 

Before I recognize you to provide your testimony, let me briefly 

explain our lighting system. You have 5 minutes to present your 

testimony. 

When you begin, the light in front of you will turn green. When 

the—1 minute is left, the light will turn yellow. When your time 

is expired, the light will turn red. At that point, I will ask you to 

wrap up your remarks as best you are able. 

Members will each have 5 minutes to ask questions. 

Now, Dr. Perna, I recognize you for 5 minutes. 

I am not sure your mike is on. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. LAURA PERNA, JAMES S. RIEPE PROFESSOR, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALLIANCE FOR HIGHER 

EDUCATION AND DEMOCRACY, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, PHILADELPHIA, PA 

Ms. PERNA. Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member Hinojosa, and 

members of the subcommittee, thank you very much for the opportunity to comment on best practices for helping low-income and 

first-generation students access and complete college. I am honored 

to have the opportunity to speak with you today. 

The federal government plays an important role in promoting 

higher education attainment through the financial aid programs 

that are authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act. Of 

particular importance is the federal Pell Grant. Research consistently demonstrates the negative implications for college enrollment 

when college prices increase and grant aid decreases. 

The negative effects are particularly large for the enrollment of 

students from low-income families. Providing sufficient funding so 

as to at least maintain the purchasing power of the Pell Grant is 

important to preserving the affordability of higher education for 

students from low-income families. 

Although essential, investment in need-based grant aid is insufficient. The federal TRIO programs and other college access and sucCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

8 

cess programs also contribute to the goal of raising higher education attainment for students from groups that are historically 

underrepresented in higher education. 

As detailed further in my written testimony, I offer five recommendations to guide your committee’s consideration of college 

access and success programs. 

So first, target students with the greatest financial need. We 

must recognize and address the many ways that inequality is 

structured into the pathways into and through college. Students 

from low-income families have fewer financial resources to pay the 

direct cost of the college attendance and the many less visible costs 

of college access and completion. 

Students from low-income families also typically attend high 

schools and postsecondary educational institutions that have fewer 

resources to invest in and support students’ college-related outcomes. Targeting programs to low-income and first-generation students helps to level the playing field for higher education opportunity. 

Second, assist students with navigating pathways into and 

through college with particular attention to financial aid processes. 

Although much information about college going and financial aid 

processes is available via the Internet and other sources, simply 

making information out there is insufficient. 

Students and their families need to be able to determine which 

information is most useful and relevant, given their financial circumstances, academic preparation, their goals, and their interests. 

Low-income and first-generation students especially need guidance 

with the many steps that promote college entry, including preparing for and taking college admissions tests, searching for colleges that are well-suited to their goals and interests, visiting college campuses, submitting college applications, and more. 

Low-income and first-generation students also need to understand the availability of financial aid and how to get the aid that 

is out there. They also often require assistance with completing financial aid application forms. 

Third recommendation is to adapt programs to recognize the 

state, regional, and local context, as well as the characteristics of 

students served. To have a meaningful effect on students’ collegerelated outcomes, college access and success programs need to 

adapt the delivery of services to recognize the context in which the 

programs are embedded. 

Particularly important are the characteristics of state policies 

pertaining to high school graduation and assessment requirements 

and the higher education options that are available in the state, region, and locality. 

Programs also need to recognize the differences in the needs of 

the students served. So middle and high school students, for example, require different types of support and assistance than veterans 

and unemployed adults who aspire to complete college. 

Fourth, leverage federal spending to serve greater numbers of 

students. Although the federal government’s investment in TRIO 

programs enables the provision of services to some students, many 

more low-income and first-generation students also require assistance. TRIO programs serve only a very small fraction, estimated 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

9 

less than 5 percent, of the nation’s total population of low-income 

and first-generation college students. 

Given constraints on the availability of additional dollars, the 

federal government should consider ways to leverage its investment 

to encourage greater support for college access and success programming from other entities as well as partnerships among the 

many programs that are also sponsored by state governments, colleges and universities, philanthropic organizations, and other entities. 

The fifth recommendation is to encourage research that improves 

our understanding of best practices for college access and success 

programs. To maximize the return on investment in college access 

and success programs, we need to know more about what components and services work, for which groups of students, and in 

which contexts. 

With more and better research, we will ensure that finite resources are used to most effectively improve college-related outcomes for students from low-income families and first-generation 

college students. 

Thank you for your attention. 

[The testimony of Dr. Perna follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

10 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 1 here 94315.001
11 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 2 here 94315.002
12 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 3 here 94315.003
13 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 4 here 94315.004
14 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 5 here 94315.005
15 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 6 here 94315.006
16 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 7 here 94315.007
17 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 8 here 94315.008
18 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 9 here 94315.009
19 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 10 here 94315.010
20 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 11 here 94315.011
21 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 12 here 94315.012
22 

Chairwoman FOXX. Dr. Alexander, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. CHARLES J. ALEXANDER, ASSOCIATE VICE 

PROVOST FOR STUDENT DIVERSITY, DIRECTOR, ACADEMIC 

ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM, ASSOCIATE ADJUNCT PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member Hinojosa, and all the members of the subcommittee, for inviting 

me to testify today. 

I am a product of a single-parent household, and when I was 

young my mother aspired for me to attend college one day. As I 

came to the end of my senior year in high school, I thought I was 

prepared to enter college and compete with the rest of the students 

who were entering higher education institutions that year. 

However, I soon learned that college was much more challenging 

than my high school was. I was fortunate, however, to be recruited 

by a college success program that provided me with a summer 

bridge experience, academic support services, and the guidance 

that I needed to succeed; 4 years later I completed my bachelor’s 

degree and later went on to earn my master’s and doctorate in the 

sociology of education. 

So I can attest to the fact that if it were not for the support of 

these programs and the encouragement of my mother, of course, 

and extended family, I would not be here today sharing testimony 

with this committee. 

Let me share with you a model student academic support program that I oversee at UCLA. The Academic Advancement Program, AAP, has been in existence since 1971. It is a multiracial, 

multiethnic academic program that advocates access, equity, and 

opportunity, and excellence in its students. 

AAP students represent about 23 percent of the UCLA student 

body, which is about 24,000 undergraduates. It is a comprehensive 

support program that provides integrated services, setting the 

highest standards for them; promoting academic, personal, and programmatic excellence; and building communities of shared learning. 

AAP is supported by a mixture of state, federal, and foundation 

funding. State funding represents the majority of our overall budget. Included in my written testimony you will see the funding 

sources and types. 

A significant number of AAP students come from low-income 

families, are eligible for Pell Grants, and are in the first in their 

family to attend college; 63 percent are from historically underrepresented communities. 

Each summer, AAP runs a rigorous, academic, 6-week, residential program for 400 entering freshmen and transfers. This is approximately 12 percent of the 34,000 students who are eligible for 

the program. Students take two to three university courses, and 

the summer bridge program could enroll more if additional funding 

were available. 

AAP also provides peer-facilitated learning communities based on 

a dialogical pedagogy, collaborative learning workshops, academic 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

23 

personal counseling, innovative science programs, and scholarships. 

AAP has a comprehensive mentoring program that encourages all 

students to prepare for graduate and professional schools, and provides resources to support this end. 

AAP also oversees a federally funded TRIO program, the Ronald 

E. McNair Scholars Program. Twenty-three of the first 33 McNair 

scholars are enrolled in graduate programs. 

Over the past 10 years, AAP has responded to a growing number 

of eligible transfer students. AAP’s work with its transfer students 

has resulted in a dramatic increase in their 4-year graduation 

rates, from 61 percent 15 years ago to 83 percent today. 

We push our students to use all the university resources. College 

Honors is a nationally renowned program that provides students 

the organization and environment within which to pursue individual excellence. The percentage of AAP students in Honors has 

increased from 4 percent in the early 1990s to 17 percent today. 

Another campus partner that we work closely with is the Program for Excellence in Education and Research in the Sciences, 

otherwise known as PEERS. PEERS is a primary retention program for entering underrepresented life and physical science students. Since its inception in 2003, 340 students have completed the 

PEERS program and 84 percent have graduated with UCLA 

science degrees. 

Engagement in PEERS clearly improves academic success and 

retention in science, eliminating the achievement gap for URM students in science. Many of our graduates go on and earn Ph.D.s, go 

to professional school. 

We have exchanged ideas with a number of universities across 

the country, including the University of Michigan, Maryland, Cal 

Berkeley, Cal Irvine, University of Texas, and international universities, such as Vrije University in Amsterdam, the University of 

Rwanda, and the University of Johannesburg. We have been hosted 

by visitors from Australia, Great Britain, South Korea, the Netherlands, South Africa, and many other countries. 

A tenet of our AAP’s philosophy that has resulted in spectacular 

graduation rates is the belief that when students work in the program to promote the success of other students, they gain the selfconfidence and self-respect that propels them to graduate. By employing AAP students as tutors and as peer counselors, we set up 

a model of academic achievement that promotes the values of giving back to the community. 

Most AAP students employees are paid with work study and institutional funds, and 100 percent of these students graduate. A 

100 percent graduate rate is AAP’s goal for all of its students. 

Let me close by thanking Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member 

Hinojosa, and the other members of the subcommittee today for the 

opportunity to appear before you. I am happy to answer any questions at any time. 

Thank you. 

[The testimony of Dr. Alexander follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

24 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 13 here 94315.013
25 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 14 here 94315.014
26 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 15 here 94315.015
27 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 16 here 94315.016
28 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 17 here 94315.017
29 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 18 here 94315.018
30 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 19 here 94315.019
31 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 20 here 94315.020
32 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 21 here 94315.021
33 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 22 here 94315.022
34 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 23 here 94315.023
35 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Dr. Alexander. 

Dr. Cooper, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. MICHELLE ASHA COOPER, PRESIDENT, INSTITUTE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY, WASHINGTON, 

D.C. 

Ms. COOPER. Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member Hinojosa, and 

members of the subcommittee, good morning and thank you for 

this opportunity. 

At IHEP we focus on issues related to college access and success 

for low-income and first-generation students. We recognize the important role of colleges and universities in serving these students. 

Given that, I would like to discuss the role of minority-serving 

institutions, MSIs, which serve large numbers of first-generation 

and low-income students. 

Most MSIs are public institutions. For example, the majority of 

the 409 Hispanic-serving institutions and 296 emerging HSIs are 

public, with 46 percent of HSIs being community colleges. 

Almost half of all students at MSIs receive Pell Grants, with 

even greater numbers of Pell recipients attending HBCUs and tribal colleges. While the term ‘‘MSIs’’ refer to institutions with similar 

student profiles, these schools do have different histories and missions. Unlike other MSIs, the mission of tribal colleges and HBCUs 

have deep historical roots in the communities that they serve. 

Many MSIs have strategies for educating low-income and firstgeneration students. I will mention a few, but before doing so, I 

want to stress the role of federal policymaking in supporting these 

students who can be found not only at MSIs but at other institutions, as well. 

Therefore, for federal policymaking I offer four recommendations. 

First, collect and provide more useful and usable data to students and their families. Students need clear and reliable data presented in user-friendly ways to inform their college choices and decisions. Likewise, policymakers need more comprehensive data to 

inform policy conversations and decision-making. 

Second, increase the investment in the Pell Grant and simplify 

the financial aid process. Even though many MSIs try to hold tuition to levels that are relatively affordable, students still rely heavily on financial aid. To support these students, we must maintain 

and possibly even increase Pell Grant funding. We also need to 

simplify the financial aid process. 

Third, we must increase support for TRIO and GEAR UP. Over 

a million students combined benefit from TRIO and GEAR UP. 

With a stronger investment, both programs could help so many 

more students, especially since the need is ever growing. 

More details about these three recommendations can be found in 

the written testimony and I am happy to discuss. 

My fourth recommendation brings me back to MSIs. I recommend that policymakers set high expectations for MSIs and support those that serve their students well. Many MSI leaders have 

already taken steps to improve student outcomes and institutional 

outcomes. 

For example, the University of Texas at El Paso and St. 

Edward’s University prioritize success for Hispanic students, which 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

36 

is evident by their strong outcomes and high graduation rates. St. 

Edward’s actually has the highest graduation rate of all HSIs, at 

72 percent. U.T. El Paso also offers dual enrollment with the local 

high schools and the local community college, which helps to reduce 

cost and time to degree. 

At HBCUs, like Fayetteville State University and Norfolk State 

University, faculty and student affairs collaborate on data-driven 

solutions to support students. Fayetteville State targeted efforts towards their men of color, and both institutions strengthened teaching and learning practices. 

Also, there are MSIs like California State, Northridge, which intentionally increased the enrollment of their Pell Grant recipients 

and first-generation students even as the state cut its budget. And 

there is North Carolina Central University, which eliminated waste 

and inefficiencies in several program areas and then funneled those 

savings into student success efforts. 

Institutional reforms like these examples are rarely discussed at 

the national level. Even when faced with chronic underfunding, 

these and other college leaders have simply decided to do more 

with less. While I recognize that this is an honorable strategy, 

doing more with less is not a sustainable strategy. 

In conclusion, it is important for federal policymakers to enhance 

support for MSIs that are enrolling and, most importantly, graduating and preparing their students to lead productive lives. 

Thank you. 

[The testimony of Dr. Cooper follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

37 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 24 here 94315.024
38 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 25 here 94315.025
39 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 26 here 94315.026
40 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 27 here 94315.027
41 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 28 here 94315.028
42 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 29 here 94315.029
43 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 30 here 94315.030
44 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 31 here 94315.031
45 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 32 here 94315.032
46 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 33 here 94315.033
47 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 34 here 94315.034
48 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 35 here 94315.035
49 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Dr. Cooper. 

Dr. May, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. JOE D. MAY, CHANCELLOR, DALLAS 

COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, DALLAS, TEXAS 

Mr. MAY. Thank you, Madam Chair, and Ranking Member Hinojosa, and members of the subcommittee. 

The Dallas County Community College District comprises seven 

colleges and supports more than 100,000 students through our 

7,000 employees. You described the problem so well in your opening comments, and we witness the same: Changing demographics 

among our students has prompted changes in how we help students and how we prepare them to enter the workforce and earn 

a living wage. 

Every college in the Dallas County Community College District 

is a minority-serving institution, with diverse representation 

among Africa-Americans, Asian-Americans, and Latinos. Six of our 

seven colleges are Hispanic-serving institutions, and the seventh is 

predominantly African-American. As a predominantly HSI system, 

Dallas community colleges offer Latino students support through 

TRIO programs and other services, as well. 

Since being designated as HSIs, the Dallas County Community 

College District colleges have closed the gaps in three key areas: 

District Hispanic enrollment reflects the demographics of Dallas 

County at 37.1 percent, and 39 percent in terms of completion of 

degrees; course performance with Hispanic students successfully 

completing attempted credit hours has gone up; and credentials 

with Hispanic students earning 31 percent of those awarded in our 

most recent year of 2014. 

We emphasize completion and credentials so that students can be 

ready to earn a living wage and build a career. In our colleges that 

serve the most Hispanic students, student support service staff 

members use a case management approach to guide students 

through their academic pursuits, and we will provide the data in 

terms of the success of that approach. 

As a result, 75 percent of the TRIO participants at Mountain 

View College are members of student associations, such as student 

government, Phi Theta Kappa, and athletic teams. Last year, almost 70 percent of Dallas County colleges’ Hispanic students successfully completed their courses. Both TRIO and Title V services 

are not only important, they are essential to continue to grow our 

workforce and build the middle class. 

We have engaged with Texas Completes, a statewide community 

college initiative to share data and strategies to improve student 

outcomes. Efforts through this partnership have led to an increase 

of 42 percent in certificates and an increase in 33 percent in associate degrees at—in Dallas from 2010 to 2014. 

Our dual credit and early college high school programs offer additional options for at-risk students. Dual credit enables high 

school students to earn transferable college credits. 

Dallas County colleges provide dual credit tuition free to our students. Dual credit students also earn more credits per semester 

than our traditional students, which places at-risk students in a 

much stronger position toward completion. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

50 

Our six early college high schools enroll 2,000 students, with Hispanics comprising 40 percent. They also account for 34.8 percent of 

the 700 early college high school students who graduate with both 

a high school diploma and a 2-year associate degree. Three of these 

schools have achieved National Blue Ribbon status. 

Today everyone needs some education beyond high school. There 

are simply no jobs for those who do not have a credential that gives 

them the tools to earn a living wage. 

And I believe in order to ensure that the middle class dreams of 

our students become a reality that Congress can affect positive 

change. I would like to leave you with four recommendations. 

One, as the nation’s demographics shift, an analysis should be 

conducted to ensure that TRIO funds are available to institutions 

that are early in the transition of serving minority and low-income 

students. Guidelines should be broadened to encourage partnerships with faith-based community organizations and others that 

are supporting the needs of similar populations. 

Two, rather than keep TRIO programs separate from others 

within the institution, they should be integrated in a manner that 

ensures that the number of students served is not limited by federal dollars. The approach currently taken has the impact of capping who is served. This cap could easily be removed by requiring 

integration with existing services. 

Increasingly, the fastest-growing HSI colleges are community colleges. As community colleges enroll over half of Hispanics in higher 

education, this designation is important to help them design successful strategies around student success and STEM. A continued 

emphasis should be placed on improving completion rates and student success. 

Four, in addition to partnerships—partnerships should be broadened to encourage the development and implementation of early 

college high schools, as this approach has a proven record of improving high school graduation rates, college readiness, reducing 

time to degree, and improving GPAs, and improving college completion. 

Thank you for your time and your attention today, and for your 

support of our students. 

[The testimony of Dr. May follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

51 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 36 here 94315.036
52 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 37 here 94315.037
53 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 38 here 94315.038
54 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Dr. May. 

I want to thank all of you for great presentations. 

I would now like to recognize my colleague, Mr. Curbelo, for 5 

minutes for questions. 

Mr. CURBELO. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

And I thank the ranking member, as well, and the witnesses, for 

making some time for us this morning. 

Dr. Alexander, you mentioned the Academic Advancement Program during your testimony that serves as a summer bridge program for entering freshmen and transfers. Florida International 

University, in the district I represent, also offers a summer bridge 

program that has helped students transition from high school to 

college. 

FIU has also created programs intended to help low-income and 

first-generation students gain access and the proper preparation to 

be successful during their experience in higher ed. I am proud to 

report that FIU is one of the nation’s largest, most diverse institutions in higher education, with over 54,000 students and 200,000 

alumni. Nearly 53 percent of FIU’s undergraduate student body 

will be the first generation in their families to attain a college degree. 

To maximize access and completion, FIU has revolutionized student advising, created outside partnerships and initiatives, and leveraged Pell Grants and funding. And FIU has a strong partnership with Miami-Dade County public schools, focused on high 

school student success through dual enrollment and other programs. 

They are hoping to incentivize a K–12 higher ed collaboration 

through their program called ACCESS, which is chaired by Superintendent Alberto Carvalho and President Mark Rosenberg. So far, 

the programs have been very successful promoting enrollment and 

graduation rates. 

How do you think we can incentivize more of these types of partnerships between K–12 and higher ed to ease the transition for students and improve access for low-income, first-generation, and minority students? 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Thank you for that question. 

One of the programs that we conduct at UCLA is called the Vice 

Provost Initiative for Pre-College Scholars. It is a cohort program 

that works with eight high schools, and basically what happens is 

students are recruited after their ninth grade year and they are 

part of a cohort that enters the university during the summers— 

2 weeks during—between their sophomore and junior year, 5 

weeks, between their junior and senior year. 

And the idea is to provide them this college readiness, this preparation, these workshops, in collaboration with their parents, so 

their parents partner in this pathway that we have created for 

these students to enter to the university. These students have been 

highly successful. 

Many have gone to other schools besides UCLA, though we try 

to recruit them, but they have been highly successful to the extent 

that the program was funded by a huge foundation grant, but now 

we are seeking institutional funding for the program itself. The 

students also receive a scholarship from the university—those who 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

55 

enroll in UCLA—a 4-year scholarship to help them with matriculating towards a degree. 

Mr. CURBELO. Thank you. 

And, Madam Chair, I want to ask an open question to anyone 

who will take it during my allotted time. 

I was with President Dona Shalala of the University of Miami 

earlier this week and she tells me that one of the greatest burdens 

on higher ed today is compliance, and that they are constantly having to deviate resources from student services to compliance. Do 

you any of you have any ideas as to what we can do to perhaps 

relieve the regulatory burden on our universities and colleges so 

that they have, in turn, more resources to dedicate to students— 

specifically the students we are discussing here today, the ones 

that most need the help? 

Ms. COOPER. I think that we definitely have to be mindful of the 

regulatory burden that institutions are certainly very vocal about 

and bringing to our attention. There are several things that I think 

could be done, and I think we need to first of all consider what are 

we asking them and whether or not it continues to be appropriate 

for the current context. 

Many questions and many of the things required currently in 

these reporting requirements are outdated; we simply no longer 

need them. And I think we need to start and focus on what are the 

kinds of questions that we need to ask, and what are the types of 

metrics that we need to gather in order to be able to answer them 

effectively. 

I would suggest looking at things like access, progression, cost, 

and post-college outcomes to start. I also note that there has recently been a regulatory task force that was convened by the American Council on Education that looked at this issue, and I think 

that they have some good recommendations, as well, that offer us 

a starting point. 

Mr. CURBELO. Thank you very much. 

My time is about to expire, but I want to thank all the witnesses. 

And thank you, Madam Chair, for scheduling this important 

hearing. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you. 

Mr. Hinojosa, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx. 

Dr. May, I was very pleased to hear you discuss the role of early 

college high schools. I believe that in my congressional district 

down in South Texas, Region One Education Service Center, which 

represents students from Laredo, Texas to Brownsville, Texas, 200- 

mile geographic area, is leading the state of Texas with 33 of these 

early college high school programs. 

Many students are coming out of high school with 2 years of college and their associate degree free of charge. In fact, we are working with one of our hospitals, Doctors Hospital at Renaissance, to 

implement a pilot program, first of its kind in the nation, which 

would graduate high school students with an R.N. degree. 

How do you believe the federal government can help expand this 

exemplary model throughout the nation? 

Mr. MAY. Well, one—and thank you very much. I am a early college high school enthusiast because it works. We see students often 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

56 

enter in the ninth grade with only being 6 percent college-ready in 

mathematics graduate, and we have 100 percent of our students 

who graduate from high school college-ready in all areas, with well 

over a 90 percent completion rate; 40 percent of those are graduating with a high school diploma and an associate’s degree. 

So I think the encouragement here are a couple of things. One, 

right now, even through data collection and reporting, we don’t collect and look at what is going on with dual enrollment programs 

between community colleges and schools or early college programs, 

either. That would be a—I think a goal worthy of tracking, because 

the results of these efforts are absolutely astounding when you look 

at the success of— 

Mr. HINOJOSA. That information that you say that we are lacking 

is something that I have heard in Texas. Dr. Steve Murdock, I 

think he has an office at Rice University, a famous demographer, 

and he has a lot of data that when I heard Dr. Cooper give so much 

information on all the MSIs, it sounds like some of what he has 

used in some of his speeches. 

And I think that you are right, we need to collect more information on each and every one of the MSIs, because that is the only 

way that we are going to be able to prescribe the right programs 

and methods so that we can increase those graduation rates. 

Mr. MAY. I agree. If parents can make better decisions for their 

children while they are in high school they will do so, and simply 

assuming that they are going to figure it out on their own without 

some assistance with that is less likely to happen than if we can 

provide that information that clarifies the importance of programs 

like early college high schools and others that can lead to student 

success. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. I want to share with you that I came to Congress 

in 1997 and I learned what HSI meant: Hispanic-serving institutions. And I saw that the funding by the appropriators was $10 

million a year for what was listed as 100 HSIs, and once they doled 

out the money, which was crumbs, maybe 20 or 30 HSIs really got 

money. 

So I worked on trying to do something about that, and I am the 

author of Title V of the Education Code. And obviously I believe 

that it is a vital component in helping low-income and first-generation students, as we are discussing here, to provide targeted assistance to all MSIs, which serve larger numbers of these students. 

How did Title V HSI funds support your ability to improve completion rates for your students in Dallas? 

Mr. MAY. Well, it is—they are critical. With Mountain View College and El Centro College, we have focused on moving our Hispanic students into STEM programs. We have given a great deal 

of not only individual support, but encouraged them to engage in 

student clubs and organizations so that they can be a part of a cohort that are moving forward with like interests. 

Not only have we seen our student persistence increase as a result of that strategy; we have seen a growth of majors in STEM 

degrees. That has been a large part of our enrollment increase that 

has occurred as we have been able to make that happen. 

And in fact, we were able to use the Title V funds as part of an 

overall initiative in order to put— 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

57 

Mr. HINOJOSA. I wish I had another 5 minutes to keep talking 

with you. 

Mr. MAY. Thank you very much. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. But, Dr. Cooper, I compliment you on your facts. 

Your remarks are excellent, as all of your remarks are, but I was 

especially interested in seeing how HSIs has gone from 100 to over 

400 HSIs. And thank goodness that Congress has sense enough to 

increase the investments in minority-serving institutions, because 

we have increased enrollment in community colleges and universities by over 30 percent in the last 4 years. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Hinojosa. 

Mr. Allen, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

And thank you, to our panel—distinguished panel, for joining us 

today. It is good to have you and good to learn more about the education process, and particularly higher education. 

I am a new member of Congress and I come from the business 

community, so I understand a little bit about, you know, giving 

folks the opportunity to have a good-paying job. And one thing I 

have learned about education is the reason for education is preparing folks to get a good job. 

The other thing that I learned in business was that, you know, 

folks are wired different ways. And if we can find out how—you 

know, where their passions are, they tend to really excel when they 

get—understand their passions and are allowed to pursue those 

passions. 

And, you know, from an accountability standpoint, you know, I 

believe every young American should have the opportunity to explore paths after high school, and I think we need to do it after 

high school and before they spend 4 years on an undergraduate degree and then say, ‘‘Okay, what do I do now?’’ 

And, you know, the issue that I see is that, you know, the traditional 4-year degree is a process, but it doesn’t guarantee a goodpaying job anymore. The traditional route is not the only path to 

a job, and many good-paying technical jobs go unfilled both in our 

district and all across the country. Businesses are practically waiting for young, hardworking Americans to step up to the plate. 

You all mentioned high school programs. Do these programs inform students of technical-type jobs that may be available to them 

and how they may seek those? And what are some ways that we 

can promote vocational learning to the low-income students? 

And I will just throw that out to anyone who would like to address that. 

Mr. MAY. I would be glad to comment on that. I really think 

the—you are exactly right. 

The earlier we can engage—higher education can engage with 

students while they are still in high school is very important to be 

a part of that communication. The rate of change is so fast that 

many students, parents, and teachers struggle to keep up with 

that. 

That is why, I mentioned earlier, why I think programs like 

early college high schools, where we integrate the higher education 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

58 

and the college while the student is still in school are very important programs. They are not for everyone, but they work. 

Others, where we can engage in dual credit programs, where a 

student again can begin to earn high school credit. The important 

fact that we have learned from that is that our students in high 

school can actually take—are taking a little heavier—slightly heavier load than our full-time students who are coming in as freshman, meaning that we are actually accelerating not only time to 

degree, but the chance that they are going to be successful and be 

able to get—enter a career and get that great job. 

Mr. ALLEN. Any other comments? 

Yes? 

Ms. PERNA. So there is some research that suggests the value of 

helping students to understand early in the educational pipeline 

the different types of employment possibilities. The research suggests that having that understanding about how—what types of opportunities are available helps—makes education more relevant, 

helps them understand the many different types of pathways that 

we have. 

Part of the challenge that we have in our higher education system is that there are so many different types of postsecondary options. And you are right, the data suggests that not everyone needs 

a 4-year college degree. But the data also do suggest that most 

need some education beyond high school. 

And so I think part of the challenge is for folks to be able to understand what that range of choices is, what the benefits and the 

costs of those different options are, and how we make sure that we 

really do have real choice for folks. 

Mr. ALLEN. You know, when my parents grew up they went to 

work first and then went to college. And of course, they kind of 

found their path and then said, ‘‘Okay, now I am going to go to college.’’ And once you get that 4-year degree, then it allows you to 

move on to the next level. 

You know, the federal government has invested much time and 

resources into college access for low-income students. Despite this 

fact, these students still complete their degrees at lower rates. 

What can we do to improve the graduation rates for our low-income 

students? 

And again, I would throw that out to whoever would like to take 

that question. 

Ms. PERNA. So it is a really complex problem. There is no one 

answer to this. 

So in order to improve college attainment we really have to focus 

on the academic readiness for success. We have to focus on the 

ability to pay. And we have to focus on making sure folks have the 

knowledge and information and support that they need to navigate 

these pathways. 

Mr. ALLEN. Okay. 

Ms. PERNA. Broad strokes— 

Mr. ALLEN. All right. 

Well, thank you again. 

And I will yield back the—I have no time left. 

Chairwoman FOXX. I now recognize the ranking member of the 

full committee, Mr. Scott, for 5 minutes. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

59 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I thank you and Representative Hinojosa for convening the hearing. 

This hearing is actually fairly timely. Just this past Monday one 

of the largest for-profit college systems in the nation, Corinthian 

Incorporated, shut its doors, and that was after being hit with a 

$30 million fine by the Department of Agriculture and—excuse me, 

Department of Education—and being denied access to student financial assistance because of findings such as misrepresentation to 

accrediting agencies and students about their placement rates. 

When you find such false advertising, it is appropriate for the 

Department of Education to take action. There were other institutions that may be doing the same things, and we need the Department of Education to take the appropriate action when there are 

specific findings of misconduct. 

Now, we all know that a quality postsecondary education is a 

proven path to the middle class, and we have heard comments 

about the need for some education past the high school level in 

order to participate in today’s economy. But the high cost of postsecondary education and the sharp reductions in student aid are 

making it very difficult for low-income and first-generation students to participate. 

Many years ago, when the Pell Grant started, it covered about 

75 percent of the cost of attending a 4-year public institution, and 

you heard people talk about working their way through college. Get 

a summer job and a part-time job during the year and you have 

got enough to close the gap and graduate with virtually no loans. 

Now the Pell Grant covers about a third of that cost, and even 

less than that for a private college, and working your way through 

college, even at 40 hours a week, is problematic without coming out 

with a debt the size of their parents’ mortgages. 

So we have to protect the access to college, and also we have to 

protect the ability of those with financial strains to actually graduate. 

Just start off with a couple of questions. 

Dr. Perna, you mentioned the financial aid form. Are people actually not filling it out because of the complications? 

Ms. PERNA. Yes. There is some evidence that suggests that lowincome students who are eligible to receive a Pell Grant attend college but they haven’t applied for the aid. 

Mr. SCOTT. Is that because of the complication of the form? 

Ms. PERNA. Well, that is what the—that is one hypothesis on 

this, and it seems to suggest, given the complexity of the form. And 

what we know through qualitative research, in terms of understanding how folks, especially low-income students and students for 

whom college is the—they are the first in their families to attend 

college, filling out the form is overwhelming, to some extent there 

is a distrust in the process. 

Mr. SCOTT. What are your findings about the financial strain as 

a factor in completing college? 

Ms. PERNA. Financial strain is certainly an important issue, and 

it plays out in several different respects. So as you discussed, there 

are only so many mechanisms that students have available to pay 

the cost of college. One is loans, and there is evidence that shows 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

60 

that some students are averse to taking out loans, and so, you 

know, that is one source— 

Mr. SCOTT. And so they drop out? 

Ms. PERNA. Drop out or choose not to attend at all. Or they decide to work to try to pay the cost through paid employment, and 

that is also a tremendous source of strain for students. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Dr. May, you mentioned the coalition works together to come up 

with ideas that work. What kind of ideas did they come up with? 

Mr. MAY. Seven colleges within the state—mostly urban but also 

one rural institution—where we are really diving deep in the data 

to look at what is really working and what is not working. One of 

the initial—we really focused on what is going on with developmental education. As you know, the—many students get into developmental education and never get out, and never complete their degree. 

So we have collectively begun a process of overhauling and redesigning developmental education. In our case we have reduced enrollment, as a result of the data that we have used for this, by 46 

percent this coming year in dual enrollment classes, but providing 

additional support to help students as they are working through 

regular courses to be successful with that. 

We have found that as we look at what gets in the way, that we 

need to help them speed up time. Time is not a friend to many students in completing the degree, so that is part—one example. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Scott. 

I now recognize myself for 5 minutes. 

Dr. Perna, what specific gaps do you see in available research regarding the success of college access programs, and what do you 

see as the repercussions of these gaps in terms of best serving lowincome and first-generation students? 

Ms. PERNA. Thank you, Chairwoman. 

So one of the important gaps in the research has to do with understanding what services work for which groups of students in 

which particular context. So we have a lot of variation in these programs, which is appropriate, given the number of different types of 

needs and places in which these programs are operating, and programs are doing a whole host of different types of things. 

There is some research around whether programs work, yes or 

no, and that research generally shows on average that college access programs, for example, do increase college enrollment. But we 

know less about what it is within those programs that is making 

the biggest difference. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Dr. May, can you tell us a little bit more 

about the Texas Completes initiatives? Have you worked with 

other community colleges around Texas to share the best practices 

for serving low-income and first-generation students? And have you 

changed any of your strategies for serving these students as a result of any collaboration that you had? 

Mr. MAY. Madam Chair, the Texas Completes I think is unique 

in that what these colleges have agreed to do is share data we normally wouldn’t share with each other and to benchmark ourselves 

against each other in the process so that we can really get a sense 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

61 

among many institutions as to what is working and what is not 

working. And it has been quite revealing and really has resulted 

in many changes within our organization. 

I mentioned developmental education, but also it has impacted 

how we advise students, understanding that what students are 

looking for is a clear pathway to not only a degree, but a future, 

so we have changed that, restructuring, in many cases, the—those 

types of support services that we make available. 

Two, we have—in our developmental education we have invested—decreased the number of courses but increased tutorial 

support and mentoring support to help students be successful. As 

we have seen, that began to change the actual numbers, with more 

students being successful. 

Also, we have realized that we have got to do a better job of encouraging students to go into STEM programs, and then what gets 

in the way of them completing those. So we have seen the completion in those areas go up dramatically as we have been able to 

share data and compare programs. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much. 

Dr. Alexander, you mentioned that you oversee—your program 

oversees one TRIO program. Have you noticed any particular regulatory burdens or programmatic constraints inherent in that program that keep you from being as innovative as you can be with 

your other AAP programs serving low-income students? 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Chairwoman Foxx, there are some glitches in 

some of the TRIO regulation that keeps us from doing some of the 

things that we do with some of the other programs. Certainly, you 

know, some of the requirements of TRIO programs are pretty specific as relates to activities, and some of the things that we do with 

other programs allows us to use more discretionary funding to enrich students’ academic backgrounds. 

And so that is probably the one area in which we have had some 

challenges, but other than that, you know, our program has been 

quite successful. 

We have actually had a student support services program in the 

past, as well, and some of the technicalities around that, particularly with the prior experience points, sometimes can be quite challenging, so— 

Chairwoman FOXX. In the very short time I have left, could you 

talk a little bit about your—the unique experiences of working with 

transfer students? 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Certainly. We actually have a Center for Community College Partnerships that works with 24 community colleges in the L.A. Basin, and the idea behind that is to send students who have transferred into UCLA back to their home institutions to help other students with the application and college readiness process. 

We also have a Transfer Alliance Program, which our faculty and 

our administrators work with community college faculty in terms 

of getting their courses up to par so that students actually can 

have transferrable courses that count towards a degree when they 

enter the university. So it has been a longstanding collaborative experience for us. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

62 

Mr. Jeffries, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx. 

And let me also thank the witnesses for your presence and testimony here today. 

Fifty years ago seemed throughout much of America there were 

robust opportunities connected to manufacturing jobs and factory 

jobs in much of the country that would allow an American to have 

a pathway toward the middle class without having to obtain a college education. Those days have subsequently abandoned us. It 

seems many of those factory and manufacturing jobs have moved 

overseas and aren’t available to Americans. 

So we are in a situation now where increasingly, many of the 

jobs in our economy are going to require some higher education. I 

think in about 5 years I have seen statistics suggesting that more 

than 65 percent of the jobs will actually require a college degree. 

And so given this changing sort of landscape that we find ourselves in, maybe we will start with Dr. Perna, I mean, what do you 

suggest that we do from a federal government perspective in investing in the notion that we are going to have to better prepare 

a wider number of Americans for successfully completing a higher 

education in order for us as a country, I think, to remain prepared 

for our folks to adequately succeed in the 21st century economy? 

Ms. PERNA. Thank you, Congressman. 

I think that you are asking exactly the right question. I think 

that this is one of the most important issues facing our country 

right now. 

The data suggests that we cannot achieve the levels of workforce 

readiness that are required without closing the gaps that exist in 

educational opportunity. Unfortunately, there is not a simple answer to do this, right, so we have a comprehensive educational system, and there—the ways in which differences in opportunity for 

high levels of education are structured into our system begin early. 

So we have profound differences in academic readiness that happen in the K through 12 schools, so this is an important structural 

issue that has to be addressed. We also have rising cost of college 

attendance; you know, the financial barriers are another section 

of—that has to be addressed. And we have to improve students’ 

ability to navigate the complex pathways that we have. 

So, you know, I really see those three different buckets. 

The federal government plays a role, but other stakeholders play 

a role as well. So I think that one role of the federal government 

is to provide a catalyst and provide leadership to signal the importance of these issues and try to—you know, I think part of what 

we need to accomplish as a nation is identify the roles and responsibilities of different players in this complex process because there 

is no one simple, easy thing to do. 

Federal government certainly plays an important role historically 

and needs to continue with regard to financial aid and ensuring 

that college is affordable to all students. The role with regard to 

college access programs is important, so in the absence of the types 

of systemic and structural change in the K through 12 academic 

system, we need to have these additional support programs in 

place to help students navigate our system. 

And the same is true at the college level. Students need— 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

63 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Thank you. 

Dr. Alexander, in terms of the shift from a manufacturing, factory-based economy of 50 years ago to, increasingly, an economy 

anchored in the technology and innovation sectors, what we have 

got right now, I believe the vacancy rate is somewhere between 20 

to 25 percent within the technology and innovation economy across 

the country. Extraordinarily high vacancy rate. 

Companies consistently tell us as members of Congress, ‘‘We 

can’t find highly qualified workers to fill these reasonably well-paying jobs even at the entry level, sometimes as high as $70,000, 

$80,000.’’ 

What do we need to do in order to tackle the preparation gap for 

younger Americans? Because it seems like in these sophisticated 

fields—science, technology, engineering, mathematics, computer 

programming—it can’t just start at the higher education level. 

What needs to be done to create a reasonable opportunity for success so that when they get to an institution like UCLA they are 

prepared to tackle these STEM fields? 

Mr. ALEXANDER. In the 10 minutes—10 seconds that I have, actually 7, I agree with Dr. Perna that early preparation is key. 

Early preparation, K–12, is critical in terms of preparation for 

these careers that you are mentioning. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Jeffries. You seem to get to 

the heart of the problem. 

Dr. Adams, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. ADAMS. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And let me thank all of the witnesses who are here today. 

You know, we have talked, I guess, a lot about access and affordability, and for me that is key. Without affordability, access doesn’t 

mean very much. 

I am one of those first-generation—or I was—first-generation, 

low-income students. I was able to survive and be successful at the 

Ohio State University, get my Ph.D. there, because of the North 

Carolina A&T, an HBCU that prepared me, gave me the skills that 

I needed that I didn’t have when I left high school from New Jersey. 

But I want to ask Dr. Cooper about Parent PLUS loans. This 

program underwent some changes in 2011 that resulted in students who were previously eligible and they were being denied as 

a result of the changes. 

It affected a lot of students, a number of them in North Carolina, 

their ability to pay tuition. Dramatic effects on HBCUs. 

When the problem first surfaced in 2012, 400,000 students nationwide were impacted; 28,000 HBCU students negatively impacted. 

So do you believe that the recent changes to this program are 

enough to fix the problem created by the 2011 changes? And if not, 

what do you believe we need to do to address this problem? 

Ms. COOPER. Thank you for your question. 

I think it is unfortunate that the changes to the program denied 

so many students immediate access to college. Many of them had 

to drop out mid-semester. And certainly all institutions had the imCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

64 

pact of this change in the loan program, but we saw it most dramatically at many of the HBCUs, as you mentioned. 

I think it is important that when we think about the changes to 

the Parent PLUS loan program, as well as any changes to financial 

aid, is that we keep them in the context of the broader conversation of college affordability, which is a complicated conversation— 

one that involves the states and their role in supporting affordability, but also institutions and their budgets, as well as the federal government. 

So while the federal government certainly controls the federal 

PLUS loan component of that, we have to have a conversation with 

the other entities to make sure that college costs are maintaining 

a more affordable level so that we don’t have the types of dramatic 

impacts that we saw when those changes took place. 

Ms. ADAMS. Yes. Thank you very much. 

I have spent 40 years teaching at Bennett College in Greensboro, 

so from another perspective, I certainly understand the plight of 

these students, and just a few days ago launched the bipartisan 

HBCU Caucus with my colleague, Bradley Byrne, so we are going 

to be working hopefully across the aisle and educating folks, because I think that is important. 

So, Dr. Cooper, I want to ask you, in terms of the demographics 

and the students who attend HBCUs. And we know that they are 

different students, and perhaps if the same demographic of students at HBCUs were at other schools in the—we would have higher graduation rates. 

So how would we then measure the success of HBCUs while taking into account that they enroll a significant percentage of low-income, first-generation students? 

Ms. COOPER. That is a great question. Thank you. 

I think it is absolutely correct that HBCUs enroll a number of 

students who come with academic challenges. They enroll a number of students who come with financial challenges. And these institutions have historically been chronically underfunded. 

So they are really trying to do a lot with the most neediest students. 

My advice is to make sure that we are supporting these institutions, but supporting them in ways that foster student outcomes 

and better student outcomes. We want to make sure that we are 

creating a viable pathway for these students to come into the institution, to get a degree that gains—earns them some value, but we 

also want them to graduate. 

That is very important and it is a challenge for HBCUs because 

of the demographic of that population, but it is not impossible. And 

we have seen evidence of that in many institutions across the country who are really, you know, owning their student population and 

saying, ‘‘We are going to do whatever it takes to serve them well.’’ 

So my advice to the federal government is to support that, to 

show evidence of that, and to raise the visibility of those institutions who are doing a tremendous job. We don’t hear about those 

stories enough. 

Ms. ADAMS. One quick comment on Pell Grants and the need for 

access to these funds year-round, if you could comment on that? 

Ms. COOPER. Could you please repeat that for me one more time? 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

65 

Ms. ADAMS. Pell Grants. We don’t have them in the summer anymore. What is your thought about it? 

Ms. COOPER. The Pell Grant program is the centerpiece of the financial aid program, and certainly we need them at all these institutions, but minority-serving institutions that are serving high 

numbers of students who have financial challenges need them tremendously, so we have to make sure that we are investing in 

that— 

Ms. ADAMS. Thank you very much. I am out of time. 

Thank you, Madam. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you. 

Mr. Polis, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. POLIS. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Dr. Cooper, our discussion today and the comments and questions really focused on creating opportunities and encourage college 

completion among low-income and first-generation students. Can 

you talk about how programs like competency-based education and 

innovations in that area can provide students the flexibility they 

need to complete their degree and reduce costs and remove—reduce 

some of the cost barriers? 

Ms. COOPER. Certainly. Thank you. 

So programs like competency-based education and a number of 

these other types of innovations that we see and are hearing more 

and more about certainly have some promise. I think that we 

should continue to study them; we should continue to explore the 

efficacy of them and how they are not only serving students, but 

providing them with post-college outcomes that give them long-lasting, positive effects. 

Mr. POLIS. And do you find that some of the challenges, in particular with low-income students, revolve around scheduling, having to work jobs, and that the flexibility that a competency-based 

course, perhaps online, might have might make it easier for them 

to matriculate? 

Ms. COOPER. Sometimes that is the case. What we have often 

found is that for a low-income and first-generation student the best 

approach is usually either if not—if it can’t be fully in a classroom, 

some type of a hybrid model, where you have some face time that 

is one-on-one with an instructor as well as the use of technology. 

Mr. POLIS. And I also wanted to ask you about the flexibility for 

Pell dollars. In my district, Colorado State University saw the 

number of Pell-eligible students enrolling in summer programs 

double when they were able to use their Pell dollars over the summer term—more on-time graduations, a number of effects. Unfortunately, the flexibility is gone and students who depend on Pell dollars can only use them in the fall and the spring. 

What could Pell flexibility mean in particular for low-income and 

first-generation students? 

Ms. COOPER. We certainly know that the year-round Pell program adds value to these low-income students. They are able to enroll at a continuous pace and graduate more on time. So we hope 

that those types of programs can come back. 

Mr. POLIS. And might that be an issue—and again, in particular 

low-income students, might have to balance work and a schedule 

might enable them to take one or two classes less each semester, 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

66 

work a little bit more to support themselves, take classes over summer to supplement that? Is that what can help on—particularly on 

the low-income student end? 

Ms. COOPER. It is the flexibility, as you say. It is the flexibility 

that accommodates the nuances of their lifestyle. 

Mr. POLIS. And, Dr. May, if you care to comment on either of 

those questions, but I did want to ask you an additional one, as 

well. 

In Colorado we have a very robust dual enrollment program, not 

only removing some of the economic barriers to high-schoolers getting college credit and associate’s degrees, but also having the sort 

of 360-degree, you know, support that a public school K–12 side 

can offer. Many students graduate from high school already having 

completed an associate’s degree or at least some college degrees. 

Can you talk about the importance of dual enrollment programs 

for low-income and first-generation students? And can you discuss 

any models where dual enrollment students could also be Pell eligible? 

Mr. MAY. And absolutely. Just to point out, I was the former 

president of Pueblo Community College and former president of the 

Colorado Community College System, so I am very familiar with 

the robust dual enrollment program leading to many students in 

Colorado to graduate with both a high school diploma and an associate degree. That is where we really had the original data to prove 

that the initiative worked, that if we could get students enrolling 

in college classes earlier, that we increase dramatically the likelihood they would earn not only bachelor’s degree, but an advanced 

degree. 

So I think that is a proven model that needs to be expanded. 

I would also, again, kind of reiterate early college high school is 

a variation of that, and—which is really a more tightly managed 

process for dual enrollment-type programs in many ways. So they 

work, and we need to encourage it. 

I would also, like I say, just want to comment on the competencybased education. We do see great value, but where we really see 

that value are for people who what we call have already earned 

education equity, where they may have been in the military or the 

workforce and they can bring that previous education right into a 

college degree without having to retake courses. Again, it accelerates time to degree and gives a reward to an individual who has 

already been able to demonstrate prior learning. 

Mr. POLIS. And what do you think we can do here? Obviously a 

lot of the dual enrollment programs are locally driven. What type 

of policies here could encourage and further allow the flexibility for 

dual enrollment programs? 

Mr. MAY. Well, I can tell you, the number one barrier—in most 

states across the country for a dual enrollment program is the 

issue of do the high schools get the funding for it or does the community college get the funding for it? They end up in a battle back 

and forth, and I think clarification that it really is about the student, not about the institutions are the most important aspect of 

that. 

Mr. POLIS. Thank you. 

Yield back the balance of my time. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

67 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Polis. 

Mr. Hinojosa, I recognize you for closing remarks. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx. 

This hearing today has been very timely, as Congressman Bobby 

Scott mentioned. I think that we are going through appropriations 

bills right now and amongst the cuts that are being discussed are 

on education and Pell Grants and funding that each and every one 

of you has said has made a difference in the last 4 years in increasing the enrollment and graduation rate of men and women who in 

the past have not had the access and affordability to higher education, and so that troubles me. 

But I am hoping that both sides of the aisle will see their way 

clear to continue the investment that increased, as I said, in the 

past 6 years towards MSIs, because the demographics indicate that 

Latinos and African-Americans make a majority of the population 

in my state of Texas and many other states, and that if we are 

going to have better quality of life for all Americans, we must invest in education, everywhere from very early pre-kinder all the 

way to what we are discussing here, and that is the community colleges and the universities. 

So we thank you for giving us current information that could be 

used by the leadership of both sides of the aisle and that, with your 

help, that we can continue to emphasize the recommendations that 

were made by each one of you, because, as Dr. Foxx said, she understands it and it is very important to her since it impacted her 

the way that gave her the opportunity to get a higher education, 

get a doctorate degree, and be chairman of this subcommittee. 

I have a bachelor’s and a master’s degree in business administration and I think that I have really enjoyed my work here 19 years 

on the Education Committee because I think that we are making 

a difference in helping get education for all. 

So again, we thank you for the work that you are doing, and 

keep the hope up for those who listen to your remarks everywhere 

you go to speak, because I think that they will be encouraged by 

the growth in the population of particularly women and minorities 

in higher education. And I just hope that in the next 5 years that 

we can see many more women who are graduating from colleges at 

a rate of about 55 percent, compared to 45 percent for the men, can 

go on to serve on corporate boards, to go on to head programs like 

you all have, and that as a result of that we are going to be able 

to continue to increase the investments in higher education. 

And we thank you for being here. 

I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Hinojosa. 

This has been, in my opinion, a very good hearing this morning, 

not just because it is a subject that most of us who are here this 

morning are very interested in, but I think because you provided 

a lot of good information to us. 

I alluded to it in the beginning, that I have been involved with 

these programs for a long time. When I stop to think about how 

long ago that was it is a little surprising to me. 

Like Dr. Adams, I have been involved in the education enterprise 

for a long time. I became involved with Upward Bound in 1972, 

with Special Services in 1973. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

68 

I did that for 4 years and then I was in charge of academic advising and orientation for all new students—transfers and freshmen— 

at Appalachian State University. Worked for the program for minority students who didn’t meet admissions requirements. And one 

of them I met the other day at the installation of the new chancellor at Appalachian and he really, really made me feel great 

about his experiences as a result of being in that program. So I 

know that these programs work in many cases. 

Just before Mr. Jeffries said what he said, I had written down 

to comment that your comments all point back to the inadequate 

preparation that students have for going to college. And so our 

problems begin much sooner than the time students present themselves to college. 

And here we are in the middle—I mean, in the 21st century, and 

we have been talking about these issues, again, since I was the director of Upward Bound and Special Services, and yet, we are still 

talking about them in practically the same ways. I will tell you, it 

is very frustrating to somebody like me. 

And, Dr. Perna, while I am a big proponent of doing more research, and particularly honing in on what works and what doesn’t 

work, in many cases we know what works and what doesn’t work. 

You all represent—Dr. Alexander, Dr. May—you have shown us. 

I mean, the programs I ran, I knew what worked and what didn’t 

work. But yet, somehow or another, we can’t seem to get that message spread across our culture. 

Even Mr. Hinojosa, who is always looking for us to increase funding, said in his program that—I mean, his comments—not just a 

matter of money. It is a matter of tracking the students. It is a 

matter working with the students. It is a matter of showing them 

what is possible. 

And it seems to me the examples you all have given, particularly 

Dr. May, Dr. Alexander, and I think the research, probably, that 

Dr. Perna is showing, is that the colleges have to take some more 

responsibility in this area. And it is a vested interest of theirs to 

do that. It is a vested interest of the states to do this, to say, ‘‘We 

want to invest more money in our students and not just rely on the 

federal government to do these things.’’ 

One of the concerns I have always had is why we don’t shift more 

money into the programs that have proven their successes and say, 

‘‘Okay, you have proven your success. Let’s help you more,’’ and 

say, ‘‘We want more role models.’’ 

You know, Mr. Jeffries, again, alluded to the fact that we have 

a lot of jobs out there. I believe, the staff tells me, the latest number is 5.1 million jobs unfilled in this country because people do not 

have the skills to fill those jobs. 

What is wrong with us, as the greatest nation in the world, that 

we can’t figure out a system to match the people who are unemployed with those jobs? I mean, it isn’t a lack of money; it is a lack 

of will somewhere. 

And I think Dr. Perna pointed it out, too. Whose responsibility— 

who is going to accept this responsibility and how do we define 

these? 

So it is enlightening to hear you all, but it is also a bit frustrating because, again, we have been hearing these stories. I mean, 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

69 

when I was the director of Upward Bound we talked about this at 

every meeting—regional meeting: How can we get the institutions 

to take more responsibility? 

Again, seems like we haven’t learned a lot in the last 40-some 

years, or at least people haven’t changed their behaviors very 

much. 

So I appreciate you all coming today more than I can tell you, 

and you have been very kind to share your expertise with us. And 

I want to thank all of you for your commitment in this area to 

helping students and to make—and to doing what you can to help 

other people understand what they can do to help these students, 

who I think do want to succeed but they do need a lot of guidance. 

So thank you very much. 

There being no further business, the subcommittee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

Æ 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER