Dual Enrollment of High School Students at Postsecondary Institutions: 2002–03

U.S. Department of EducationInstitute of Education SciencesNCES 2005-008

E.D. TAB

2005
Dual Enrollment of 

High School Students 

at Postsecondary 

Institutions: 2002–03 

U.S. Department of Education 

Institute of Education Sciences 

NCES 2005–008 

E.D. TAB

April 2005

Brian Kleiner

Laurie Lewis 

Westat 

Bernard Greene 

Project Officer 

National Center for 

Education Statistics 
U.S. Department of Education

Margaret Spellings

Secretary

Institute of Education Sciences

Grover J. Whitehurst

Director

National Center for Education Statistics

Grover J. Whitehurst

Acting Commissioner

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, 

and reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional

mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in 

the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance 

of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical systems; and

review and report on education activities in foreign countries.

NCES activities are designed to address high priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable,

complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high

quality data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, 

practitioners, data users, and the general public.

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a

variety of audiences. You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating 

information effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other NCES product

or report, we would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to:

National Center for Education Statistics

Institute of Education Sciences

U.S. Department of Education

1990 K Street NW

Washington, DC 20006

April 2005

The NCES World Wide Web Home Page is: http://nces.ed.gov

The NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch

Suggested Citation

Kleiner, B., and Lewis, L. (2005). Dual Enrollment of High School Students at Postsecondary Institutions: 

2002–03 (NCES 2005–008). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for

Education Statistics.

For ordering information on this report, write:

U.S. Department of Education

ED Pubs

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794–1398

Call toll free 1–877–4ED–Pubs; or order online at www.edpubs.org

Content Contact:

Bernard Greene

(202) 502-7348

e-mail: Bernard.Greene@ed.gov
iii

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the many individuals who contributed to the development of the

“Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students” survey and this report. The survey

was requested by the Office of Vocational and Adult Education of the U.S. Department of Education. 

Bernie Greene was the NCES Project Officer.

Westat’s project director was Laurie Lewis, and the survey manager was Brian Kleiner. 

Debbie Alexander directed the data collection efforts, assisted by Ratna Basavaraju and Anjali Pandit. 

Nazik Elgaddal, Alla Belenky, and Robert DelFierro were the programmers, Carol Litman was the editor, 

and Sylvie Warren was responsible for formatting the report. 

The NCES staff who reviewed the report and provided valuable suggestions include Val

Plisko, Shelley Burns, Jeff Owings, James Griffith, Carol Chelemer, and Robert Lerner. Reviewers

outside of NCES included Susan Henderson from the University of Minnesota, and Tom Nachazel, Pia 

Peltola, Zeyu Xu, Kevin Bromer, and Geeta Kotak of the Education Statistics Services Institute,

American Institutes for Research. The report was also reviewed by Duc-Le To of the Institute of

Education Sciences.
iv

This page intentionally left blank.
v

Table of Contents

Page

Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. vi

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. x

Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 1

Background .......................................................................................................................... 1

Selected Findings ................................................................................................................. 4

Prevalence of and Enrollment in Dual Enrollment Programs and CollegeLevel Courses ................................................................................................... 4

Prevalence of Dual Enrollment Programs and College Coursetaking ............. 4

Enrollment of High School Students in Dual Enrollment Programs 

and College-Level Courses ........................................................................ 7

Characteristics of Dual Enrollment Programs ......................................................... 9

Course Location and Type of Instructors ......................................................... 9

Curriculum and Coursetaking Patterns ............................................................ 10

Credit Award .................................................................................................... 11

Academic Eligibility Requirements ................................................................. 11

Funding ............................................................................................................ 13

Dual Enrollment Programs Specifically for Students at Risk of Education 

Failure ............................................................................................................... 14

References ................................................................................................................................... 19

Tables of Estimates and Standard Errors ................................................................................ 21

Appendix A: Technical Notes ................................................................................................... A-1

Appendix B: Questionnaire ...................................................................................................... B-1
vi

List of Tables

Table Page

1 Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with any high school students 

taking courses for college credit, within and outside of dual enrollment 

programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ................... 22

1-A Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with any 

high school students taking courses for college credit, within and outside of dual 

enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 23

2 Number of high school students who took college-level courses through Title 

IV degree-granting institutions, within and outside of dual enrollment programs, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 .................................... 24

2-A Standard errors of the number of high school students who took college-level 

courses through Title IV degree-granting institutions, within and outside of dual 

enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 25

3 Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

indicating the location of courses taken by high school students in the dual 

enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 26

3-A Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating the location of courses taken by high school 

students in the dual enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 

12-month academic year, 2002–03 ................................................................................. 27

4 Number of Title IV degree-granting institutions reporting at least some courses 

taught on a high school campus, and the percentage distribution of institutions 

indicating the type of course instructors who taught these courses, by institution 

type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 .......................................................... 28

4-A Standard errors of the number of Title IV degree-granting institutions reporting 

at least some courses taught on a high school campus, and the percentage 

distribution of institutions indicating the type of course instructors who taught 

these courses, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ............. 29

5 Number of Title IV degree-granting institutions reporting at least some courses 

taught by high school instructors, and the percentage distribution of institutions 

indicating the minimum qualifications for high school instructors who taught 

these courses, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ............. 30
vii

List of Tables (continued)

Table Page

5-A Standard errors of the number of Title IV degree-granting institutions reporting 

at least some courses taught by high school instructors, and the percentage 

distribution of institutions indicating the minimum qualifications for high 

school instructors who taught these courses, by institution type and size: 

12-month academic year, 2002–03 ................................................................................. 31

6 Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating the typical pattern of high school enrollments 

per academic term, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 32

6-A Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with dual enrollment programs indicating the typical pattern of high 

school enrollments per academic term, by institution type and size: 12-month 

academic year, 2002–03 .................................................................................................. 33

7 Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating the maximum number of allowable courses per 

academic term, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03............ 34

7-A Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with dual enrollment programs indicating the maximum number of 

allowable courses per academic term, by institution type and size: 12-month 

academic year, 2002–03 .................................................................................................. 35

8 Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating whether the curriculum of programs was 

specially designed for high school students or the same as for regular college 

students, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ..................... 36

8-A Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with dual enrollment programs indicating whether the curriculum of 

programs was specially designed for high school students or the same as for 

regular college students, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 37

9 Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating when high school students were generally 

awarded college credit for courses taken, by institution type and size: 

12-month academic year, 2002–03 ................................................................................. 38

9-A Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with dual enrollment programs indicating when high school students 

were generally awarded college credit for courses taken, by institution type and 

size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ......................................................................... 39
viii

List of Tables (continued)

Table Page

10 Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating the level at which credit was earned, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 .................................... 40

10-A Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with dual enrollment programs indicating the level at which credit 

was earned, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ................. 41

11 Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

that had academic eligibility requirements for high school students to participate 

in the dual enrollment program and what those academic eligibility 

requirements were, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 42

11-A Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs that had academic eligibility requirements for high school 

students to participate in the dual enrollment program and what those academic 

eligibility requirements were, by institution type and size: 12-month academic 

year, 2002–03 .................................................................................................................. 43

12 Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

that had a minimum high school grade point average requirement to participate 

in the dual enrollment program, and the percentage distribution of the minimum 

GPA requirement, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year,

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 44

12-A Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs that had a minimum high school grade point average 

requirement to participate in the dual enrollment program, and the percentage 

distribution of the minimum GPA requirement, by institution type and size: 12-

month academic year, 2002–03 ....................................................................................... 45

13 Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

that had academic eligibility requirements for high school students to participate 

in the dual enrollment programs, and the percentage distribution of institutions 

indicating whether those requirements were the same or different than the 

institution’s admissions standards for regular college students, by institution 

type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 .......................................................... 46

13-A Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual

enrollment programs that had academic eligibility requirements for high school 

students to participate in the dual enrollment programs, and the percentage 

distribution of institutions indicating whether those requirements were the same 

or different than the institution’s admissions standards for regular college 

students, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ..................... 47
ix

List of Tables (continued)

Table Page

14 Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

indicating the grade levels of students eligible for the dual enrollment programs, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 .................................... 48

14-A Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating the grade levels of students for the dual 

enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 49

15 Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

indicating which sources paid tuition for college-level courses taken in the dual 

enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 50

15-A Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating which sources paid tuition for college-level 

courses taken in the dual enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-

month academic year, 2002–03 ....................................................................................... 51

16 Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating the type of payment generally made by parents 

and students for courses taken in the dual enrollment programs, by institution 

type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 .......................................................... 52

16-A Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with dual enrollment programs indicating the type of payment 

generally made by parents and students for courses taken in the dual enrollment 

programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ................... 53

17 Number and percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs geared specifically toward high school students at risk of 

education failure, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 54

17-A Standard errors of the number and percent of Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with dual enrollment programs geared specifically toward high 

school students at risk of educational failure, by institution type and size: 

12-month academic year, 2002–03 ................................................................................. 55

18 Standard errors for figures: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ..................................... 56

A-1 Number and percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions in the study, and 

the estimated number and percent in the nation, for the total sample and for 

institutions that had any dual enrollment, by institution type and size: 2004 ................ A-5

A-2 Number of cases with imputed data in the study sample, and number of cases 

with imputed data the sample represents, by questionnaire items: 2004 ........................ A-6
x

List of Figures

Figure Page

1 Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with any high 

school students taking courses for college credit, by whether courses were taken 

within dual enrollment programs only, outside of dual enrollment programs 

only, or both within and outside of programs: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 5

2 Percentage distribution of high school students taking courses for college credit 

within or outside of dual enrollment programs: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 ........................................................................................................................... 7

3 Percentage distribution of high school students taking courses for college credit, 

by institution type: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 .................................................. 8

4 Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs for at-risk high school students, by primary focus of such

programs: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ................................................................ 15

5 Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs for at-risk high school students, by typical patterns of 

enrollments in such programs: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ................................ 16

6 Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

for at-risk high school students that had extra support services, by specific extra 

support services: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 ..................................................... 17
1

Summary

Background

This report provides data from a nationally representative survey of Title IV degree-granting 

postsecondary institutions on the topic of dual enrollment of high school students. Dual enrollment, also

known as “dual credit,” “concurrent enrollment,” and “joint enrollment,” refers to the participation in

college-level courses and the earning of college credits by high school students. Dual enrollment is

viewed as providing high school students benefits such as greater access to a wider range of rigorous

academic and technical courses, savings in time and money on a college degree, promoting efficiency of

learning, and enhancing admission to and retention in college. By providing a pathway for students to

move seamlessly between K–12 and postsecondary systems, dual enrollment is thought to promote

greater support for students’ college aspirations and greater collaboration between high schools and

colleges (Bailey and Karp 2003; Clark 2001). In an effort to prepare high school students for college, 38

states have enacted dual enrollment policies that support the development of programs that promote a

smoother transition between high school and postsecondary education (Karp et al. 2004). However, at

present, there is no existing national source of information on dual enrollment of high school students at

postsecondary institutions. The “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students”

survey, undertaken by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Institute of Education

Sciences, was designed to provide policymakers, researchers, educators, and administrators with baseline 

information on the prevalence and characteristics of dual enrollment programs. While the majority of the 

survey’s questions focused on dual enrollment programs, several key questions also revealed the

prevalence of college coursetaking outside of dual enrollment programs by high school students. The

survey was requested by the Office of Vocational and Adult Education, U.S. Department of Education. 

The front page of the survey included a definition and description of dual enrollment (see

appendix B). For this study, dual enrollment was defined as high school students who earn college credits 

for courses taken through a postsecondary institution. The definition specified that courses could be part

of a dual enrollment program, or courses could be taken outside of a dual enrollment program. A dual

enrollment program was defined as an organized system with special guidelines that allows high school

students to take college-level courses. The guidelines might delineate entrance or eligibility requirements, 

funding, limits on coursetaking, and so on. High school students who simply enrolled in college courses

and were treated as regular college students were not considered to be participating in a dual enrollment

program. Credit for courses could be earned at both the high school and college level simultaneously or
2

only at the college level, and credit could be earned immediately or upon enrollment at the postsecondary 

institution after high school graduation. Courses could be taught on a college campus, on a high school

campus, or at some other location. The time frame for the survey was the 2002–03 12-month academic

year, including courses taken during summer sessions.1 The survey definition also specified that

information about summer bridge programs for students who had already graduated from high school

should not be included. 

This survey was conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) using the 

Postsecondary Education Quick Information System (PEQIS).2 PEQIS is a survey system designed to

collect small amounts of issue-oriented data from a previously recruited, nationally representative sample 

of institutions, with minimal burden on respondents and within a relatively short period of time.

Questionnaires for the survey “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students” were

mailed in February 2004 to the PEQIS survey coordinators at the approximately 1,600 Title IV degreegranting postsecondary institutions in the 50 states and the District of Columbia that compose the PEQIS 

panel. Coordinators were informed that the survey was designed to be completed by the person(s) at the

institution most knowledgeable about the institution’s dual enrollment programs and courses.

Respondents were given the option of completing the survey online. Data were adjusted for questionnaire 

nonresponse and weighted to yield national estimates that represent all Title IV-eligible, degree-granting 

institutions in the United States.3 The unweighted response rate was 92 percent, and the weighted

response rate4 was 93 percent. Detailed information about the survey methodology is provided in

appendix A, and the questionnaire can be found in appendix B.

Survey respondents at selected postsecondary institutions were asked to report on the

prevalence of college coursetaking by high school students at their institutions during the 2002–03 12-

month academic year, both within and outside of dual enrollment programs. Among institutions with

dual enrollment programs, additional information was obtained on the characteristics of programs,

including course location and type of instructors, program and course curriculum, academic eligibility

requirements, and funding. Institutions with dual enrollment programs were also asked whether they had

 

1

 The summer session included in the 2002–03 12-month academic year (i.e., the summer session of 2002 or the summer session of 2003) was 

whichever one each institution considered to be part of that 12-month academic year.

2

 More information about PEQIS may be found at http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/peqis/.

3

Institutions participating in Title IV federal student financial aid programs (such as Pell grants or Stafford loans) are accredited by an agency or 

organization recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, have a program of over 300 clock hours or 8 credit hours, have been in business 

for at least 2 years, and have a signed Program Participation Agreement with the Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE), U.S. Department of 

Education. Degree-granting institutions are those that offer an associate’s, bachelor’s, master’s, doctoral, or first-professional degree (Knapp et 

al. 2001).

4 All weighted response rates were calculated using the base weight (i.e., the inverse of the probability of selection). 
3

programs specifically geared toward high school students at risk of education failure; if they answered

yes, they were asked a series of questions about the features of such special programs. 

The primary focus of this report is to present national estimates on dual enrollment. In

addition, selected survey findings are presented by the following institution characteristics:

• Institution type: public 2-year, private 2-year, public 4-year, and private 4-year. 

Institution type was created from a combination of level (2-year and 4-year) and control 

(public and private). Two-year institutions are defined as institutions at which the

highest level of offering is at least 2 but less than 4 years (below the baccalaureate

degree); 4-year institutions are those at which the highest level of offering is 4 or more

years (baccalaureate or higher degree). Private institutions comprise private nonprofit

and private for-profit institutions; these institutions are reported together because there

are too few private for-profit institutions in the survey sample to report them as a

separate category.

• Size of institution: less than 3,000 students, 3,000 to 9,999 students, and 10,000 or more 

students. These are referred to in the text as small, medium, and large institutions,

respectively. 

In general, comparisons by these institution characteristics are presented only where

significant differences were detected and follow meaningful patterns. It is important to note that the

characteristics of type and size are related to each other. For example, private institutions tend to be

smaller than public ones. However, this E.D. TAB report focuses on bivariate relationships between the

analysis variables (institution type and size) and questionnaire variables rather than on more complex

analyses.5

All specific statements of comparison made in this report have been tested for statistical

significance through t-tests and are significant at the 95 percent confidence level. However, only selected 

findings are presented for each topic in the report. Throughout this report, differences that may appear

large may not be statistically significant due to the relatively large standard errors surrounding the

estimates (because of the small sample size). A detailed description of the statistical tests supporting the

survey findings can be found in appendix A. 

Interested readers may refer to a companion E.D. TAB report, published by NCES, entitled

Dual Credit and Exam-Based Courses in U.S. Public High Schools: 2002–03 (Waits, Setzer, and Lewis

2005). The companion report describes nationally representative findings from a complementary high-

 

5

 E.D. TAB reports focus on the presentation of selected descriptive data in tabular format. This report did not control for the interrelationships

between the analysis variables of institution type and size. 
4

school-level survey requested by the Office of Vocational and Adult Education and conducted by NCES 

through the Fast Response Survey System (FRSS). Unlike the survey for the current report, which

focused more broadly on dual enrollment, the FRSS survey focused on dual credit, where dual credit was 

defined as a course or program where high school students can earn both high school and postsecondary

credits for the same course. 

Selected Findings

The findings in this report are organized as follows:

• Prevalence of and enrollment in dual enrollment programs and college-level courses

outside of dual enrollment programs;

• Characteristics of dual enrollment programs and courses, such as location, instructors,

curriculum, eligibility requirements, and funding; and

• Dual enrollment programs specifically geared toward students at risk of education

failure.

Prevalence of and Enrollment in Dual Enrollment Programs and College-Level 

Courses

The survey asked whether institutions had any high school students who took courses for

college credit during the 2002–03 12-month academic year. Institutions that did were then asked whether 

high school students took college-level courses outside of any dual enrollment program, followed by a

question on whether any high school students took courses for college credit that were part of a dual

enrollment program. If any high school students took courses outside of or within dual enrollment

programs, institutions were asked to provide the number of students who did so. 

Prevalence of Dual Enrollment Programs and College Coursetaking

• During the 2002–03 12-month academic year, 57 percent of all Title IV degree-granting 

institutions had high school students taking courses for college credit within or outside

of dual enrollment programs (table 1). Forty-eight percent of institutions had dual

enrollment programs for high school students taking college courses, and 31 percent of

institutions had high school students taking college courses outside of such programs.
5

• Of the 57 percent of institutions that had high school students who took courses for

college credit during the 2002–03 12-month academic year, 85 percent had high school

students taking courses for college credit in dual enrollment programs, and 55 percent 

had students who took college courses outside of dual enrollment programs (table 1).

• Of those institutions with any high school students taking courses for college credit,

45 percent had high school students taking college-level courses within dual enrollment

programs only, 15 percent had high school students taking college-level courses outside

of dual enrollment programs only, and 40 percent had high school students taking

college-level courses both within and outside of those programs (figure 1). 

• Ninety-eight percent of public 2-year institutions had high school students taking

courses for college credit during the 2002–03 12-month academic year, compared to

77 percent of public 4-year institutions, 40 percent of private 4-year institutions, and

17 percent of private 2-year institutions (table 1). 

Figure 1. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with any high school 

students taking courses for college credit, by whether courses were taken within dual 

enrollment programs only, outside of dual enrollment programs only, or both within 

and outside of programs: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Both within 

and outside 

of dual 

enrollment 

programs

(40%)

Within dual 

enrollment 

programs 

only

(45%)

Outside of dual

enrollment 

programs only

(15%)

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,410 institutions with any high school students taking courses for college credit (see table 1). Detail may 

not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
6

• Among all institutions, a greater percentage of public 2-year institutions than public 4-

year and private 4-year institutions had high school students taking college-level courses 

within dual enrollment programs (93 percent versus 64 and 29 percent, respectively)

(table 1). Similarly, a greater percentage of public 2-year institutions than public 4-year 

and private 4-year institutions had high school students taking college-level courses

outside of dual enrollment programs (63 percent versus 40 and 18 percent, respectively). 

• Among institutions with high school students taking college-level courses, a higher 

percentage of public 2-year institutions than public 4-year and private 4-year institutions 

had high school students taking courses within dual enrollment programs (95 percent 

versus 83 and 73 percent, respectively) (table 1). Similarly, among those institutions 

with high school students taking college-level courses, a higher percentage of public 2-

year institutions than public 4-year and private 4-year institutions had high school

students taking courses outside of dual enrollment programs (64 percent versus 52 and

45 percent, respectively). 

• Forty-four percent of small institutions had high school students taking courses for

college credit, compared to 83 percent of medium institutions and 94 percent of large

institutions (table 1). 

• Based on all institutions, a lower percentage of small institutions than medium and large 

institutions had high school students taking courses for college credit within dual

enrollment programs (36 percent versus 74 and 79 percent, respectively) (table 1). In

addition, based on all institutions, a lower percentage of small institutions than medium

and large institutions had high school students taking courses outside of dual enrollment 

programs (22 percent versus 51 and 50 percent, respectively). 
7

Enrollment of High School Students in Dual Enrollment Programs and

College-Level Courses

• Overall, approximately 813,000 high school students took college-level courses through 

postsecondary institutions, either within or outside of dual enrollment programs, during

the 2002–03 12-month academic year (table 2). This number represents about 5 percent

of all high school students. In fall 2001 (the last year for which data are available), there 

were over 15 million students enrolled in public and private high schools in the United

States (U.S. Department of Education 2003).

• Approximately 680,000 high school students took courses for college credit within dual

enrollment programs (table 2). Fewer high school students (approximately 133,000) took 

college-level courses outside of dual enrollment programs. Thus, 84 percent of high

school students who took courses for college credit through postsecondary institutions

did so as part of a dual enrollment program (figure 2). 

Figure 2. Percentage distribution of high school students taking courses for college credit within 

or outside of dual enrollment programs: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

High school 

students 

taking 

college 

courses 

within dual 

enrollment 

programs

(84%)

High school students taking 

college courses outside of 

dual enrollment programs

(16%)

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 812,700 high school students who took college-level courses at the 2,410 Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with any high school students taking courses for college credit during the 2002–03 12-month academic year (see table 1 and table 2). 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
8

• Public 2-year institutions had more high school students who took college-level courses

than public 4-year and private 4-year institutions during the 2002–03 12-month 

academic year (619,000 versus 122,000 and 67,000, respectively) (table 2). Thus,

77 percent of high school students who took college-level courses were in public 2-year 

institutions, versus 15 percent in public 4-year and 8 percent in private 4-year 

institutions (figure 3).

• Public 2-year institutions also had more high school students than public 4-year and

private 4-year institutions within dual enrollment programs (517,000 versus 100,000 and 

60,000, respectively) and outside of dual enrollment programs (102,000 versus 22,000

and 7,000, respectively) (table 2). 

• Small institutions had fewer high school students taking college-level courses than

medium and large institutions during the 2002–03 12-month academic year (171,000

versus 308,000 and 333,000, respectively) (table 2). Similarly, small institutions had

fewer high school students taking college-level courses than medium and large

institutions, both within dual enrollment programs (149,000 versus 249,000 and

282,000, respectively) and outside of dual enrollment programs (23,000 versus 59,000

and 51,000, respectively). 

Figure 3. Percentage distribution of high school students taking courses for college credit, 

by institution type: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

High school 

students 

taking 

college 

courses at 

public 

2-year 

institutions

(77%)

High school 

students taking 

college courses 

at public 

4-year 

institutions

(15%)

High school students 

taking college courses 

at private 4-year 

institutions

(8%)

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 812,700 high school students who took college-level courses at the 2,410 Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with any high school students taking courses for college credit during the 2002–03 12-month academic year (see table 1 and table 2). 

Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
9

Characteristics of Dual Enrollment Programs

Those institutions that reported having high school students who took courses for college

credit within dual enrollment programs were asked about the characteristics of their programs. The topics 

explored in the survey included course location, course instructors, program curriculum, academic

eligibility requirements, and funding. 

Course Location and Type of Instructors

Institutions with dual enrollment programs were asked whether high school students in the

dual enrollment programs took courses on the campus of the institution, on a high school campus, or at

some other location. Institutions with courses taught on a high school campus were also asked whether

the courses in the dual enrollment programs were taught by college instructors only, high school

instructors only, or by both high school and college instructors. If institutions indicated that at least some 

courses were taught by high school instructors, they were asked how the minimum qualifications for high 

school instructors who taught the courses compared to the qualifications required for college instructors.

• Among institutions with dual enrollment programs, 80 percent offered courses taken by

high school students on their college campus, 55 percent offered courses on a high

school campus, and 12 percent offered courses at some other location6 (table 3). 

• A greater percentage of public 2-year than public 4-year and private 4-year institutions

offered the courses taken by high school students on a high school campus (73 percent

versus 47 and 28 percent, respectively) (table 3). 

• Of those institutions with dual enrollment programs with courses taught on a high school 

campus, 26 percent reported that the courses were taught by college instructors only,

32 percent reported high school instructors only, and 42 percent reported both college

and high school instructors (table 4).

• A smaller percentage of private 4-year institutions had the courses taught on a high

school campus taught by college instructors only, compared to public 2-year and public

4-year institutions (10 percent versus 28 and 31 percent, respectively) (table 4). 

• Of those institutions with dual enrollment programs with at least some courses taught by 

high school instructors, 86 percent said that the minimum qualifications for high school

instructors were the same as those required for college instructors, compared to 6 percent 

that said that the minimum qualifications were different (table 5). Four percent of

 

6

 The percentage of institutions with courses for high school students offered on their college campus, on a high school campus, or at some other 

location sum to more than 100 percent because institutions may have offered courses at more than one location. Other locations included

community centers, vocational/technical schools, and hospitals. Respondents also included online courses as “other locations.”
10

institutions said that they had no set policy with respect to minimum qualifications, and

5 percent said that it varied. 

• A higher percentage of public 2-year institutions than public 4-year institutions reported

the same minimum qualifications for high school instructors as for college instructors

with respect to teaching college-level courses (90 percent versus 73 percent) (table 5). 

Curriculum and Coursetaking Patterns

Institutions were asked several questions regarding dual enrollment program curriculum and 

coursetaking patterns, including the typical coursetaking pattern for high school students and the

maximum number of courses allowed per academic term. Institutions were also asked whether the

curriculum for courses taken in the programs was specially designed for high school students. 

• Among institutions with dual enrollment programs, 48 percent of institutions responded

that one course per academic term most closely resembled the typical high school

enrollment pattern during the 2002–03 12-month academic year, compared to 19 percent 

that responded two courses per academic term, and 4 percent that responded three or

more courses per academic term (table 6). Twenty-eight percent of institutions said that

it varied.7 

• A higher percentage of public 4-year and private 4-year institutions than public 2-year 

institutions reported one course per academic term as the typical pattern of high school

enrollments (56 and 64 percent, respectively, versus 36 percent) (table 6). A higher

percentage of public 2-year institutions than public 4-year and private 4-year institutions 

reported that the typical pattern varied (37 percent versus 28 and 12 percent, 

respectively).

• Fourteen percent of institutions with dual enrollment programs said that one course was

the maximum number allowed per academic term, 30 percent reported allowing a

maximum of two courses per academic term, and 25 percent reported allowing three or

more courses per academic term (table 7). Another 31 percent of institutions said that

there was no maximum number of courses per academic term. 

• A greater percentage of private 4-year institutions than public 2-year and public 4-year 

institutions allowed a maximum of one course per academic term (33 percent versus 5

and 11 percent, respectively) (table 7). Thirty-eight percent of public 2-year institutions

had no maximum number of courses per academic term, compared to 31 percent of

public 4-year and 19 percent of private 4-year institutions. 

• A smaller percentage of large institutions allowed a maximum of one course per

academic term, compared to small and medium institutions (8 percent versus 18 and 11

percent, respectively) (table 7). 

 

7

 The “it varied” response could indicate that there was no typical pattern of high school enrollments within a single program, or else that multiple 

programs within an institution had different typical patterns.
11

• Eighty-nine percent of institutions said that the curriculum of the college-level courses

taken by high school students as part of their dual enrollment programs was the same as 

for regular college students, compared to 3 percent of institutions that said that the

curriculum was specially designed for high school students, and 8 percent that said it

varied (table 8).8

Credit Award

Institutions were asked about when high school students were generally awarded college

credit for courses taken, and whether they earned credit at the high school level for courses taken.

• Ninety-four percent of institutions with dual enrollment programs awarded college credit 

for courses immediately after course completion, compared to 3 percent that awarded

credit upon enrollment of students at their institutions and another 3 percent that

awarded credit in some other way (table 9).9 

• Fifty-nine percent of institutions with dual enrollment programs indicated that credit for

college courses was earned at both the high school and college level, compared to

6 percent where credit was earned at the college level only, and 21 percent where it

varied (table 10).10 Fourteen percent of institutions did not know whether credit was

earned at the high school level.

• A greater percentage of respondents at private 4-year institutions than at public 2-year 

and public 4-year institutions did not know whether credit for courses was earned at the

high school level (25 percent versus 9 and 14 percent, respectively) (table 10). 

Academic Eligibility Requirements 

Institutions with dual enrollment programs were asked a series of questions pertaining to

academic eligibility requirements for high school students to participate in the dual enrollment programs. 

Institutions were asked whether they had academic eligibility requirements, what were the requirements,

and whether their academic eligibility requirements were the same or different than their institutions’

admissions standards for regular college students. In addition, institutions were asked to identify the grade 

levels at which high school students were eligible to take courses in dual enrollment programs.

 

8

 “It varied” could mean that the curriculum varied within a single program (e.g., was the same as for regular college students for some courses, 

but different for others), or else that the curriculum varied across multiple programs within an institution (i.e., was the same as for regular

college students in one program, but specially designed for high school students in another program).

9 Of the roughly 20 “other ways” cited by respondents, about half noted that credits were awarded after high school graduation. The remaining

responses varied.

10 The “it varied” response could indicate that credit was earned in various ways within a single program, or else that credit was earned in

different ways across multiple programs within an institution.
12

Prevalence and Type of Requirements

• Among institutions with dual enrollment programs, 85 percent had academic eligibility

requirements for high school students to participate (table 11). A higher percentage of

public 4-year institutions than public 2-year and private 4-year institutions had academic 

eligibility requirements (93 percent versus 83 and 81 percent, respectively). 

• A higher percentage of institutions with dual enrollment programs that had academic

eligibility requirements had a minimum high school grade point average (GPA)

requirement, compared to other kinds of requirements (66 percent versus 16 to 45

percent) (Table 11). Forty-five percent of the institutions used a minimum score on a

standardized test, 44 percent used a college placement test, and 16 percent used

minimum high school class rank as academic eligibility requirements for high school

students to participate in dual enrollment programs. Thirty-one percent had some other

academic eligibility requirements, including recommendations or permission (from a

high school principal, guidance counselor, or a parent/guardian), course prerequisites,

strong high school attendance, junior or senior grade level, or an essay or written letter.

• Public 4-year and private 4-year institutions used minimum high school GPA as an

academic eligibility requirement more frequently than 2-year institutions (79 and 86

percent, respectively, versus 46 percent). A higher percentage of public 2-year 

institutions than public 4-year and private 4-year institutions required passing a college

placement test (73 percent versus 22 and 13 percent, respectively) (table 11).

• A greater percentage of public 4-year institutions than public 2-year and private 4-year 

institutions required a minimum score on a standardized test (60 percent versus 43 and

37 percent, respectively) and a minimum high school class rank (28 percent versus 8 and 

19 percent, respectively) (table 11).

Minimum High School GPA

• Of those institutions with dual enrollment programs that had a minimum high school

GPA requirement, the highest percentage (44 percent) required a minimum GPA

between 2.75 and 3.24, compared to 7 percent that required between 1.75 and 2.24,

10 percent that required between 2.25 and 2.74, 22 percent that required between 3.25

and 3.74, and 3 percent that required a minimum GPA of 3.75 or above (table 12).

Fourteen percent of institutions said that it varied.11

• A lower percentage of public 2-year institutions than public 4-year and private 4-year 

institutions required a minimum GPA between 3.25 and 3.74 (15 percent versus 27 and

29 percent, respectively) (table 12). 

 

11 “It varied” could indicate that the minimum GPA varied within a single program, or else that the minimum required GPA was different across 

multiple programs within an institution.
13

Comparability of Admissions Standards

• Of the 85 percent of institutions with dual enrollment programs that had academic

eligibility requirements for high school students to participate, 38 percent indicated that

their requirements were the same as admissions standards for regular college students,

while 62 percent indicated that their requirements were different from admissions

standards for regular college students (table 13).

• Fifty-five percent of public 2-year institutions reported that their academic eligibility

requirements were the same as admissions standards for regular college students,

compared to 21 percent of public 4-year and 27 percent of private 4-year institutions

(table 13). 

Eligible Grade Levels

• Among institutions with dual enrollment programs, 96 percent allowed grade 12 high

school students to take courses in the programs,12 86 percent allowed grade 11 students, 

28 percent allowed grade 10 students, 16 percent allowed grade 9 students, and 2 percent 

allowed students in grades lower than grade 9 (table 14). 

• A greater percentage of public 2-year institutions than public 4-year and private 4-year 

institutions allowed grade 9 (21 percent versus 15 and 12 percent, respectively) and

grade 10 high school students (35 percent versus 26 and 18 percent, respectively) to take 

courses in dual enrollment programs (table 14). A smaller percentage of private 4-year 

institutions allowed grade 11 high school students to take courses in dual enrollment

programs, compared to public 2-year and public 4-year institutions (76 percent versus 93 

and 89 percent, respectively). 

• A greater percentage of large than of small or medium institutions allowed grade 9

(26 percent versus 14 and 16 percent, respectively), grade 10 (40 percent versus 23 and

30 percent, respectively), and grade 11 (93 percent versus 83 and 88 percent,

respectively) high school students to take courses in dual enrollment programs (table

14). 

Funding

Institutions with dual enrollment programs were asked two questions relating to sources of

funding for courses taken by high school students in their programs. The first addressed the various

sources for tuition payment, and the second addressed how much high school students (and their parents) 

generally paid out of pocket for the college-level courses taken as part of dual enrollment programs.

• Sixty-four percent of institutions with dual enrollment programs reported that parents

and students were a source for tuition for courses taken as part of the programs (table

 

12 Four percent of institutions did not allow grade 12 students to participate in dual enrollment programs, while they did allow students in other

grades (predominantly grade 11) to participate in dual enrollment programs.
14

15). Thirty-eight percent of institutions indicated that their own postsecondary institution 

was a source for tuition (including both actual contributions and tuition waivers),

37 percent said that high schools and public school districts were a source, and

26 percent said that their state was a source for tuition.13 Nine percent indicated that

there was some other source(s) for tuition. The most commonly cited other sources

included various federal and county grants, as well as scholarships from local businesses 

and nonprofit organizations. 

• A lower percentage of private 4-year institutions than public 2-year and public 4-year 

institutions indicated that high schools/public school districts (21 percent versus 45 and

41 percent, respectively) and the state (15 percent versus 31 and 25 percent,

respectively) were sources for tuition for courses taken in their dual enrollment

programs. However, a higher percentage of private 4-year institutions than public 2-year 

and public 4-year institutions said that their own institution was a source for tuition

(50 percent versus 33 percent each) (table 15). 

• A smaller percentage of public 2-year institutions reported that parents and students

were a source for tuition for courses taken in dual enrollment programs, compared to

public 4-year and private 4-year institutions (56 percent versus 72 and 71 percent,

respectively) (table 15). 

• Twenty percent of institutions with dual enrollment programs indicated that students and 

parents generally paid full tuition for college-level courses taken in their dual enrollment 

programs (table 16). Another 20 percent said that students and parents generally paid

partial tuition. Twenty-three percent said that students and parents generally paid for

books and/or fees only, and 19 percent said that students and parents generally paid

nothing for courses in the dual enrollment programs. Nineteen percent of institutions

reported that the amount paid out of pocket by students and parents varied.14

• A greater percentage of public 4-year institutions than public 2-year and private 4-year 

institutions indicated that students and parents generally paid full tuition for courses

taken in dual enrollment programs (28 percent versus 20 and 13 percent, respectively)

(table 16). Thirty-eight percent of private 4-year institutions said that students and

parents generally paid partial tuition out of pocket, compared to 10 percent of public 2-

year and 17 percent of public 4-year institutions. 

Dual Enrollment Programs Specifically for Students at Risk of Education Failure

Some postsecondary institutions have developed programs for at-risk students as a way of

promoting high school retention as well as enthusiasm for education among a population of students at

risk of complete withdrawal from the education system. Institutions with dual enrollment programs were

asked whether they had a formal dual enrollment program geared specifically toward high school students 

 

13 Multiple sources could have been selected.

14 “It varied” could indicate that the amount paid out of pocket by students and parents varied within a single program, or else that the amount

paid varied across multiple programs within an institution.
15

who were at risk of education failure. If there was a dual enrollment program for at-risk high school

students, institutions were then asked about features of that program, such as the number of students in

the program, the primary focus of the program, the typical pattern of enrollments, and any extra support

services provided to the at-risk students. 

• Among the estimated 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs, approximately

110 (5 percent) had dual enrollment programs specifically geared toward high school

students at risk of education failure (table 17). Two percent of all institutions had such

programs. 

• During the 2002–03 12-month academic year, there were approximately 6,400 students

enrolled in dual enrollment programs geared specifically toward high school students at

risk of education failure (not shown in tables).15

• Thirty-nine percent of institutions with dual enrollment programs geared toward students 

at risk of education failure reported that the primary focus of the program was

career/technical (figure 4). Thirty-four percent said that the primary focus was academic, 

and 21 percent said that the primary focus was equally academic and career/technical.

Six percent reported some other primary focus.

Figure 4. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment 

programs for at-risk high school students, by primary focus of such programs: 

12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Other focus

(6%)

Career/

technical 

focus

(39%)

Academic 

focus

(34%)

Equally 

academic 

and career/

technical 

focus

(21%)

NOTES: Percentages are based on the 110 institutions that had dual enrollment programs for at-risk high school students (see table 17). Detail 

may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.

 

15Standard error = 1,110.
16

• Forty percent of institutions with dual enrollment programs for at-risk students indicated 

that the most common pattern of enrollments in such programs was one course per

academic term, 14 percent reported two courses per academic term, 8 percent reported 

three or more courses per academic term, and 38 percent reported that the number of

courses students took varied considerably (figure 5).

Figure 5. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment 

programs for at-risk high school students, by typical patterns of enrollments in such 

programs: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Three or more 

courses per 

academic 

term

(8%)

Two courses 

per academic 

term

(14%)

One course 

per academic 

term

(40%)

Number of 

courses 

varied 

considerably

(38%)

NOTES: Percentages are based on the 110 institutions that had dual enrollment programs for at-risk high school students (see table 17). Detail 

may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.

• Sixty percent of institutions with programs for at-risk students provided extra support

services specifically for the students in the program, such as tutoring, academic advising, 

study skills workshops, and precollege counseling (not shown in tables).16

• Of those institutions with programs for at-risk students that provided extra support

services, 84 percent provided academic advising, 82 percent provided tutoring,

76 percent provided study skills workshops, 75 percent offered college

application/selection counseling, 62 percent offered financial aid counseling, and

38 percent offered other support services (figure 6). Mentoring and career counseling

were commonly cited as other support services. 

 

16 Standard error = 8.4. Respondents were asked to include only those support services beyond those usually provided to students taking courses 

through their institution.
17

Figure 6. Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs for atrisk high school students that had extra support services, by specific extra support 

services: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

82

76 75

62

38

84

0

20

40

60

80

100

Academic 

advising

Study 

skills 

workshops

Financial 

aid 

counseling

Percent

Tutoring College 

application/

selection 

counseling

Other 

support 

services

NOTES: Percentages are based on the 60 institutions that had dual enrollment programs for at-risk high school students and provided extra 

support services to students.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
18

This page intentionally left blank.
19

References

Bailey, T.R., and Karp, M. (2003). Promoting College Access and Success: A Review of Credit-Based 

Transition Programs. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: Office of Adult and

Vocational Education.

Clark, R.W. (2001). Dual Credit: A Report of Programs and Policies That Offer High School Students

College Credits. Seattle, WA: Institute for Educational Inquiry. 

Karp, M., Bailey, T.R., Hughes, K.L., and Fermin, B.J. (2004). State Dual Enrollment Policies:

Addressing Access and Quality. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: Office of Adult

and Vocational Education. 

Knapp, L.G., Kelly, J.E., Whitmore, R.W., Wu, S., Gallego, L.M., and Grau, E. (2001). Postsecondary 

Institutions in the United States: Fall 2000 and Degrees and Other Awards Conferred: 1999–2000

(NCES 2002–156). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for

Education Statistics. 

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Digest of Education

Statistics, 2003. Retrieved February 24, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d03/. 

Waits, T., Setzer, J.C., and Lewis, L. (2004). Dual Credit and Exam-Based Courses in U.S. Public High 

Schools: 2002–03 (NCES 2005–009). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National 

Center for Education Statistics.
20

This page intentionally left blank.
21

Tables of Estimates and Standard Errors
22

Table 1. Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with any high school students taking 

courses for college credit, within and outside of dual enrollment programs, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institutions with any high 

school students taking 

courses for college credit

Institutions with any high school 

students taking courses within 

dual enrollment programs

Institutions with any high school 

students taking courses outside of 

dual enrollment programs

Institution type and size

Total 

number of 

institutions

Number Percent

Number of 

institutions

Percent 

based on all 

institutions

Percent 

based on 

institutions 

with any 

high school 

students 

taking 

courses for 

college 

credit

Number of 

institutions

Percent 

based on all 

institutions

Percent 

based on 

institutions 

with any 

high school 

students 

taking 

courses for 

college 

credit

All institutions......... 4,240 2,410 57 2,050 48 85 1,310 31 55

Institution type

Public 2-year............. 1,090 1,070 98 1,020 93 95 680 63 64

Private 2-year............ 660 110 17 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Public 4-year............. 630 490 77 400 64 83 250 40 52

Private 4-year............ 1,860 750 40 550 29 73 340 18 45

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ......... 2,940 1,290 44 1,070 36 83 660 22 51

3,000 to 9,999 ........... 870 730 83 640 74 89 450 51 61

10,000 or more .......... 420 400 94 340 79 84 210 50 54

‡Reporting standards not met. Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had 

any dual enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals 

and in analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or because too few cases were reported for a reliable estimate for private 2-year 

institutions.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
23

Table 1-A. Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with any high 

school students taking courses for college credit, within and outside of dual enrollment 

programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institutions with any high 

school students taking 

courses for college credit

Institutions with any high school 

students taking courses within 

dual enrollment programs

Institutions with any high school 

students taking courses outside of 

dual enrollment programs

Institution type and size

Total 

number of 

institutions

Number Percent

Number of 

institutions

Percent 

based on all 

institutions

Percent 

based on 

institutions 

with any 

high school 

students 

taking 

courses for 

college 

credit

Number of 

institutions

Percent 

based on all 

institutions

Percent 

based on 

institutions 

with any 

high school 

students 

taking 

courses for 

college 

credit

All institutions......... † 47.6 1.1 48.8 1.2 1.2 52.0 1.2 2.3

Institution type

Public 2-year............. 3.1 11.3 1.0 14.8 1.3 0.9 26.4 2.4 2.5

Private 2-year............ 17.9 25.4 3.8 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

Public 4-year............. 4.4 15.4 2.3 15.6 2.4 1.8 15.6 2.5 2.8

Private 4-year............ 18.0 32.5 1.8 33.9 1.8 3.5 29.9 1.7 3.6

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ......... 17.3 46.6 1.6 47.0 1.6 2.1 49.2 1.6 4.0

3,000 to 9,999 ........... 17.6 15.0 1.5 17.5 1.7 1.8 18.1 2.1 2.3

10,000 or more .......... 5.1 5.1 0.1 4.8 0.3 0.2 3.0 0.2 0.1

†Not applicable. The PEQIS sample was poststratified to current IPEDS frame counts, and so the weighted total number of institutions 

reproduces the IPEDS frame counts and is not subject to sampling error.

‡Reporting standards not met. Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had 

any dual enrollment of high school students in 2002-03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals 

and in analyses by institution size.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
24

Table 2. Number of high school students who took college-level courses through Title IV degreegranting institutions, within and outside of dual enrollment programs, by institution type 

and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

High school students who took 

courses within and outside of 

dual enrollment programs

High school students who took 

courses within dual 

enrollment programs

High school students who took 

courses outside of dual 

enrollment programs

All institutions......................................... 812,7001679,500 133,100

Institution type2

Public 2-year............................................. 619,100 516,900 102,200

Public 4-year............................................. 121,600 99,600 22,000

Private 4-year............................................ 66,600 59,900 6,800

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ......................................... 171,300 148,800 22,500

3,000 to 9,999 ........................................... 308,200 249,000 59,200

10,000 or more .......................................... 333,200 281,700 51,500

1This number represents about 5 percent of all high school students. In fall 2001 (the last year for which data are available), there were over 15 

million students enrolled in public and private high schools in the United States (U.S. Department of Education). 

2Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: High school students may have been counted twice if they took courses both within and outside of dual enrollment programs at the same 

institution. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or because too few cases were reported for a reliable estimate for private 2-year 

institutions. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
25

Table 2-A. Standard errors of the number of high school students who took college-level courses 

through Title IV degree-granting institutions, within and outside of dual enrollment 

programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

High school students who took 

courses within and outside of 

dual enrollment programs

High school students who took 

courses within dual 

enrollment programs

High school students who took 

courses outside of dual 

enrollment programs

All institutions......................................... 24,800 20,390 11,930

Institution type

Public 2-year............................................. 16,660 15,700 5,750

Public 4-year............................................. 11,460 5,850 9,280

Private 4-year............................................ 9,000 8,970 1,160

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ......................................... 15,240 14,860 3,740

3,000 to 9,999 ........................................... 18,470 13,300 11,130

10,000 or more .......................................... 8,030 6,590 1,150

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
26

Table 3. Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

indicating the location of courses taken by high school students in the dual enrollment 

programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size A college campus A high school campus Some other location1

All institutions.................................. 80 55 12

Institution type2

Public 2-year...................................... 79 73 16

Public 4-year...................................... 81 47 11

Private 4-year..................................... 83 28 8

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 79 49 10

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 82 63 13

10,000 or more ................................... 83 57 16

1Locations besides college or high school campuses included community centers, vocational/technical schools, and hospitals. Respondents also 

included online courses as “other locations.”

2Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). Percentages do not sum to 100 because 

courses could have been offered by institutions at multiple locations. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
27

Table 3-A. Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating the location of courses taken by high school students 

in the dual enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic 

year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size A college campus A high school campus Some other location

All institutions.................................. 1.9 2.3 1.2

Institution type

Public 2-year...................................... 2.4 2.6 1.9

Public 4-year...................................... 2.5 2.6 1.6

Private 4-year..................................... 2.9 3.6 3.0

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 3.4 4.1 2.0

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 2.0 2.4 2.1

10,000 or more ................................... 0.0 0.3 0.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
28

Table 4. Number of Title IV degree-granting institutions reporting at least some courses taught 

on a high school campus, and the percentage distribution of institutions indicating the 

type of course instructors who taught these courses, by institution type and size: 

12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Percentage distribution of institutions indicating the instructors of the

college-level courses taught on high school campuses

Institution type and size

Total number of 

institutions with dual 

enrollment programs 

with at least some 

courses taught on a 

high school campus

College instructors 

only

High school 

instructors only

Both college and 

high school instructors

All institutions.................................... 1,120 26 32 42

Institution type1

Public 2-year........................................ 740 28 26 47

Public 4-year........................................ 190 31 36 33

Private 4-year....................................... 150 10 51 39

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................... 530 28 35 37

3,000 to 9,999 ...................................... 400 22 30 48

10,000 or more ..................................... 190 29 30 42

1Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: The last three columns of table 4 are based on the 1,120 institutions with dual enrollment programs that had at least some college-level 

courses taught on a high school campus (55 percent). Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or because too few cases were reported for 

a reliable estimate for private 2-year institutions. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
29

Table 4-A. Standard errors of the number of Title IV degree-granting institutions reporting at 

least some courses taught on a high school campus, and the percentage distribution of 

institutions indicating the type of course instructors who taught these courses, by 

institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Percentage distribution of institutions indicating the instructors of the 

college-level courses taught on high school campuses

Institution type and size

Total number of 

institutions with dual 

enrollment programs 

with at least some 

courses taught on a 

high school campus

College instructors 

only

High school 

instructors only

Both college and 

high school instructors

All institutions.................................. 41.7 2.2 2.5 2.7

Institution type

Public 2-year...................................... 27.9 2.8 2.5 2.5

Public 4-year...................................... 13.2 4.0 4.0 4.3

Private 4-year..................................... 20.6 3.6 8.5 7.6

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 38.0 4.3 4.6 4.8

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 18.2 2.8 3.4 4.0

10,000 or more ................................... 3.6 0.1 0.1 0.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
30

Table 5. Number of Title IV degree-granting institutions reporting at least some courses taught 

by high school instructors, and the percentage distribution of institutions indicating the 

minimum qualifications for high school instructors who taught these courses, by 

institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Percentage distribution of institutions indicating minimum qualifications for high 

school instructors teaching courses for college credit

Institution type and size

Total number of 

institutions with 

at least some 

courses taught by 

high school 

instructors in 

dual enrollment 

programs

Same as those 

required for 

college instructors

Different than 

those required for 

college instructors No set policy It varied

All institutions.................................. 830 86 6 4 5

Institution type1

Public 2-year...................................... 540 90 4 4 2

Public 4-year...................................... 130 73 14 2 11

Private 4-year..................................... 140 81 5 6 8

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 380 86 7 4 3

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 320 88 4 3 5

10,000 or more ................................... 140 83 4 5 9

1Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: The last four columns of table 4 are based on the 830 institutions with dual enrollment programs that had at least some courses in the 

program taught by high school instructors (74 percent). Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or because too few cases were reported 

for a reliable estimate for private 2-year institutions. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
31

Table 5-A. Standard errors of the number of Title IV degree-granting institutions reporting at 

least some courses taught by high school instructors, and the percentage distribution 

of institutions indicating the minimum qualifications for high school instructors who 

taught these courses, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Percentage distribution of institutions indicating minimum qualifications for high 

school instructors teaching courses for college credit

Institution type and size

Total number of 

institutions with 

at least some 

courses taught by 

high school 

instructors in 

dual enrollment 

programs

Same as those 

required for 

college instructors

Different than 

those required for 

college instructors No set policy It varied

All institutions.................................. 40.8 1.8 1.1 0.9 1.0

Institution type

Public 2-year...................................... 26.4 2.0 1.3 1.2 0.9

Public 4-year...................................... 12.4 4.4 4.2 0.2 3.5

Private 4-year..................................... 20.4 5.3 3.0 3.1 3.8

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 35.9 3.2 2.2 1.6 1.7

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 20.4 2.9 1.3 1.2 1.9

10,000 or more ................................... 2.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
32

Table 6. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment 

programs indicating the typical pattern of high school enrollments per academic term, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Typical pattern of high school enrollments in dual enrollment programs

Institution type and size

One course per 

academic term

Two courses per 

academic term

Three or more 

courses per 

academic term It varied1

All institutions.................................. 48 19 4 28

Institution type2

Public 2-year...................................... 36 23 3 37

Public 4-year...................................... 56 12 3 28

Private 4-year..................................... 64 16 4 12

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 51 19 4 23

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 44 19 3 33

10,000 or more ................................... 48 17 2 31

1The “it varied” response could indicate that there was no typical pattern of high school enrollments within a single program, or else that multiple 

programs within an institution had different typical patterns.

2Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). Detail may not sum to totals because of 

rounding and because the 1 percent of institutions with dual enrollment programs that responded that there was “some other pattern” of high 

school enrollments are not presented in this table. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
33

Table 6-A. Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions 

with dual enrollment programs indicating the typical pattern of high school 

enrollments per academic term, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 

Typical pattern of high school enrollments in dual enrollment programs

Institution type and size

One course per 

academic term

Two courses per 

academic term

Three or more 

courses per 

academic term It varied

All institutions.................................. 2.0 1.5 1.0 1.4

Institution type

Public 2-year...................................... 2.6 2.5 1.0 2.4

Public 4-year...................................... 2.7 1.7 0.7 2.5

Private 4-year..................................... 5.2 3.1 2.1 2.0

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 3.4 2.5 1.8 2.2

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 2.8 2.3 0.8 2.5

10,000 or more ................................... 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
34

Table 7. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment 

programs indicating the maximum number of allowable courses per academic term, by 

institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Maximum number of courses for high school students per academic term

Institution type and size

One course per 

academic term

Two courses per 

academic term

Three or more 

courses per 

academic term No maximum

All institutions.................................. 14 30 25 31

Institution type1

Public 2-year...................................... 5 30 26 38

Public 4-year...................................... 11 32 27 31

Private 4-year..................................... 33 28 20 19

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 18 27 23 31

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 11 30 27 32

10,000 or more ................................... 8 36 28 28

1Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). Detail may not sum to totals because of 

rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
35

Table 7-A. Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions 

with dual enrollment programs indicating the maximum number of allowable courses 

per academic term, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Maximum number of courses for high school students per academic term

Institution type and size

One course per 

academic term

Two courses per 

academic term

Three or more 

courses per 

academic term No maximum

All institutions.................................. 1.8 1.9 1.5 1.7

Institution type

Public 2-year...................................... 1.7 3.1 2.3 2.7

Public 4-year...................................... 2.1 2.7 2.2 2.7

Private 4-year..................................... 5.2 3.0 3.8 4.1

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 3.3 3.4 2.4 3.1

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 1.5 2.3 2.6 1.8

10,000 or more ................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
36

Table 8. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment 

programs indicating whether the curriculum of programs was specially designed for high 

school students or the same as for regular college students, by institution type and size: 

12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

The same as for regular 

college students

Specially designed 

for high school students It varied1

All institutions.................................. 89 3 8

Institution type2

Public 2-year...................................... 88 2 10

Public 4-year...................................... 92 ‡ 7

Private 4-year..................................... 87 7 7

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 90 3 7

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 86 3 11

10,000 or more ................................... 93 1 6

‡Reporting standards not met. Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1

“It varied” could mean that the curriculum varied within a single program (e.g., was the same as for regular college students for some courses, 

but different for others), or else that the curriculum varied across multiple programs within an institution (i.e., was the same as for regular college 

students in one program, but specially designed for high school students in another program).

2Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
37

Table 8-A. Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions 

with dual enrollment programs indicating whether the curriculum of programs was

specially designed for high school students or the same as for regular college students, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

The same as for regular 

college students

Specially designed 

for high school students It varied

All institutions.................................. 1.4 0.7 1.2

Institution type

Public 2-year...................................... 2.2 0.9 1.7

Public 4-year...................................... 1.6 ‡ 1.5

Private 4-year..................................... 3.2 2.3 2.1

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 2.4 1.2 2.1

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 1.7 0.7 1.5

10,000 or more ................................... 0.1 # #

‡Reporting standards not met. Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

#Rounds to zero.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
38

Table 9. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment 

programs indicating when high school students were generally awarded college credit 

for courses taken, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

Immediately after 

course completion

Upon enrolling 

at institution Other

All institutions.................................. 94 3 3

Institution type1

Public 2-year...................................... 92 4 4

Public 4-year...................................... 97 2 ‡

Private 4-year..................................... 96 ‡ 3

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 93 3 4

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 93 4 3

10,000 or more ................................... 98 ‡ 1

‡Reporting standards not met. Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). Detail may not sum to totals because of 

rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
39

Table 9-A. Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions 

with dual enrollment programs indicating when high school students were generally 

awarded college credit for courses taken, by institution type and size: 12-month 

academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

Immediately after 

course completion

Upon enrolling 

at institution Other

All institutions.................................. 0.8 0.7 0.7

Institution type

Public 2-year...................................... 1.6 1.2 1.3

Public 4-year...................................... 1.6 1.1 ‡

Private 4-year..................................... 1.9 ‡ 1.8

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 1.5 1.1 1.3

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 1.0 1.0 1.0

10,000 or more ................................... # ‡ #

‡Reporting standards not met. Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

# Rounds to zero.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
40

Table 10. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment 

programs indicating the level at which credit was earned, by institution type and size: 

12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

High school and

 college level College level only It varied1 Don’t know2

All institutions.................................. 59 6 21 14

Institution type3

Public 2-year...................................... 66 3 22 9

Public 4-year...................................... 52 7 27 14

Private 4-year..................................... 53 10 13 25

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 65 6 13 16

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 57 4 28 11

10,000 or more ................................... 46 8 30 16

1The “it varied” response could indicate that credit was earned in various ways within a single program, or else that credit was earned in different 

ways across multiple programs within an institution.

2Respondents answered “Don’t know” if they were not sure whether credits were earned at the high school level (in addition to the college level).

3Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). Detail may not sum to totals because of 

rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
41

Table 10-A. Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with dual enrollment programs indicating the level at which credit was

earned, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

High school and 

college level College level only It varied Don’t know

All institutions.................................. 2.1 0.9 1.6 1.4

Institution type

Public 2-year...................................... 2.5 0.7 2.0 1.9

Public 4-year...................................... 3.0 1.2 2.5 1.6

Private 4-year..................................... 4.5 2.6 2.1 3.4

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .................................. 3.6 1.6 2.4 2.5

3,000 to 9,999 .................................... 2.9 1.1 2.8 1.6

10,000 or more ................................... 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
42

Table 11. Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs that 

had academic eligibility requirements for high school students to participate in the 

dual enrollment program and what those academic eligibility requirements were, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Academic eligibility requirements2

Institution type 

and size

Institutions with 

dual enrollment 

programs that had 

academic 

eligibility 

requirements for 

high school 

students1

Minimum high 

school GPA

Minimum score 

on a 

standardized test

Passing a college 

placement 

test

Minimum high 

school class rank

Other academic 

eligibility 

requirement(s)3

All institutions... 85 66 45 44 16 31

Institution type4

Public 2-year....... 83 46 43 73 8 28

Public 4-year....... 93 79 60 22 28 36

Private 4-year...... 81 86 37 13 19 34

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ... 83 66 43 43 17 29

3,000 to 9,999 ..... 85 63 46 52 15 30

10,000 or more .... 88 69 49 34 19 40

1

Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). 

2

Percentages are based on the 1,730 institutions with academic eligibility requirements.

3Other eligibility requirements considered to be academic by some institutions included recommendations or permission (from the high school 

principal, guidance counselor, or a parent/guardian), course prerequisites, strong high school attendance, junior or senior grade level, or essays or 

written letters. 

4Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
43

Table 11-A. Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs that had academic eligibility requirements for high school 

students to participate in the dual enrollment program and what those academic 

eligibility requirements were, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 

Academic eligibility requirements

Institution type 

and size

Institutions with 

dual enrollment 

programs that had 

academic 

eligibility 

requirements for 

high school 

students

Minimum high 

school GPA

Minimum score 

on a 

standardized test

Passing a college 

placement 

test

Minimum high 

school class rank

Other academic 

eligibility 

requirement(s)

All institutions... 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.3 2.3

Institution type4

Public 2-year....... 2.3 3.0 2.7 2.8 1.7 3.3

Public 4-year....... 1.5 3.0 3.3 2.6 2.8 2.9

Private 4-year...... 4.0 3.7 3.9 3.4 3.4 4.0

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ... 3.1 3.0 3.4 3.4 2.2 4.1

3,000 to 9,999 ..... 1.9 2.3 2.5 2.6 2.0 3.2

10,000 or more .... 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
44

Table 12. Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs that 

had a minimum high school grade point average requirement to participate in the 

dual enrollment program, and the percentage distribution of the minimum GPA 

requirement, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Minimum GPA requirement2

Institution type 

and size

Institutions 

with dual 

enrollment 

programs 

that had a 

minimum 

high school 

GPA 

requirement1

Between 

1.75 and 

2.24

Between 

2.25 and 

2.74

Between 

2.75 and 

3.24

Between 

3.25 and 

3.74

3.75 or 

above It varied3

All institutions.............. 66 7 10 44 22 3 14

Institution type4

Public 2-year.................. 46 9 16 38 15 2 21

Public 4-year.................. 79 5 7 46 27 4 12

Private 4-year................. 86 4 8 46 29 3 11

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .............. 66 7 10 48 21 3 11

3,000 to 9,999 ................ 63 7 11 41 19 3 18

10,000 or more ............... 69 8 9 38 27 4 14

1

Percentages are based on the 1,730 institutions with academic eligibility requirements.

2

Percentages are based on the 1,140 institutions with a minimum GPA requirement.

3

“It varied” could indicate that the minimum GPA varied within a single program, or else that the minimum required GPA was different across 

multiple programs within an institution.

4Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
45

Table 12-A. Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs that had a minimum high school grade point average 

requirement to participate in the dual enrollment program, and the percentage 

distribution of the minimum GPA requirement, by institution type and size: 

12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Minimum GPA requirement

Institution type 

and size

Institutions 

with dual 

enrollment 

programs 

that had a 

minimum 

high school 

GPA 

requirement 

Between 

1.75 and 

2.24

Between 

2.25 and 

2.74

Between 

2.75 and 

3.24

Between 

3.25 and 

3.74

3.75 or 

above It varied

All institutions.............. 1.8 1.7 1.3 2.5 2.0 1.0 1.6

Institution type

Public 2-year.................. 3.0 2.3 2.8 4.2 3.4 1.0 3.0

Public 4-year.................. 3.0 1.7 2.1 3.6 3.1 1.0 2.4

Private 4-year................. 3.7 2.7 2.5 4.6 4.0 1.0 3.0

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 .............. 3.0 3.1 2.1 4.5 3.4 1.9 2.5

3,000 to 9,999 ................ 2.3 1.6 2.3 3.5 2.9 1.1 3.0

10,000 or more ............... 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
46

Table 13. Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs that 

had academic eligibility requirements for high school students to participate in the dual 

enrollment programs, and the percentage distribution of institutions indicating whether 

those requirements were the same or different than the institution’s admissions 

standards for regular college students, by institution type and size: 12-month academic 

year, 2002–03 

Academic eligibility requirements were:2

Institution type and size

Institutions with dual 

enrollment programs that had 

academic eligibility 

requirements for high school 

students1

The same as 

admissions standards 

for regular 

college students

Different from 

admissions standards 

for regular 

college students

All institutions......................................... 85 38 62

Institution type3

Public 2-year............................................. 83 55 45

Public 4-year............................................. 93 21 79

Private 4-year............................................ 82 27 73

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ......................................... 83 38 62

3,000 to 9,999 ........................................... 86 41 59

10,000 or more .......................................... 88 34 66

1

Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1).

2

Percentages are based on the 1,730 institutions with academic eligibility requirements.

3Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
47

Table 13-A. Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs that had academic eligibility requirements for high school 

students to participate in the dual enrollment programs, and the percentage 

distribution of institutions indicating whether those requirements were the same or 

different than the institution’s admissions standards for regular college students, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Academic eligibility requirements were:

Institution type and size

Institutions with dual 

enrollment programs that had 

academic eligibility 

requirements for high school 

students

The same as 

admissions standards 

for regular 

college students

Different from 

admissions standards 

for regular 

college students

All institutions......................................... 1.7 2.0 2.0

Institution type

Public 2-year............................................. 2.3 2.9 2.9

Public 4-year............................................. 1.5 2.4 2.4

Private 4-year............................................ 4.0 4.8 4.8

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ......................................... 3.1 3.6 3.6

3,000 to 9,999 ........................................... 1.9 2.7 2.7

10,000 or more .......................................... 0.1 0.3 0.3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
48

Table 14. Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

indicating the grade levels of students eligible for the dual enrollment programs, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size Less than grade 9 Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12

All institutions............................. 2 16 28 86 96

Institution type1

Public 2-year................................. 2 21 35 93 96

Public 4-year................................. 2 15 26 89 97

Private 4-year................................ ‡ 12 18 76 97

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ............................. ‡ 14 23 83 96

3,000 to 9,999 ............................... 3 16 30 88 96

10,000 or more .............................. 2 26 40 93 97

‡Reporting standards not met. Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
49

Table 14-A. Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating the grade levels of students for the dual enrollment 

programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size Less than grade 9 Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12

All institutions............................. 0.4 1.5 2.0 1.8 0.8

Institution type

Public 2-year................................. 0.6 1.9 2.5 1.6 1.3

Public 4-year................................. 1.2 1.9 2.4 1.2 0.7

Private 4-year................................ ‡ 2.8 3.4 4.3 1.4

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ............................. ‡ 2.6 3.5 3.4 1.2

3,000 to 9,999 ............................... 0.9 1.4 2.4 1.5 1.3

10,000 or more .............................. # 0.2 0.3 0.1 #

‡Reporting standards not met. Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

# Rounds to zero.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
50

Table 15. Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

indicating which sources paid tuition for college-level courses taken in the dual 

enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size Parents/

students

Postsecondary 

institution1

High schools/

public school 

districts The state

Some other 

source2

All institutions............................. 64 38 37 26 9

Institution type3

Public 2-year................................ 56 33 45 31 10

Public 4-year................................ 72 33 41 25 7

Private 4-year................................ 71 50 21 15 8

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ............................. 63 37 35 25 11

3,000 to 9,999 ............................... 67 36 42 24 7

10,000 or more .............................. 60 46 29 31 8

1

Postsecondary institution includes the institution’s contributions and/or tuition waivers.

2The most commonly cited other sources included various federal and county grants, as well as scholarships from local businesses and nonprofit 

organizations. 

3Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). Percentages do not sum to 100 because 

tuition could be paid by multiple sources. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
51

Table 15-A. Standard errors of the percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs indicating which sources paid tuition for college-level courses 

taken in the dual enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-month 

academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size Parents/

students

Postsecondary 

institution

High schools/

public school 

districts The state

Some other 

source

All institutions............................. 2.0 2.1 1.4 1.9 1.2

Institution type

Public 2-year................................ 3.4 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.0

Public 4-year................................ 3.0 2.8 3.7 2.6 1.2

Private 4-year................................ 3.1 4.1 3.1 2.4 2.3

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ............................. 3.3 3.7 2.2 3.4 2.1

3,000 to 9,999 ............................... 3.3 2.5 2.8 2.2 1.3

10,000 or more .............................. 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
52

Table 16. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment 

programs indicating the type of payment generally made by parents and students for 

courses taken in the dual enrollment programs, by institution type and size: 12-month 

academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

Full tuition Partial tuition

Books and/or 

fees only Nothing It varied1

All institutions............................. 20 20 23 19 19

Institution type2

Public 2-year................................ 20 10 25 22 23

Public 4-year................................ 28 17 19 18 17

Private 4-year................................ 13 38 18 15 16

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ............................. 16 24 21 21 18

3,000 to 9,999 ............................... 24 16 23 15 22

10,000 or more .............................. 24 13 26 18 19

1

“It varied” could indicate that the amount paid out of pocket by students and parents varied within a single program, or else that the amount paid 

varied across multiple programs within an institution.

2Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample had any dual 

enrollment of high school students in 2002–03 to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in 

analyses by institution size.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions with dual enrollment programs (see table 1). Detail may not sum to totals because of 

rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
53

Table 16-A. Standard errors of the percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting 

institutions with dual enrollment programs indicating the type of payment generally 

made by parents and students for courses taken in the dual enrollment programs, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

Full tuition Partial tuition

Books and/or 

fees only Nothing It varied

All institutions............................. 1.6 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.7

Institution type

Public 2-year................................ 2.0 2.0 2.4 3.0 2.6

Public 4-year................................ 2.8 1.8 2.5 2.5 2.3

Private 4-year................................ 3.4 4.0 2.8 2.6 3.1

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ............................. 2.8 2.0 2.7 2.8 2.9

3,000 to 9,999 ............................... 2.3 1.7 2.3 2.0 2.4

10,000 or more .............................. 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
54

Table 17. Number and percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment 

programs geared specifically toward high school students at risk of education failure, 

by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Institution type and size

Number of institutions

Percent based on 

all institutions1

Percent based on 

institutions with dual 

enrollment programs2

All institutions............................................. 110 2 5

Institution type

Public 2-year................................................. 90 8 9

Private 2-year................................................ ‡ ‡ ‡

Public 4-year................................................. 10 2 2

Private 4-year................................................ ‡ ‡ ‡

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ............................................. 40 1 4

3,000 to 9,999 ............................................... 40 4 5

10,000 or more .............................................. 30 7 9

‡Reporting standards not met. Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1

Percentages are based on the 4,240 Title IV degree-granting institutions in the nation.

2

Percentages are based on the 2,050 institutions that had dual enrollment programs (see table 1).

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
55

Table 17-A. Standard errors of the number and percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions 

with dual enrollment programs geared specifically toward high school students at 

risk of educational failure, by institution type and size: 12-month academic year, 

2002–03 

Institution type and size

Number of institutions

Percent based on 

all institutions

Percent based on 

institutions with dual 

enrollment programs

All institutions........................................... 17.5 0.4 0.9

Institution type

Public 2-year............................................... 16.7 1.5 1.7

Private 2-year.............................................. ‡ ‡ ‡

Public 4-year............................................... 2.8 0.5 0.7

Private 4-year.............................................. ‡ ‡ ‡

Size of institution

Less than 3,000 ........................................... 15.6 0.5 1.5

3,000 to 9,999 ............................................. 7.7 0.9 1.2

10,000 or more ............................................ 0.9 0.1 0.1

‡Reporting standard not met. Too few cases for a reliable estimate. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
56

Table 18. Standard errors for figures: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Item Estimate Standard error

Figure 1. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with any high 

school students taking courses for college credit, by whether courses were taken within 

dual enrollment programs only, outside of dual enrollment programs only, or both within 

and outside of programs: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Within programs only..................................................................................................................... 45 2.3

Outside of programs only ............................................................................................................... 15 1.2

Both within and outside of programs.............................................................................................. 40 1.9

Figure 2. Percentage distribution of high school students taking courses for college credit 

within or outside of dual enrollment programs: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

High school students taking courses within dual enrollment programs........................................... 84 1.3

High school students taking college courses outside of dual enrollment programs......................... 16 1.3

Figure 3. Percentage distribution of high school students taking courses for college credit, 

by institution type: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

High school students taking college courses at public 2-year institutions....................................... 77 1.6

High school students taking college courses at public 4-year institutions....................................... 15 1.2

High school students taking college courses at private 4-year institutions...................................... 8 1.0

Figure 4. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs for at-risk high school students, by primary focus of such 

programs: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Career/technical focus.................................................................................................................... 39 8.8

Academic focus.............................................................................................................................. 34 5.5

Equally academic and career/technical focus ................................................................................. 21 8.6

Other focus..................................................................................................................................... 6 2.5

Figure 5. Percentage distribution of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual 

enrollment programs for at-risk high school students, by typical patterns of enrollments 

in such programs: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

One course per academic term........................................................................................................ 40 9.0

Two courses per academic term...................................................................................................... 14 4.1

Three or more courses per academic term ...................................................................................... 8 2.5

Number of courses varied considerably.......................................................................................... 38 8.9

Figure 6. Percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions with dual enrollment programs 

for at-risk high school students that had extra support services, by specific extra 

support services: 12-month academic year, 2002–03 

Academic advising ......................................................................................................................... 84 6.6

Tutoring.......................................................................................................................................... 82 5.3

Study skills workshops................................................................................................................... 76 7.1

College application/selection counseling........................................................................................ 75 6.3

Financial aid counseling ................................................................................................................. 62 8.0

Other support services.................................................................................................................... 38 7.6

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
A-1

Appendix A

Technical Notes
A-2

This page intentionally left blank.
A-3

Technical Notes

Postsecondary Education Quick Information System

The Postsecondary Education Quick Information System (PEQIS) was established in 1991

by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education (ED). PEQIS is

designed to conduct brief surveys of postsecondary institutions or state higher education agencies on

postsecondary education topics of national importance. Surveys are generally limited to three pages of

questions, with a response burden of about 30 minutes per respondent. Most PEQIS institutional surveys 

use a previously recruited, nationally representative panel of institutions. The PEQIS panel was originally 

selected and recruited in 1991–92. In 1996, the PEQIS panel was reselected to reflect changes in the

postsecondary education universe that had occurred since the original panel was selected. A modified

Keyfitz approach was used to maximize overlap between the panels; this resulted in 80 percent of the

institutions in the 1996 panel overlapping with the 1991–92 panel. The PEQIS panel was reselected again 

in 2002. A modified Keyfitz approach was used to maximize the overlap between the 1996 and 2002

samples; 81 percent of the institutions overlapped between these two panels. 

At the time the 1991–92 and 1996 PEQIS panels were selected, NCES was defining higher

education institutions as institutions accredited at the college level by an agency recognized by the

Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education. However, ED no longer makes a distinction between

higher education institutions and other postsecondary institutions that are eligible to participate in federal 

financial aid programs. Thus, NCES no longer categorizes institutions as higher education institutions. 

Instead, NCES now categorizes institutions on the basis of whether the institution is eligible to award

federal Title IV financial aid, and whether the institution grants degrees at the associate’s level or higher. 

Institutions that are both Title IV-eligible and degree-granting are approximately equivalent to higher

education institutions as previously defined. It is this subset of postsecondary institutions (Title IVeligible and degree-granting) that are included in the 2002 PEQIS sampling frame.

The sampling frame for the 2002 PEQIS panel was constructed from the 2000 Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) Institutional Characteristics file. Institutions eligible for

the 2002 PEQIS frame included 2-year and 4-year (including graduate-level) institutions that are both

Title IV eligible and degree granting, and are located in the 50 states and the District of Columbia: a total 

of 4,175 institutions. The 2002 PEQIS sampling frame was stratified by instructional level (4-year, 2-

year), control (public, private nonprofit, private for-profit), highest level of offering (doctor’s/firstprofessional, master’s, bachelor’s, less than bachelor’s), and total enrollment. Within each of the strata,
A-4

institutions were sorted by region (Northeast, Southeast, Central, West) and by whether the institution had 

a relatively high minority enrollment. The sample of 1,610 institutions was allocated to the strata in

proportion to the aggregate square root of total enrollment. Institutions within a stratum were sampled

with equal probabilities of selection. The modified Keyfitz approach resulted in 81 percent of the

institutions in the 2002 panel overlapping with the 1996 panel. Panel recruitment was conducted with the 

300 institutions that were not part of the overlap sample. During panel recruitment, 6 institutions were

found to be ineligible for PEQIS. The final unweighted response rate at the end of PEQIS panel

recruitment with the institutions that were not part of the overlap sample was 97 percent (285 of the 294

eligible institutions). There were 1,600 eligible institutions in the entire 2002 panel, because 4

institutions in the overlap sample were determined to be ineligible for various reasons. The final

unweighted participation rate across the institutions that were selected for the 2002 panel was 99 percent 

(1,591 participating institutions out of 1,600 eligible institutions). The weighted panel participation rate

was also 99 percent.

Each institution in the PEQIS panel was asked to identify a campus representative to serve as 

survey coordinator. The campus representative facilitates data collection by identifying the appropriate

respondent for each survey and forwarding the questionnaire to that person. Data are weighted to produce 

national estimates, and the sample size allows for limited breakouts by classification variables. However, 

as the number of categories within the classification variables increases, the sample size within categories 

decreases, which results in larger sampling errors for the breakouts by classification variables. 

Sample Selection and Response Rates

The sample for the survey consisted of all of the institutions in the 2002 PEQIS panel. In

February 2004, questionnaires (see appendix B) were mailed to the PEQIS coordinators at the institutions. 

Coordinators were told that the survey was designed to be completed by the person at the institution most 

knowledgeable about the institution’s dual enrollment programs and courses. Respondents had the option 

of completing the survey online. Telephone follow-up of nonrespondents was initiated in mid-March 

2004; data collection and clarification were completed in June 2004. Before and during data collection for 

the PEQIS dual enrollment survey, 23 institutions were determined to be ineligible for the panel. For the 

eligible institutions, an unweighted response rate of 92 percent (1,461 responding institutions divided by

the 1,587 eligible institutions in the sample for this survey) was obtained. The weighted response rate for 

this survey was 93 percent. The unweighted overall response rate was 91 percent (99.4 percent panel 

participation rate multiplied by the 92 percent survey response rate). The weighted overall response rate

was 92 percent (99.3 percent weighted panel participation rate multiplied by the 93 percent weighted
A-5

survey response rate). Of the institutions that completed the survey, 51 percent completed it online, 32

percent completed it by mail, 9 percent completed it by fax, and 8 percent completed it by telephone. 

Following data collection on the PEQIS 2004 dual enrollment survey, a poststratification weighting

adjustment was made to the totals in the 2002 IPEDS Institutional Characteristics file. The weighted

number of eligible institutions in the survey represent the estimated universe of approximately 4,240 Title 

IV-eligible degree-granting institutions in the 50 states and the District of Columbia (see table A-1). 

Table A-1. Number and percent of Title IV degree-granting institutions in the study, and the 

estimated number and percent in the nation, for the total sample and for institutions 

that had any dual enrollment, by institution type and size: 2004

Total sample

Had any dual enrollment during the 2002–03 

12-month academic year

Responding 

institutions 

(unweighted)

National estimate 

(weighted)

Responding 

institutions 

(unweighted)

National estimate 

(weighted)

Institution type and size

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 All institutions............................................ 1,461 100 4,240 100 1,085 100 2,410 100

Institution type

 Public 2-year ................................................ 491 34 1,090 26 487 45 1,070 44

 Private 2-year ............................................... 85 6 660 16 15 1 110 5

 Public 4-year ................................................ 392 27 630 15 326 30 490 20

 Private 4-year ............................................... 493 34 1,860 44 257 24 750 31

Size of institution

 Less than 3,000............................................. 580 40 2,940 69 304 28 1,290 53

 3,000 to 9,999............................................... 489 33 870 21 413 38 730 30

 10,000 or more ............................................. 392 27 420 10 368 34 400 16

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.

Imputation for Item Nonresponse

Weighted item nonresponse rates ranged from 0 to 2 percent for all items. Although item

nonresponse for key items was very low, data were imputed for all missing questionnaire data. These 20

items are listed in table A-2. The missing items included both numerical data such as counts of students

in dual enrollment programs or outside of programs, as well as categorical data such as which sources

paid tuition for courses taken by high school students in dual enrollment programs. The missing data

were imputed using a “hot-deck” approach to obtain a “donor” institution from which the imputed values 

were derived. Under the hot-deck approach, a donor institution that matched selected characteristics of
A-6

the institution with missing data (the recipient institution) was identified. The matching characteristics

included PEQIS stratum (defined by sector, highest level of offering, and enrollment size) and whether

the institution offered courses inside or outside of a dual enrollment program. Once a donor was found, it 

was used to derive the imputed values for the institution with missing data. For categorical items, the

imputed value was simply the corresponding value from the donor institution. For numerical items, the

imputed value was calculated by taking the donor’s response for that item (e.g., enrollment in dual 

enrollment programs) and dividing that number by the total number of students enrolled in the donor

institution. This ratio was then multiplied by the total number of students enrolled in the recipient

institution to provide an imputed value. All missing items for a given institution were imputed from the

same donor whenever possible.

Table A-2. Number of cases with imputed data in the study sample, and number of cases with 

imputed data the sample represents, by questionnaire items: 2004

Questionnaire item

Responding 

institutions 

(unweighted)

National 

estimate 

(weighted)

3. How many high school students took courses outside of any dual enrollment program?................................ 35 50

5. How many high school students took courses that were part of a dual enrollment program?................................ 8 14

9. How did the qualifications for high school instructors compare to those for college instructors?................................1 1

10. Which of the following most closely resembles the typical pattern of high school enrollments?................................ 2 3

12. When were high school students generally awarded college credit for courses taken? ................................ 2 2

13. Were there academic eligibility requirements for high school students?................................................................ 1 1

14A. Was minimum high school grade point average an academic eligibility requirement? ................................ 1 2

14B. Was minimum score on a standardized test, such as the SAT an academic eligibility requirement?..............................1 2

14C. Was minimum high school class rank an academic eligibility requirement?................................................................2 3

14D. Was passing a college placement test given by your institution an academic eligibility requirement?...........................2 3

14E. Were there some other academic eligibility requirement(s)? .........................................................................................1 2

15. What was the minimum high school GPA (on a 4-point scale) required for the dual enrollment 

program?................................................................................................................................................................ 2 5

16. Were academic requirements for high school students the same or different than for regular college 

students? ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 2

18. 

Was the curriculum specifically designed for high school students or the same as for regular

students? ................................................................................................................................................................ 3 4

19B. Which sources paid tuition for courses taken? The state................................................................................................1 3

19C. Which sources paid tuition for courses taken? High schools/public school districts................................ 1 3

19D. Which sources paid tuition for courses taken? Parents/students................................................................ 1 3

19E. Which sources paid tuition for courses taken? Some other source(s)................................................................ 2 4

20. What did high school students (and their parents) generally pay out of pocket for courses?................................ 5 13

22. How many at-risk high school students were enrolled in the program? ................................................................ 1 1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System 

(PEQIS), “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students,” PEQIS 14, 2004.
A-7

Data Reliability

While the “Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students” survey was

designed to account for sampling error and to minimize nonsampling error, estimates produced from the

data collected are subject to both types of error. Sampling error occurs because the data are collected

from a sample rather than a census of the population, and nonsampling errors are errors made during the

collection and processing of the data.

Sampling Errors

The responses were weighted to produce national estimates (see table A-1). The weights

were designed to adjust for the variable probabilities of selection and differential nonresponse. The

findings in this report are estimates based on the sample selected and, consequently, are subject to

sampling variability. General sampling theory was used to estimate the sampling variability of the

estimates and to test for statistically significant differences between estimates.

The standard error is a measure of the variability of an estimate due to sampling. It indicates 

the variability of a sample estimate that would be obtained from all possible samples of a given design

and size. Standard errors are used as a measure of the precision expected from a particular sample. If all 

possible samples were surveyed under similar conditions, intervals of 1.96 standard errors below to 1.96

standard errors above a particular statistic would include the true population parameter being estimated in 

about 95 percent of the samples. This is a 95 percent confidence interval. For example, the estimated

percentage of Title IV degree-granting institutions with any dual enrollment is 56.9 percent and the

standard error is 1.1 percent (see tables 1 and 1a). The 95 percent confidence interval for the statistic

extends from [56.9 – (1.1 x 1.96)] to [56.9 + (1.1 x 1.96)], or from 54.7 to 59.1 percent. The 1.96 is the

critical value for a statistical test at the 0.05 significance level (where 0.05 indicates the 5 percent of all

possible samples that would be outside the range of the confidence interval).

Because the data from the PEQIS dual enrollment programs and courses survey were

collected using a complex sampling design, the variances of the estimates from this survey (e.g., estimates 

of proportions) are typically different from what would be expected from data collected with a simple

random sample. Not taking the complex sample design into account can lead to an underestimation of the 

standard errors associated with such estimates. To generate accurate standard errors for the estimates in

this report, standard errors were computed using a technique known as jackknife replication. As with any 

replication method, jackknife replication involves constructing a number of subsamples (replicates) from 
A-8

the full sample and computing the statistic of interest for each replicate. The mean square error of the

replicate estimates around the full sample estimate provides an estimate of the variance of the statistic. 

To construct the replications, 50 stratified subsamples of the full sample were created and then dropped 1 

at a time to define 50 jackknife replicates. A computer program (WesVar) was used to calculate the

estimates of standard errors. WesVar is a stand-alone Windows application that computes sampling

errors from complex samples for a wide variety of statistics (totals, percents, ratios, log-odds ratios,

general functions of estimates in tables, linear regression parameters, and logistic regression parameters).

Nonsampling Errors

Nonsampling error is the term used to describe variations in the estimates that may be caused 

by population coverage limitations and data collection, processing, and reporting procedures. The sources 

of nonsampling errors are typically problems like unit and item nonresponse, differences in respondents’

interpretations of the meaning of questions, response differences related to the particular time the survey

was conducted, and mistakes made during data preparation. It is difficult to identify and estimate either

the amount of nonsampling error or the bias caused by this error. To minimize the potential for

nonsampling error, this study used a variety of procedures, including a pretest of the questionnaire with

individuals at postsecondary institutions deemed to be the most knowledgeable about the dual enrollment 

programs and courses at their institutions. The pretest provided the opportunity to check for consistency 

of interpretation of questions and definitions and to eliminate ambiguous items. The questionnaire and

instructions were also extensively reviewed by NCES and the data requestor at the Office of Vocational

and Adult Education. In addition, manual and machine editing of the questionnaire responses were

conducted to check the data for accuracy and consistency. Cases with missing or inconsistent items were 

recontacted by telephone to resolve problems. Data were keyed with 100 percent verification for surveys 

received by mail, fax, or telephone.
A-9

Definitions of Analysis Variables

• Institution type: public 2-year, private 2-year, public 4-year, private 4-year. Type was

created from a combination of level (2-year, 4-year) and control (public, private). Twoyear institutions are defined as institutions at which the highest level of offering is at

least 2 but less than 4 years (below the baccalaureate degree); 4-year institutions are

those at which the highest level of offering is 4 or more years (baccalaureate or higher

degree).17 Private comprises private nonprofit and private for-profit institutions; these 

private institutions are reported together because there are too few private for-profit 

institutions in the sample for this survey to report them as a separate category. 

• Size of institution: less than 3,000 students; 3,000 to 9,999 students; and 10,000 or

more students.

For more information about the Postsecondary Education Quick Information System or the

Survey on Dual Enrollment Programs and Courses for High School Students, contact Bernie Greene,

Early Childhood, International, and Crosscutting Studies Division, National Center for Education

Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20006; e-mail: Bernard.Greene@ed.gov; telephone (202) 502-7348.

 

17 Definitions for level are from the data file documentation for the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) Institutional

Characteristics file, U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
A-10

This page intentionally left blank.
B-1

Appendix B

Questionnaire
B-2

This page intentionally left blank.
B-3

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5651

DUAL ENROLLMENT PROGRAMS AND COURSES FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION QUICK INFORMATION SYSTEM

FORM APPROVED

O.M.B. No.: 1850–0733

EXPIRATION DATE: 09/2006

This survey is authorized by law (P.L. 103-382). While participation in this survey is voluntary, your cooperation is critical to make the results of this 

survey comprehensive, accurate, and timely.

Definition of Dual Enrollment

For the purposes of this survey, dual enrollment refers to high school students who earn college credits for courses taken through a 

postsecondary institution. Different institutions have different names for dual enrollment, including “dual credit,” “concurrent 

enrollment,” “joint enrollment,” etc. Please use the definition provided here when completing the survey, regardless of how your 

institution refers to high school students taking college-level courses. Please note that:

• Courses may be part of a dual enrollment program, or courses may be taken by students outside of any such program.

ÿ “Dual enrollment program” is defined here as an organized system with special guidelines that allows high school students 

to take college level courses. The guidelines might have to do with entrance or eligibility requirements, funding, limits on 

coursetaking, and so on. 

ÿ High school students who simply enroll in courses through your institution, and are treated as regular college students, 

should not be considered as participating in a dual enrollment program.

• Credit for courses may be earned at both the high school and college level simultaneously or only at the college level. Credit 

may be earned immediately or upon enrollment at your institution after high school graduation. 

• Courses may be taught on a college campus, on a high school campus, or at some other location.

The time frame for this survey is the 2002–03 12-month academic year, including courses taken during summer sessions. Do not 

include information about summer bridge programs for students who had already graduated from high school.

This survey should be completed by the person(s) most knowledgeable about dual enrollment at your institution. 

IF ABOVE INSTITUTION INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, PLEASE UPDATE DIRECTLY ON LABEL.

Name of person completing form:_____________________________________ Telephone:________________________

Title/position: ________________________________ E-mail:

Best days and times to reach you (in case of questions):_______________________________________________________

THANK YOU. PLEASE KEEP A COPY OF THIS SURVEY FOR YOUR RECORDS.

PLEASE RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO: IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, CONTACT:

WESTAT Brian Kleiner

Attention: 7166.30—Kleiner 800–937–8281, ext. 4469 or 301–294–4469

1650 Research Boulevard Fax: 800–254–0984

Rockville, Maryland 20850 E-mail: BrianKleiner@westat.com

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB

control number. The valid OMB control number for this information is 1850–0733. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated 

to average 30 minutes per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and 

review the information collected. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form,

please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. 20202–4651. If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your

individual submission of this form, write directly to: National Center for Education Statistics, 1990 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 

PEQIS Form No. 14, 01/2004
B-4

1. During the 2002–03 12-month academic year, did any high school students take courses for college credit through

your institution? (This may include students who took courses within a dual enrollment program or on their own,

outside of any program—see definition on the front of the survey.) 

Yes..... 1 (Continue with question 2.) No ...... 2 (Stop. Complete respondent section on front and return survey.)

2. During the 2002–03 12-month academic year, did any high school students take college-level courses through your

institution outside of any dual enrollment program? (These are generally high school students who simply enroll in and 

pay for college courses on their own and are treated the same as regular college students. See definition.)

Yes..... 1 (Continue with question 3.) No ...... 2 (Skip to question 4.)

3. During the 2002–03 12-month academic year, how many high school students took college-level courses through

your institution outside of any dual enrollment program? (Please provide unduplicated head counts, i.e., do not count

students more than once if they took more than one course.)

Number of students 

College-Level Courses Taken by High School Students Through Your Institution’s 

Dual Enrollment Program(s)

• “Dual enrollment program” is defined here as an organized system with special guidelines that allows high school students 

to take college-level courses. The guidelines might have to do with entrance or eligibility requirements, funding, limits on 

coursetaking, and so on. 

• High school students who simply enroll in courses through your institution, and are treated as regular college students, should 

not be considered as participating in a dual enrollment program.

4. During the 2002–03 12-month academic year, did any high school students take courses for college credit through

your institution that were part of a dual enrollment program? (See definition.) 

Yes..... 1 (Continue with question 5.) No ...... 2 (Stop. Complete respondent section on front and return survey.)

5. During the 2002–03 12-month academic year, how many high school students took college-level courses in the dual 

enrollment program(s) through your institution? (Please provide unduplicated head counts, i.e., do not count students 

more than once if they took more than one course.)

Number of students 

6. Did the high school students who took courses for college credit in the dual enrollment program(s) also receive credit 

at the high school level for those courses? (Circle only one.)

Yes..................................................................................................................................... 1

No ...................................................................................................................................... 2

It varied .............................................................................................................................. 3

Don’t know ......................................................................................................................... 4

7. Where were the courses that were taken by high school students in the dual enrollment program(s) taught? (Circle 

one on each line.)

Yes No

a. Your college campus ........................................................................................................ 1 2

b. A high school campus........................................................................................................ 1 2

c. Some other location(s) (specify) 1 2

If you answered “yes” to 7b (“a high school campus”), then continue with question 8. If not, skip to question 10. 

8. Who were the instructors of the college-level courses in the dual enrollment program(s) that were taught on a high

school campus? (Consider a high school instructor as someone primarily employed by a school district, and a college 

instructor as someone primarily employed by your institution.) (Circle only one.)

College instructors only ............................................................................. 1 (Skip to question 10.)

High school instructors only....................................................................... 2 (Continue with question 9.)

Both high school and college instructors................................................... 3 (Continue with question 9.)
B-5

9. How did the minimum qualifications for high school instructors who taught college-level courses as part of the dual

enrollment program(s) compare to those required for college instructors at your institution? (Circle only one.)

The same as those required for college instructors .......................................................... 1

Different than those required for college instructors.......................................................... 2

There was no set policy with respect to minimum qualifications....................................... 3

It varied .............................................................................................................................. 4

10. Which of the following most closely resembles the typical pattern of high school enrollments in the dual enrollment

program(s)? (A course is equivalent to 3 or 4 credits. An academic term could be a semester, quarter, or trimester.)

(Circle only one.)

High school students took one college course per academic term ................................... 1

High school students took two college courses per academic term.................................. 2

High school students took three or more college courses per academic term.................. 3

The number of college courses high school students took varied considerably ............... 4

Some other pattern (specify) 5

11. What was the maximum number of courses per academic term (e.g., semester, quarter) a high school student was 

allowed to take as part of the dual enrollment program(s)? (Circle only one.)

One course per academic term ......................................................................................... 1

Two courses per academic term ....................................................................................... 2

Three or more courses per academic term ....................................................................... 3

No maximum number per academic term ......................................................................... 4

12. When were high school students generally awarded college credit for courses taken through the dual enrollment

program(s)? (Circle only one.)

Immediately upon completion of courses .......................................................................... 1

Upon enrolling at your institution after high school graduation ......................................... 2

Other (specify) 3

13. Were there academic eligibility requirements for high school students to participate in your institution’s dual enrollment 

program(s)?

Yes ........... 1 (Continue with question 14.) No............... 2 (Skip to question 17.)

14. What were the academic eligibility requirements for high school students to participate in your institution’s dual

enrollment program(s)? (Circle one on each line.)

Yes No

a. Minimum high school grade point average................................................................... 1 2

b. Minimum score on a standardized test, such as the SAT.............................................. 1 2

c. Minimum high school class rank........................................................................................ 1 2

d. Passing a college placement test given by your institution ............................................... 1 2

e. Some other requirement(s) (specify) 1 2

If you answered “yes” to 14a (a minimum GPA), then continue with question 15. If not, skip to question 16. 

15. What was the minimum high school GPA (on a 4-point scale) required by your institution for high school students to

take courses in the dual enrollment program(s)? (Circle only one.)

Between 1.75 and 2.24...................................................................................................... 1

Between 2.25 and 2.74...................................................................................................... 2

Between 2.75 and 3.24...................................................................................................... 3 

Between 3.25 and 3.74...................................................................................................... 4 

3.75 or above..................................................................................................................... 5

It varied .............................................................................................................................. 6 

16. Were the academic requirements for high school students to be eligible to participate in your institution’s dual

enrollment program(s) the same or different than your institution’s admissions standards for regular college students?

(Circle only one.)

The same..............1 Different.............. 2

17. Which grade levels of high school students were eligible to take college-level courses as part of the dual enrollment 

program(s)? (If you had more than one program, include grade levels across all programs.) (Circle all that apply.)

9th 10th 11th 12th Some other grade(s) (specify)
B-6

18. Was the curriculum (i.e., syllabus, books, exams, course length) for the college-level courses taken by high school

students as part of the dual enrollment program(s) specially designed for high school students, or was it the same as 

for regular college students? (Circle only one.)

Specially designed for high school students ..................................................................... 1

The same as for regular college students ......................................................................... 2

It varied .............................................................................................................................. 3

19. Which sources paid tuition for the college-level courses taken by high school students in the dual enrollment

program(s)? (Circle one on each line.)

Yes No

a. Your institution (including both your institution’s contributions and/or tuition waivers) ..... 1 2

b. The state............................................................................................................................ 1 2

c. High schools/public school districts ................................................................................... 1 2

d. Parents/students................................................................................................................ 1 2

e. Some other source(s) (specify) 1 2

20. What did high school students (and their parents) generally pay out of pocket for college-level courses taken in the

dual enrollment program(s)? (Circle only one.)

Full tuition .......................................................................................................................... 1

Partial tuition...................................................................................................................... 2

Books and/or fees only ...................................................................................................... 3

Nothing—tuition, books, and fees were paid in full by other sources................................ 4

It varied .............................................................................................................................. 5

21. During the 2002–03 12-month academic year, did your institution have a formal dual enrollment program geared 

specifically toward high school students who were at risk of educational failure? (This program may have been

included in dual enrollment programs already covered above. Only include programs in which at-risk high school

students could earn college credit for courses taken.)

Yes ..... 1 (Continue with question 22.) No ..... 2 (Stop. Complete respondent section on front and return survey.)

22. During the 2002–03 12-month academic year, how many at-risk high school students were enrolled in that dual 

enrollment program? Number of students

23. What was the primary focus of the dual enrollment program for at-risk high school students? (Circle only one.)

Academic (e.g., mathematics, English, social studies, foreign languages)....................... 1

Career/technical (e.g., computer systems networking, culinary arts, metallurgy)............. 2

Equally academic and career/technical............................................................................. 3

Some other primary focus (specify) 4

24. Which of the following most closely resembles the typical pattern of enrollments in the dual enrollment program for atrisk high school students? (An academic term could be a semester, quarter, or trimester.) (Circle only one.)

High school students took one college course per academic term ................................... 1

High school students took two college courses per academic term.................................. 2

High school students took three or more college courses per academic term.................. 3

The number of college courses high school students took varied considerably ............... 4

25. Did your institution provide extra support services specifically for the at-risk high school students in the dual

enrollment program (e.g., tutoring, academic advising, study skills workshops, precollege counseling)? (Only include

support services beyond those usually provided to students taking courses through your institution.)

26. What extra support services were specifically offered to the at-risk high school students in the dual enrollment 

program? (Only include support services beyond those usually provided to students taking courses through your

institution.) (Circle one on each line.)

Yes No

a. Tutoring.............................................................................................................................. 1 2

b. Academic advising............................................................................................................. 1 2

c. Study skills workshops....................................................................................................... 1 2

d. College application/selection counseling........................................................................... 1 2

e. Financial aid counseling .................................................................................................... 1 2

f. Some other support service(s) (specify) 1 2

Yes ..... 1 (Continue with question 26.) No...... 2 (Stop. Complete respondent section on front and return survey.)