U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

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

94–613 PDF 2017

S. HRG. 114–610 

REAUTHORIZING THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT: 

THE ROLE OF CONSUMER INFORMATION IN 

COLLEGE CHOICE 

HEARING 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, 

LABOR, AND PENSIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON

EXAMINING REAUTHORIZING THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT, FOCUSING 

ON THE ROLE OF CONSUMER INFORMATION IN COLLEGE CHOICE 

MAY 6, 2015 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ 

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee, Chairman 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

SUSAN COLLINS, Maine 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

MARK KIRK, Illinois 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

BILL CASSIDY, M.D., Louisiana 

PATTY MURRAY, Washington 

BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland 

BERNARD SANDERS (I), Vermont 

ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts 

DAVID P. CLEARY, Republican Staff Director 

EVAN SCHATZ, Minority Staff Director 

JOHN RIGHTER, Minority Deputy Staff Director 

(II) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 2015 

Page 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Alexander, Hon. Lamar, Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions, opening statement ....................................................................... 1 

Murray, Hon. Patty, a U.S. Senator from the State of Washington, opening 

statement .............................................................................................................. 3 

Cassidy, Hon. Bill, a U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana .......................... 41 

Franken, Hon. Al, a U.S. Senator from the State of Minnesota .......................... 43 

Warren, Hon. Elizabeth, a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts ........ 45 

Murphy, Hon. Christopher, a U.S. Senator from the State of Connecticut ........ 46 

Whitehouse, Hon. Sheldon, a U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode Island ...... 48 

Scott, Hon. Tim, a U.S. Senator from the State of South Carolina ..................... 50 

WITNESSES

Schneider, Mark, Ph.D., Vice President and Institute Fellow, American Institutes for Research, and President, College Measures, Washington, D.C. ....... 6 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 8 

Santiago, Deborah A., Chief Operating Officer and Vice President for Policy, 

Excelencia In Education, Washington, DC. ....................................................... 13 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 15 

Lightfoot, Stacy, Vice President of College and Career Success Initiatives, 

Public Education Foundation, Chattanooga, TN ............................................... 21 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 23 

Mitchell, Taleah, Graduate, Seattle Central College, Seattle, WA ..................... 29 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 31 

(III) 

(1) 

REAUTHORIZING THE HIGHER EDUCATION 

ACT: THE ROLE OF CONSUMER INFORMATION IN COLLEGE CHOICE 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 2015 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room SD– 

430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lamar Alexander, chairman of the committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Alexander, Scott, Cassidy, Murray, Casey, 

Franken, Bennet, Whitehouse, Murphy, and Warren. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ALEXANDER

The CHAIRMAN. The Senate Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions will please come to order. 

This morning we are holding our second hearing in this Congress 

on the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, which will 

focus on the role of consumer information in college choice. 

Senator Murray and I will each have an opening statement. 

Then we will introduce our panel of witnesses. After our witness 

testimony, Senators will have 5 minutes of questions. 

This is our second higher education hearing, but we have a good 

head start. Last Congress, we held 13 hearings on higher education, and all but two of our Members who are on this year’s committee were on last year’s committee. 

We also have a head start in the sense we have several bipartisan pieces of legislation that are on this subject of Higher Education reauthorization. 

There is the FAST Act that Senators Bennet, Booker, Burr, King, 

Isakson, and I introduced that was based on testimony before this 

committee from last year about simplifying Federal student aid and 

reducing borrowing. 

There is the REPAY Act. Senator Burr, along with Senators 

King, Warner, Rubio, Collins, and I have introduced that. That 

would simplify loan repayment. 

Then Senator Mikulski, Burr, Bennet, and I are planning to introduce legislation to incorporate many of the recommendations 

from the report we asked for on Federal rules and regulations governing colleges and universities and how to simplify them. 

Senator Murray and I will work together to put all this and other 

information into a bipartisan process for reauthorizing the Higher 

Education Act. I hope we can produce a bill for that this fall. This 

2 

now becomes the major effort of our committee, now that the committee has finished its work on the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act. 

We are here today to examine what students want and need to 

know in order to make their college choices and look at whether 

this matches up with the information the Federal law requires colleges to collect. It is important to note that since 1944 with the GI 

bill for veterans, Federal aid has followed students to the colleges 

of their choice. American college students have lots of choices, more 

than 6,000, and to make a smart choice, students need information. 

The Federal Government collects and disseminates information 

on colleges and universities. The testimony we will hear today will 

say it does a better job of collecting than disseminating. We will 

talk about that. That requires time and money from the institutions. I have an example here of the data survey that each of our 

almost 1,000 public community colleges must fill out. Every one of 

our 2-year schools has to fill this out. The other 5,000 colleges and 

universities have a similar document they fill out. This one is 426 

pages of data requirements and reporting instructions, 3,300 different necessary responses or inputs. The question is, are all those 

necessary? Are all those useful to students? 

Last year, the National Association of Student Financial Aid administrators issued a report on federally mandated college consumer disclosures. They have lent me this 900-page binder to show 

what one university with two campuses is required to disclose. 

Most of this is made public on the institution’s website, but the law 

and regulations prescribe a dizzying variety of ways the different 

disclosures must be sent to current students and, upon request, the 

public. Items range from the useful and necessary such as terms 

and conditions of student aid to such things as informing students 

when Constitution Day is. 

The question is, is all this necessary? The more important question is, how much of this is actually useful to students making a 

college choice? The president of that association suggested that 

with such an overwhelming amount of information students will 

have a hard time making good use of it. 

We have this phenomenon in too many areas of life today. For 

example, if you get a mortgage loan or if you buy a car, you are 

provided with so much consumer information, it may not help you. 

At colleges, the burden of getting this information to the student 

falls in most cases on the financial aid offices. This takes away 

time and money from other important activities like counseling students about loans or the careers they might follow. Ninety percent 

of college administrators, those who work every day with this information, say the requirements—many of them could be eliminated 

or modified or improved, and they are among the most burdensome 

part of higher education regulation. 

I got a note from the president of the Missouri Baptist University 

the other day, whom I do not know, and he said, 

‘‘I have been in higher education administration for over 40 

years, the last 20 as university president. I have never experienced the amount of regulatory pressure our institution currently faces.’’ 

3 

What I just discussed is only a part of the mandates on colleges 

and universities by the Federal Government. When we reauthorized the Higher Education Act in 2008, I brought a copy of all the 

regulations, sub-regulations, the guidance, dear colleague letters, 

and forms. I brought them to the Senate floor. I stacked them up, 

and they were as tall as I was. The new law produced even more. 

I mentioned earlier the report that four members of this committee have commissioned on higher education regulations. That 

commission found what it called a jungle of red tape strangling colleges and universities, overloading consumers with an enormous 

amount of information. 

They listed information that was an overload among the top 10 

areas they identified as particularly burdensome, such questions 

about copyright infringement or how many fire drills the institution holds each year. 

The question is, do the students actually need and use this information? The most well-known Federal consumer tool is the College 

Navigator, which came from the last Higher Education Act. If you 

print out information from the College Navigator—and you will excuse me for going on a little bit here—this is the College Navigator 

for the University of Tennessee. I tried to navigate it myself this 

morning. It is hard to read. I am not sure it helps students very 

much. It is a lot of information, takes a lot of time to do it. 

Two years ago, the White House added a new Federal tool, the 

College Scoreboard. The Center for American Progress looked at it 

and summarized it this way: What am I looking at? 

We know students are not using Federal websites for college. 

One survey showed only 18 percent of prospective adults used any 

interactive website to compare colleges. The College Board found 

only 12 percent of high school students reported using Government 

tools to learn about college costs. Consumer information that is too 

complicated to understand or to use is worthless. 

She can speak for herself, but Senator Warren understands this. 

In her time at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, she 

tried to boil down the mortgage disclosure form to a 2-page shopping sheet, if I remember right, so people could actually understand what they were getting. 

This leads to these questions. How might consumer information 

actually become useful for prospective students and families? What 

better information may be needed? And what requirements can we 

eliminate? 

We have a panel of distinguished witnesses here today with 

hands-on knowledge of how prospective families and students use 

information to decide upon a college. This is a bipartisan hearing, 

which means Senator Murray and I have jointly selected the witnesses. We learn more that way. I want to thank her for working 

with me in that way, and I now recognize Senator Murray for her 

opening comments. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MURRAY

Senator MURRAY. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you to all of our witnesses, as well, for being here today. 

I believe it is important to give students a strong voice at the table 

when we create Federal policies. I am especially glad to see Taleah 

4 

Mitchell, who is joining us from Washington State today. I am looking forward to your testimony on your experience of going back to 

school and navigating the options of furthering your education. 

Over the past several months, this committee has primarily been 

focused on fixing the badly broken No Child Left Behind law. We 

were able to work through the partisan gridlock and work together 

and reach a bipartisan compromise. I was very proud to join with 

the Chairman and pass that out of committee with unanimous support. We still have work to do on that legislation. But now that we 

have cleared the committee process, we are going to be able to 

focus more of our attention on reauthorizing the Higher Education 

Act. 

Access to quality and affordable higher education is important 

for students, and it is also a crucial part of building an economy 

that works for all of our families, not just the wealthiest few. A 

highly educated workforce is good for our economy. It strengthens 

the middle class. It strengthens the workforce we will need to compete in the 21st century global economy. I believe we should be 

working on ways to help more students earn their degree and gain 

that foothold into the middle class. 

There are a few broad themes that I am going to be fighting for 

throughout our work to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. For 

one, we have got to reduce the crushing burden of student debt. 

Making college more affordable will be a central part of what I 

focus on throughout any discussion of higher education. I believe 

all students should have access to a safe learning environment as 

well. Strengthening protections for students and preventing sexual 

violence, assault, and bullying on campus is a priority. We need our 

education system to work seamlessly for students from the cradle 

through to their career, and more students from all walks of life 

should have strong, clear pathways into and through higher education. 

That is at the heart of what we will be talking about today. We 

will be discussing the role of consumer information in choosing between college options. The postsecondary options are only truly valuable if students and families have access to the information that 

actually helps them make the best decision for themselves, their 

careers, and their future. The lack of clear and consistent consumer 

data can make it difficult for students and families to navigate college options. It can be especially difficult if you are a first-generation student or a student from a low-income background where 

your pathway to higher education is not as well worn. 

Let us remember, the profile of a typical college student today is 

quite different than 10 years ago. So-called nontraditional students 

have become the new norm. They are more likely to be the first in 

their family to go to college, and before they enroll, they often already have a good idea of how they want to advance their careers. 

Right now, families and students are not able to access basic but 

essential consumer information on their program, their college or 

their university. In some cases, colleges have even put out false information misleading students about their job placement prospects. 

When students are deciding where to attend, they should be able 

to easily see accurate information on how much they will pay and 

5 

borrow, the amount they will earn if they complete their degree 

and their chances of succeeding. 

I recently received a letter from a diverse group of organizations 

from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to Young Invincibles and New 

America focusing on how we can improve this consumer information. They pointed out that the current restrictions on student data 

are unnecessary and outdated, and they all agree the Federal Government has an important role to play in collecting and reporting 

clear and consistent data about postsecondary education to promote 

student success. 

In reauthorizing the Higher Education Act, we have the opportunity to improve and streamline the current system. So, instead 

of the illusion of choice, students will have meaningful information 

to help them make an informed decision. That is something I will 

be pushing for. 

I am looking forward to hearing from our panel today on how to 

strengthen students’ pathways to higher education so they complete their degrees and how to ensure our system can work 

seamlessly for all of our students because expanding access to higher education could not be more important for students who want 

to gain a foothold in the middle class. 

Again, thank you to all of our witnesses today. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for having this hearing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Murray. 

I am pleased to welcome our witnesses. I will introduce three, 

and then Senator Murray will introduce one. 

The first witness will be Mark Schneider, vice president and institute fellow with the American Institutes for Research. Prior to 

joining the Institute, Dr. Schneider was Commissioner of the National Center of Education Statistics at the U.S. Department of 

Education. His current work is focused on increasing accountability 

through improved public disclosure of data related to institutional 

productivity at the State level. 

Our next witness, Ms. Deborah Santiago, co-founder, chief operating officer, and vice president for Policy at Excelencia in Education. She co-founded Excelencia in Education to accelerate Latino 

student success in higher education, and some of her recent work 

has involved how to best provide information to students. She has 

served in a number of policy and advisory roles at the Department 

of Education and at the White House. 

Our third witness today is from Tennessee. Stacy Lightfoot is 

vice president of the College and Career Success Initiatives at the 

Public Education Foundation located in Chattanooga. In her role, 

Ms. Lightfoot trains local high school guidance counselors to help 

students in finding the right college to best meet that student’s 

needs. She has earned several awards at the State, local, and national levels in recognition of her work in the college-going process. 

She earned her bachelor’s degree in communications from DePauw 

University in Indiana, and her master’s degree in international 

service from the University of Roehampton, during which she spent 

teaching in Jamaica. 

I now turn to Senator Murray to introduce our final witness. 

Senator MURRAY. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

6 

I am very pleased to introduce Taleah Mitchell, who came all the 

way from Washington State to be here today. Taleah recently went 

through Washington State’s integrated basic education and skills 

training program, or what we call I–BEST, at one of our State’s 

largest community colleges. Taking classes at Seattle Central College, Taleah was able to learn the skills she needed to forge a clear 

career path. She recently earned a certification in business information technology and an associate degree in computer science and 

women and gender studies and now works at a major company in 

Seattle. 

As members of the committee will hear in just a bit from her, 

Taleah’s story underscores the important role of adult education 

and its potential to help so many other Americans who did not 

think they needed or even had the chance to get a college degree. 

Taleah, thank you for coming all the way here. I look forward to 

hearing your testimony today. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Murray. 

We look forward to everyone’s testimony. May I suggest that you 

try to summarize your testimony in about 5 minutes, and that will 

give the Senators more of a chance to have a conversation with 

you. We will start with Dr. Schneider. 

STATEMENT OF MARK SCHNEIDER, Ph.D., VICE PRESIDENT 

AND INSTITUTE FELLOW, AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH, AND PRESIDENT, COLLEGE MEASURES, WASHINGTON, DC 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you. It is my pleasure to be here. As 

noted, I am Mark Schneider, and again, thank you so much for the 

opportunity to talk with you. 

As noted, I had the honor of serving as the Commissioner for the 

National Center of Education Statistics from 2005 through 2008. 

While I was there, NCES redesigned many of its consumer facing 

tools to allow easier access to data. I was actually going to claim 

credit for the College Navigator, but I am not so sure if I should 

do that now. 

[Laughter.] 

I was also faced with the constant struggle to balance compelling 

Federal interests with an equally compelling need to honor the role 

of the States as partners in any efforts to improve consumer information about postsecondary education. 

Much of my current work at AIR and at College Measures involves documenting the labor market experiences of students as 

they complete their studies at colleges and universities and move 

into and through the workforce. 

These experiences lead me to believe that we can and should organize consumer information into five different categories that students and their families need to ask questions about and get answers to these questions in order to better inform their decisions 

about where to enroll and what to study. 

The five questions for me are: Will I get in? Selectivity. Will I 

get out? Graduation Rates. How long will it take? Time to degree. 

How much will I pay? And how much will I earn? 

With these pieces of information, we can construct the equivalent 

of return on investment calculations that should aid students in 

7 

understanding where to best allocate and invest their time and 

money. 

As we think about these five questions and how to answer them, 

there are four cross-cutting issues that we need to always keep in 

mind. 

First, any efforts to develop consumer information about postsecondary education must—absolutely must—contain information 

about subbaccalaureate credentials. The interest in associate degrees and certificates granted by community colleges is growing 

much more rapidly than the demand for any other kind of information. 

Second, the United States must break what I call its ‘‘bachelor’s 

addiction.’’ Yes, the bachelor’s degree is a great degree, and for 

most people, it has a good return on the investment. The fact of 

the matter is that subbaccalaureate credentials can put students 

directly into the middle class and many students earning technical 

degrees from community colleges can out-earn bachelor degree students. We have to move beyond the bachelor’s addiction. 

Third, we need to battle our fixation on institution level data. We 

all love league tables. We all like to look at how my university is 

doing compared to other universities. These league tables at the institution level is dangerous. It is a distraction because there is 

more variation across student outcomes by program than there is 

by institution. We need data at the program level way beyond the 

institution level. 

Finally, gathering the information is not enough. Getting information into the hands of consumers is a giant challenge, and it is 

not clear to me that the Federal Government, which has an enormous capacity to create and collect the data, actually has that capacity to disseminate it. 

I just want to spend a minute or so on the last question that I 

posed above, and how much will I make? Because ultimately, most 

students say the reason they go to college is to have a good career 

and have high wages. 

For a variety of reasons detailed in my written testimony, I believe Congress needs to find a way to allow student data to be 

matched with Federal tax data collected by the IRS and to have 

these data more widely used and distributed. I understand that 

this is fraught with privacy concerns, but I believe that we have 

the capacity to protect these data. There are strong statistical 

methods to protect these data and make them secure. 

I believe that since the Federal Government has such a compelling interest in the outcome for students that are getting title IV 

student aid, a reasonable place to start is merging the Federal income tax data with FSA data, but this has to be done at the program level, not at the institution level. I believe that these data 

should be made widely available to researchers and to Federal departments. The Federal Government does not share data very well 

with each other. 

Of equal importance, I believe that the Federal Government 

should make clear a policy allowing State governments to match 

their much more complete student data with Federal tax data. In 

this way, we could move beyond the measurement of student outcomes beyond the 60 percent covered by the FSA data and we could 

8 

use the more complete sweep of State-held student data for detailed analysis consistent with State policy needs. 

To conclude, I think that the Federal Government can and 

should create high quality data, but that the dissemination should 

be left to others. The data should be put in the hands of private 

companies and State governments, not-profit organizations that 

could experiment with a variety of measures and metrics and a variety of ways of producing those data and getting them into the 

hands of consumers. 

Thank you so much. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Schneider follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARK SCHNEIDER, PH.D. 

SUMMARY

I believe that we can and should organize consumer information into five different 

questions that students and their families need to ask (and answer) to better inform 

their postsecondary education decisions about where to enroll and what to study. 

1. Will I get in? (Selectivity). 

2. Will I get out? (Graduation rates). 

3. How long will it take? (Time to complete). 

4. How much will I pay? (Net price). 

5. How much will I make? (Post completion earnings). 

Answering each of these questions presents challenges, but none are insurmountable. We can make progress with the measures the Federal and State governments 

already collect. We can and should do better—all the while protecting the privacy 

of these data and minimizing the burden on States, which will likely have to provide 

much of the data needed to answer these questions. 

My work with Andrew Kelly, ‘‘Filling in the Blanks’’, shows that choices across 

postsecondary institutions can be improved by good data presented simply. How we 

proceed to provide this information will matter. To ensure widespread use, we can 

distinguish at least three audiences for these data: Students, their families and the 

guidance counselors who help students find and choose schools; State policymakers; 

and Federal policymakers. 

While the underlying data these audiences need may be the same, the way in 

which the data are presented and which strands are highlighted will vary. 

The Federal Government is in the position to create a consumer-oriented database 

that can answer all five questions identified earlier. However, it is far from the best 

actor when it comes to disseminating the data in a usable form. Rather, I believe 

the Federal Government should help create high quality data and then make the 

data widely available to States and the private sector and encourage the creation 

of applications based on these data. Many efforts will inevitably follow, as States, 

companies and not-for-profit organizations experiment with different user interfaces, 

emphasizing different metrics. This competition will likely yield the best solutions 

to the need for better, more widely used consumer information about the large and 

growing number of postsecondary options available across the land. 

All of this work should be done in close cooperation with State governments and 

must proceed cautiously, considering privacy issues and minimizing reporting burdens placed on States. 

Good morning, Chairman Alexander, Ranking Member Murray, and distinguished 

Members of the committee. My name is Mark Schneider and I wish to thank you 

for the opportunity to share some of my views on consumer information and postsecondary education. 

I had the honor of serving as the Commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics from 2005 through 2008. During that time, NCES created College 

Navigator, still one of the most heavily used sites run by the U.S. Department of 

Education. While I was commissioner, NCES also redesigned other consumer facing 

tools, such as the NAEP Data Explorer, to allow easier access to NCES data. I also 

constantly struggled to balance compelling Federal interests with the equally compelling need to honor the role of the States as essential partners in any efforts to 

improve consumer information about postsecondary education. 

9 

1The American Institutes for Research AIR is one of the world’s largest behavioral and social 

science research and evaluation organizations. Founded in 1946 as a not-for-profit organization, 

AIR is committed to using the best science available to bring the most effective ideas and approaches to enhancing everyday life. College Measures is a joint effort of AIR and Optimity-Matrix Group created to improve the efficiency of postsecondary education in the United States and 

to help students find programs of study that will lead to higher wages and better labor market 

outcomes. 

Previous to my joining NCES, I was a distinguished professor of political science 

at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, where I developed expertise 

assessing how information can help inform school choice. That work was focused on 

K–12 education and in the early 2000s led to the creation of DCSchoolSearch.com, 

one of the first attempts to help parents access information about the performance 

of all DC public schools, traditional and charter. 

Much of my current work at the American Institutes for Research and at College 

Measures1 involves detailing the labor market experiences of students as they complete their studies at colleges and universities and move into and through the workplace. 

The goal of this work is to document differences in earnings over time and to identify postsecondary credentials with high market value. This work has been with 

State governments and my State partners all share a commitment to put this information into the public sphere in a form that is usable by different audiences. To 

date, College Measures has partnered with Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Minnesota, 

Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. 

This work lead me to believe that we can and should organize consumer information into five different questions that students and their families need to ask (and 

answer) to better inform their decisions about where to enroll and what to study. 

1. Will I get in? (Selectivity). 

2. Will I get out? (Graduation rates). 

3. How long will it take? (Time to complete). 

4. How much will I pay? (Net price). 

5. How much will I make? (Post completion earnings). 

The first question springs naturally to the minds of many students—driven by the 

quest for admission to the most visible and most selective universities in the Nation, 

institutions that have acceptance rates that makes admission only slightly more 

likely than winning a State lottery. The last question about earnings is of great importance to students; depending on the survey, around 80 percent or more of students queried say that getting a good job and strong earnings are among the most 

important reasons they go to college. We have the responsibility to help them identify programs that will help them achieve that goal. 

Most students probably don’t pay enough attention to questions 2 and 3, because 

they assume that they will graduate on time. However, we know that there is wide 

variation in both graduation rates and time to degree and that this variation is consequential to the success students will experience in the labor market and their 

ability to pay off their loans. Finally, the Nation has made progress on publicizing 

the difference between sticker and net price, but we still have much work to do on 

measuring the difference between these two sets of prices and letting people know 

about their true cost of getting a postsecondary credential. 

Answering each of these questions presents challenges, but none are insurmountable. We can make progress with the measures the Federal and State governments 

already collect. We can and should do better—all the while protecting the privacy 

of these data and minimizing the burden on States, which will likely have to provide 

much of the data needed to answer these questions. 

Before turning in more detail about some of the challenges in developing consumer information in each of these five categories, I turn to four issues that cut 

across all of them. 

First, any efforts to develop consumer information about postsecondary education 

must include information about subbaccalaureate credentials, such as associate’s degrees and certificates, most of which are delivered by America’s community colleges. 

One reason is evident by looking at trends in student enrollments: The number of 

subbaccalaureate degrees granted in the United States is growing more rapidly than 

the number of bachelor’s degrees awarded. Last year, subbaccalaureate awards 

granted almost equaled the number of bachelor’s degrees issued, although the bachelor’s degree still remains the most commonly granted college credential. 

Second, the United States must break its ‘‘bachelor’s addiction.’’ Empirically, the 

bachelor’s degree is a good investment—on average and in the long run. However, 

many students do not have the time, money or inclination to pursue this degree. 

There is consistent empirical evidence, much of it produced by College Measures, 

10 

that subbaccalaureate credentials can lead to earnings that exceed those of bachelor’s graduates and that place students earning those credentials squarely in the 

middle class. The data also show that the subbaccalaureate credentials with the 

most market value produce students who know how to fix things (e.g., technicians) 

or how to fix people (e.g., health care). These credentials can help the Nation fill 

the need for ‘‘mid-skilled’’ level workers, where some postsecondary training but not 

a bachelor’s degree are the usual requirements. 

Third, in addition to battling our bachelor’s addiction, we need to battle our fixation on institution level measurement. We love league tables that rank campuses 

against one another. Student outcomes can vary more by program of study than by 

institution. In other words: What a student studies often is more important than 

where they study it. In turn, we need to deliver usable consumer information at the 

program level. 

Finally, gathering good information is not enough—getting information into the 

hands of consumers in a format that is useful, usable, and used is a challenge. It 

is not clear to me that the Federal Government, which has a unique capacity to 

gather the data, has an equal capacity to disseminate it. 

With these thoughts in mind, I return to some of the issues in helping students 

understand why the answers to each of these five questions matter. 

WILL I GET IN?

We need to keep in mind that while many students and their parents are fixated 

on the competition for seats in the Nation’s most prestigious universities, the bulk 

of our colleges and universities offer broad or open access. 

Because there are large differences in student outcomes, any data collected about 

gaining admission should help students broaden their choice of schools, alerting 

them to the many options they have, and steering their selection process to options 

that include schools that are higher on measures of student success. 

WILL I GET OUT?

The limits on Federal graduation rate statistics, reported through IPEDS, are 

well-known. Most basically, they are still based on first-time, full-time, beginning 

students, a declining proportion of America’s college students. While the coverage 

of different student populations will expand in the next few years, the new graduation rate data will still be at the institution level. 

We need to move to the collection of program level graduation rates. Given the 

number of students who change majors (and swirl through campuses), this will be 

difficult, but we need to start down this path. 

Admittedly, this will add a burden on to State data systems, but we need to balance that burden against the rewards this information can have for students. To 

compensate, we should identify other components of IPEDS that are burdensome 

without producing commensurate benefits. This is a task I know this committee is 

taking seriously. 

HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE?

The time it takes to earn a degree is important. The longer a student is enrolled 

in pursuing a credential the more likely it is that ‘‘life happens,’’ derailing student 

progress. As is well-known, students who don’t complete their studies will usually 

have a harder time paying off their loans. Moreover, each year spent enrolled is one 

more year of tuition paid out and one more year of foregone earnings. While it is 

possible to use IPEDS to estimate the average time to degree for institution-level 

graduation rates, we need to gather time to degree by program. Texas already reports these data, information that other States should be collecting and reporting. 

Again, this may increase burden on State systems, but these data are far more 

important to help students understand the consequences of their choices than much 

of the data the Federal Government compels States and institutions to gather. 

HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?

Thanks to congressional action, the Nation has made great strides in making public the difference between sticker price and net price. However, according to recent 

work by Andrew Kelly at the American Enterprise Institute, most students still do 

not have good information about the true costs they will encounter—and they are 

far more likely to overestimate the cost of college, which can discourage attendance. 

Any tools we develop to estimate costs must allow students to enter personalized 

information. For example, in the My Future Texas application College Measures 

11 

2 Available at http://www.myfuturetx.com/ 3 Available at https://www.aei.org/publication/filling-in-the-blanks/. 

built,2 students can enter personal information from their own financial aid letters 

to compare their likely costs to earn a degree. The application takes into account 

the time to degree for the program in which the student is interested to estimate 

total cost. 

HOW MUCH WILL I MAKE?

Yes, postsecondary education is about many more things than making money, 

and, yes, college graduates usually are healthier, live longer, and engage in our 

democratic processes at higher levels than non-graduates—but the path to all of 

these rewards largely runs through success in the labor market. In addition, students themselves overwhelmingly say that the prospect of good careers and strong 

earnings drives their desire for postsecondary education. 

Not surprisingly, I believe that we need program level earnings data. Right now, 

these data come from States’ unemployment insurance (UI) wage data. Many States 

link their UI data to student level information detailing the year of graduation and 

program/institution of study, allowing detailed reporting of earnings of graduates as 

much as 10 years after graduation. 

The problems with these State UI wage data are well-known: students who move 

across State lines to work are no longer found in the data system of the State where 

they earned their degree. In some States, such as Colorado, only around 40–45 percent of the students in the State’s student data system can be matched to data in 

the unemployment insurance wage system. In big States like Texas and Florida, 

with booming economies, match rates are 20 percentage points higher. These are 

still low—and we don’t know how much error is introduced as students choose to 

leave the State. 

Match rates also vary across institutions, with rates for graduates from State flagships lagging the rates from regional comprehensive campuses. Field of study also 

matters: match rates for teachers, where State certification matters for employment, 

are far higher than for engineers. 

The Wage Record Interchange System (WRIS 2) held out some promise to ameliorate the problem of interstate movement of graduates. WRIS 2 is a consortium of 

over 30 States that theoretically agreed to search for UI wage data requested by 

other members of the consortium. If this system worked as planned, coverage would 

expand dramatically. However, some very large States are not in the WRIS 2 consortium—and States that are members often do not honor the requests from other 

States. Match rates hover in the single digits and about 1⁄3 of the States in the consortium do not run requests from other member States. 

The alternative is accessing Federal tax collected by the IRS. I recognize and appreciate that using these data is fraught with privacy concerns. Nonetheless, based 

on my experience at NCES and following the work done by other Federal agencies, 

especially the Census Bureau, I believe that there are sufficiently strong statistical 

procedures that can be employed to protect the data. With such protections in place, 

I believe the Congress should seek ways to allow the U.S. Department of Education 

to collaborate with other Federal agencies to match data about students education 

with IRS earnings data. 

I believe that since the Federal Government has a compelling interest in the outcomes of students receiving title IV aid, a reasonable place to start would be to 

match FSA data with tax data. However, to be useful the FSA data must be expanded to capture program of study. I also believe that the Federal Government 

should make clear a policy to allow State governments to match their much more 

complete student data with Federal tax data. 

NEXT STEPS

Let us assume that the Nation makes a commitment to expand the collection of 

consumer data. How we proceed will matter. My work with Andrew Kelly, ‘‘Filling 

in the Blanks,’’ 3 shows that choices across postsecondary institutions can be improved by good data presented simply. To ensure widespread use, to paraphrase the 

perennial description of real estate, it is essential to keep in mind three fundamentals about data usage: audience, audience, audience. 

We can distinguish at least three audiences for these data—and while the underlying data may be the same, the way in which the data are presented and which 

strands are highlighted will vary. Trying to satisfy all three audiences with the 

same data application may not be possible. 

12 

STUDENTS, THEIR FAMILIES AND THE GUIDANCE COUNSELORS WHO HELP STUDENTS

FIND AND CHOOSE SCHOOLS

The data for this audience need to be tailored to help students find schools and 

programs that they are likely to complete and that will give them a strong chance 

to enter the middle class. They need to be able to understand that a bachelor’s degree is not the only path into the labor market. Given the well documented low levels of financial literacy among young adults, they may need targeted help to understand the consequences of their decisions and how their choices translate into outcomes they can easily grasp: such as what kind of car will I be able to afford or 

will I be able to live somewhere else but my mother’s basement. 

We also have to recognize that guidance counselors can act as intermediaries 

helping students navigate the data to choose programs that will lead to more success following completion. Guidance counselors are notoriously overworked and most 

are not trained to guide student college choices. We need to provide them with better mechanisms for accessing information to help better guide their students. 

However, I am not at all sanguine that the Federal Government can produce applications that will be appealing to this audience. 

STATE POLICYMAKERS

States invest large amounts of money in their postsecondary systems because 

these systems are viewed as human capital investment designed to help the State 

remain economically competitive. At the current time, States also ‘‘own’’ both student data and the State Unemployment Insurance (UI) wage data. This allows them 

to build far more powerful applications documenting labor market outcomes and credentials with high market value than the Federal Government can. 

Furthermore, most States are now building performance-based budgeting systems 

to reward colleges and universities that are exceeding benchmarks. Most of these 

systems are dominated by measures of the flow of students through the institutions 

(e.g., retention or graduation rates of different types of students), but many States 

have already included or are considering the inclusion of wage data into these budget systems. 

One motivation behind this movement is clear: the returns to the taxpayer should 

play a role in State budget allocations. While most of my previous discussion focused 

on student returns, taxpayers and their representatives also have the right to know 

about the returns on their investment in their State’s colleges and universities. 

For taxpayer returns to be better measured, we not only need to measure better 

student earnings, we also need better measures of the amount of government subsidies flowing into and through campuses: This ultimately will require better information about how government money is actually spent when it gets to campuses. 

This may require either better State finance data tracking systems and likely a systematic overhaul of IPEDS finance data. 

FEDERAL POLICYMAKERS

There is a compelling Federal interest measuring how well the Nation’s large investment in title IV student aid pays off to students and taxpayers. Despite legitimate privacy concerns, linking FSA data with IRS tax data is essential. FSA data 

would need to be modified to include information about the programs in which title 

IV recipients are enrolled. These merged data would cover around 60 percent of all 

students in the Nation. 

In addition to or in lieu of Federal action, the Congress should make it possible 

for States to contract with the IRS or the Social Security Administration to merge 

State held student data with Federal income tax data. Again, these data would be 

returned to the States aggregated at the program level and subject to statistical 

methods, such as perturbation, to ensure privacy. 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Clearly, the Federal Government is in the position to create a consumer-oriented 

database that can answer all five questions identified earlier. While States can and 

do develop data systems that answer these questions, the Federal Government can 

create a post-completion earnings database that no State or private entity can come 

close to matching in terms of coverage and quality. As noted, I believe the Congress 

should create such a database starting with FSA data and Congress should also endorse the ability of States to match their own student data with IRS tax data. The 

Federal Government has a role working with States to improve the measurement 

of time to degree- and program-level graduation rates. This should be approached 

13 

as a partnership in which the Federal Government helps States achieve their policy 

goals and not as Federal mandates. 

While the Federal Government can be the most powerful actor in the Nation in 

creating these databases, it is far from the best actor when it comes to disseminating the data in a usable form. 

The long and contentious history of gainful employment and the shorter but 

equally fraught history of the current attempts to create a college ratings system 

show the dangers of Federal overreach. 

I work with Money Magazine on Money’s Guide to Best Colleges. We use a variety 

of data to help identify schools where students get the best outcomes for their investment of time and money. We have no regulatory authority and if people don’t 

like our rankings system, they simply won’t buy the magazine. A Federal Government system, especially one tied to, say, title IV funding, carries totally different 

consequences. I believe the Federal Government should help create high quality 

databases and then make the data widely available. Many efforts will follow, as 

States, companies—such as Money Magazine and College Measures—and not-forprofit organizations experiment with different user interfaces, emphasizing different 

metrics. This competition will likely yield the best solutions to the need for better, 

more widely used consumer information about the large and growing number of 

postsecondary options available across the land. 

Thank you for your time and for your consideration of these ideas. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Dr. Schneider. 

Ms. Santiago. 

STATEMENT OF DEBORAH A. SANTIAGO, CHIEF OPERATING 

OFFICER AND VICE PRESIDENT FOR POLICY, EXCELENCIA 

IN EDUCATION, WASHINGTON, DC 

Ms. SANTIAGO. I want to also thank you all for allowing me to 

come and speak with you giving the perspective we have at 

Excelencia in Education. 

I am Deborah Santiago and have multiple hats at a small nonprofit organization. Our mission is to accelerate Latino student success in higher education. For us, that is not the exclusion of any 

other students, but too often Latinos are the footnote or the aside, 

and the reality is that increasingly that is the majority of students. 

For us, it is an opportunity to look at these institutions. They kind 

of represent the post-traditional students that we really need to be 

focusing on at the Federal level and institution level. For us posttraditional as opposed to nontraditional—I think nontraditional 

presumes we are going to go back to a way of being that we are 

not meeting a norm of tradition. I think the reality is we are beyond that. We are never going to get to that point where the majority of our students are that traditional student and profile. For us, 

that is an important distinction because the information that flows 

to those students is predicated on understanding who they are, and 

for us, that is an important part of how we approach data. 

We are also very data-focused. For us, the focus of the data is 

really to inform and compel action because we do find, despite the 

volume of data, there is still profound ignorance about who there 

students are, where their needs are, and where they intend to go— 

and the ability to use that is summarily important. 

For us, the use of good, accurate information is critical for the 

students and the choices they make, especially low-income, firstgeneration students. Too often we find this is complicated for students and families because the data themselves and the construct 

that informs our choices are constantly in flux. When you have institutional selectivity, costs, financial aid, and workforce opportunities constantly changing, it is hard to imagine a student or family 

14 

can find ways to mitigate the 4,000-plus institutions and opportunities they have in a significant way. I think there is a role for the 

Federal Government to be able to assist us in narrowing down 

those choices and get to what could be more of a best fit, presuming that we will never know perfect information, but having a 

good sense. 

Our experience is that these post-traditional students tend to be 

very pragmatic, and the information they choose is maybe not what 

we would always want or think they should know, but they are 

dealing in an environment that is incredibly complex. And we always want to recognize that. 

In dealing with data, I will say because it is complex, I think you 

need to be very multilingual. I speak Spanish, English, and data, 

and I think that is important when we deal with the kinds of populations we are trying to serve. They rely on intermediaries that can 

find a way, that can understand the complexities of tables and 

charts and rates, which I think very few of the general public understand what that means, and our ability to serve as an intermediary to help them is summarily important especially when we 

are looking at the multiple audiences. 

From my perspective, there are three audience that take advantage of or that can take advantage of the Federal information that 

is collected, and these are all consumers in my mind. One is certainly students. As I said, I think they have very pragmatic perspectives that I think we need to be respectful of. I think cost, access, and work opportunities are important. I think also the opportunity to look at things side by side. The College Navigator has a 

plethora of information. Our experience is that students maybe 

take a look at three or four points. I have yet to find a student who 

makes any choice, though, based on graduation rate. They tend to 

think that they can be the exception rather than the norm. We 

have to just acknowledge that that is the case. For the students 

that we deal with, the low-income, first-generation, they want to be 

the exception to the norm in their families because no one in the 

family has gone to college, and the data they consume are predicated on that perspective. 

Best fit is informed by what they think is possible, not just what 

data say because they are already outliers in their family. They are 

people of privilege because they are going to be going to college. 

That perspective is I think important as we think about this. 

Students are actually critical, and to the extent the Federal Government can speak to them, I think it is predicated on the value 

of intermediaries. I think Mark already mentioned this. For us, it 

is important. We look at groups like Gear Up, Trio, NCAN, 

NACAC. I know all the alphabet soup that we deal with here 

whether it is counselors or other organizations. They are critical in 

the translation of good information to students, and students rely 

on these intermediaries because they have direct contact and trust 

in the community in ways that, unfortunately, it is too hard at the 

Federal level to be able to get. Relying on those kinds of organizations, as my own, are really important to be able to get good information in the hands of students and families. That is what matters. 

15 

I think the last group that has a critical role is research. I know 

that we are talking about consumer information, but if we look at 

the intermediary role, the ability to take a look at institutional effort—we do a lot of work looking at Hispanics over the institutions, 

what are they, who is enrolling, what do we see in terms of completion, what more can be done. It is important that intermediaries 

are able to take a look at that and inform policy and practice. 

I would also say that as we are looking to these issues—issues 

like under-matching where the assumption is that there is perfect 

information, students are just making bad choices—I think contrasts with this idea of a best fit and understanding that post-traditional students use the best information they have available and 

how can we get that in to them so that we are looking at issues 

that are critical to the student being the center rather than assuming they are making bad choices with the information they have. 

It is critically important to understanding what is a very complex 

choice situation between students and families. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Santiago follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DEBORAH A. SANTIAGO

SUMMARY

Having accurate and useful information is critical to student and family choices 

for college access and success. However, three current realities are challenging the 

increased efforts at the Federal level to provide useful information to a diverse polis 

of potential college-goers: (1) limited awareness of how to reach the growing representation of Latinos, adults, veterans, and other ‘‘post-traditional’’ students ready 

to access college; (2) the resistance to change of institutional structures designed for 

‘‘traditional’’ students; and, (3) the constant fluctuations of factors informing choice, 

such as institutional selectivity, costs, financial aid, and workforce opportunities. 

Key findings and recommendations: 

1. Low-income and potentially first-generation college-goers make pragmatic college 

choices. Whereas conventional wisdom asserts students make college choices based 

on financial aid, institutional prestige, and academic programs offered, more contemporary research has found post-traditional students are increasingly making college choices based on college costs, institutional accessibility, and location. Understanding these distinctions can improve the crosswalk between what students want 

to know and should know to find the ‘‘best fit’’ in their college choices. 

2. Transparency of targeted and appropriate information on postsecondary education requires strategic outreach and engagement for maximum effectiveness. Detailed information has limited benefit if it does not reach those with the most need 

for it through intentional outreach and engagement of diverse communities. Implementing government outreach strategies that partner with organizations who are already aware and able to serve the information needs of post-traditional students can 

better support the college choices students make to find their ‘‘best fit’’ college option. 

3. An abundance of information about college options does not necessarily improve 

the chances of post-traditional students finding their ‘‘best fit’’ college. In this day 

and age, sophisticated search engines have been developed to simultaneously inform 

and guide consumer choices based on basic preferences (i.e., Google, Netflix, and 

Amazon). Help in narrowing options can facilitate the navigation of too much information so that potential students with limited college knowledge can still find a 

‘‘best fit’’ college. 

4. Providing useful information about college options early and often in an educational pathway creates awareness and knowledge among students and their families that can help them prepare for their access and success. Maternity wards, K– 

12 schools, and community-based organizations are viable venues along the educational continuum that can provide information to prepare potential students with 

a roadmap to enroll in college so that their expectations and costs for persistence 

and completion are clear. 

16 

5. Identifying post-traditional students is needed to design tailored information 

and outreach. Disaggregating data by the very characteristics that define post-traditional students can improve the targeted and intentional strategies to reach these 

students and can further inform the impact of those strategies for effectiveness. 

Chairman Alexander, Ranking Member Murray, and HELP Committee members, 

thank you for the invitation to participate in this hearing to discuss information for 

students and parents and the potential to better inform college choice. Everyone in 

the United States deserves a shot at the American Dream. The American Dream 

is the Nation’s idea where everyone has the opportunity for success and upward social mobility through hard work in a society with few barriers. Today, a college education is increasingly required for success and upward social mobility, but educational attainment has not been reached equally by all and barriers continue to 

exist. 

I am Deborah Santiago, chief operating officer and vice president for policy at 

Excelencia in Education (Excelencia). Excelencia in Education accelerates Latino student success in higher education by promoting Latino student achievement, conducting analysis to inform educational policies, and advancing institutional practices 

while collaborating with those committed and ready to meet our Nation’s goal of improving educational success. Launched in 2004 in Washington, DC, Excelencia is 

building a network of results-oriented educators and policymakers to address the 

U.S. economy’s need for a highly educated workforce and engaged civic leadership. 

While some believe a focus on race and ethnicity divides us as a society, 

Excelencia in Education believes acknowledging racial and ethnic trends describes 

our society, and therefore, helps us understand it. This does not exclude other 

groups in society. Our purpose is to consider seemingly inflexible issues in postsecondary education with a more contemporary lens. This lens provides a fresh perspective to consider redesigning consumer information and data using this young 

and growing population as the baseline, rather than the footnote, from which to develop more effective policies, engage diverse stakeholders, and enhance active tactical responses necessary to better serve a majority of students, not just Latinos. 

Excelencia starts our discussions about postsecondary education with a consideration of the Latino population, because, despite our long-standing existence and 

growth in the United States, too often Latinos are not considered at all, or are an 

afterthought in education issues. We cannot reach our national goals of an educated 

citizenry and workforce without a tactical plan that includes Latinos. 

Now you have a sense of the lens from which Excelencia has formed our perspective on information for students and families and their college choices. One final 

point that informs my lens: I am a person of privilege who has benefited from the 

American Dream. I am privileged because I have a college education. Less than one 

in two adults in the Nation, and less than one in four Latino adults in the Nation, 

have earned an associate degree or higher. I was raised to believe with privilege 

comes responsibility to give back to others who do not have the same privileges. 

While I had emotional and financial support from my parents, it was my responsibility to figure out how to apply, enroll and pay for college. I was lucky. I went to 

college in a traditional pathway (straight from high school to college, lived on campus, and finished in 4 years). This traditional pathway is no longer the prevalent 

pathway for the majority of students today. These experiences and knowledge inform the work to help our current and future students also become people of privilege. 

INFORMATION FOR STUDENTS AND FAMILIES

Having accurate and useful information is critical to student and family choices 

for college access and success. However, three current realities are challenging the 

increased efforts at the Federal level to provide useful information to a diverse polis 

of potential college-goers: (1) limited awareness of how to reach the growing representation of Latinos and other ‘‘post-traditional’’ students ready to access college; 

(2) the resistance to change of institutional structures designed for ‘‘traditional’’ students; and, (3) the constant fluctuations of factors informing choice, such as institutional selectivity, costs, financial aid, and workforce opportunities. 

LIMITED AWARENESS OF POST-TRADITIONAL STUDENTS

Sharing broad profiles of students to guide public policy obviously muddles the individual profile or experience, but is a necessary tool to work at scale. The traditional student profile currently drives so much of the information shared about college today. However, this profile represents less than 20 percent of students enrolled 

17 

in college today, and their representation is shrinking. In fact, the majority of college-going, and potentially college-going students are ‘‘post-traditional.’’ Whereas the 

term ‘‘nontraditional’’ is often used to describe students that do not fit into a traditional profile, the term ‘‘post-traditional’’ better describes the growing majority of 

students of today. We are not returning to a student majority that fits the traditional profile entirely. Post-traditional students include part-time, returning, veteran, commuting, adult, Latino and other traditionally underrepresented students. 

They are the majority of students today. Consider the contrast between the traditional and post-traditional student profiles. 

The post-traditional student profile offers a contemporary lens to more accurately 

see America’s student population from which policymakers can develop more effective policies, engage diverse stakeholders, and enhance tactical responses to better 

inform and serve a growing majority of students in postsecondary education today 

and in the future. 

INFORMATION NEEDS OF POST-TRADITIONAL STUDENTS AND FAMILIES

Considering the information needs of this diverse set of post-traditional students 

complicates an already challenging goal to ensure public access to purposeful and 

consumer friendly information that enables students and families to select colleges 

or universities that best fits their needs. A growing body of research as well as work 

at Excelencia with communities and institutional leaders across the Nation has led 

us to summarize the following about the informational needs of many post-traditional students and families. 

Post-traditional college-goers make pragmatic college choices 

About half of all Latino undergraduates were the first in their family to enroll 

in postsecondary education. This is not surprising, since only 7 percent of Latino 

adults had an associate degree, and only 14 percent had a bachelor degree or higher 

in 2012. While Latinos are more likely to be the first in their family to enroll in 

college than other racial/ethnic groups, this is not unique to Latinos. Given that 

only 41 percent of all adults in the United States have an associate degree or higher, the children from the majority of adults in the country are potential first-generation college-goers. This group characteristic highlights a critical opportunity in public policy to design and deliver information about college options that increases the 

access and success of first-generation college-goers. 

Conventional wisdom is that students prioritize financial aid, institutional prestige, and academic programs as critical factors influencing their college choice. However, many Latino and other post-traditional students prioritized college costs, proximity to where they lived, and an accessible campus as decisive factors in their college choice. In fact, increasingly post-traditional students are choosing their institution based on the ‘‘sticker price’’ of tuition and related costs, without significantly 

factoring in financial aid. They also appear to be increasingly adapting to rising colVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:15 Apr 28, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\94613.TXT CAROL

94613-1.eps
18 

lege costs by choosing to enroll at less expensive institutions, enroll part-time, occasionally stop out and return, and work while enrolled. 

Recent national discussions that point to high-achieving, low-income and first-generation students undermatching in their college choices miss a broader understanding of the factors that inform choice and applies a conventional understanding 

of a ‘‘best fit’’ college for a student. Speaking with students and asking why they 

chose their institution may yield a better understanding of the students’ choices. In 

focus groups with low-income and first-generation college-goers, students repeatedly 

told us they believed they could get a quality education anywhere, if they were motivated, so why would they go elsewhere or pay more? Many of these post-traditional 

students are making their own ‘‘tradeoffs’’ in deciding what a ‘‘best fit’’ college choice 

is for them that accommodates their economic needs, family responsibility and goals 

for completion with institutional flexibility, cost, and convenience. This is a pragmatic and self-determining perspective, and should be respected. However, those of 

us who study postsecondary education know the diversity of college options and opportunities available vary between institutions. If all colleges are not ‘‘equal,’’ what 

additional information should post-traditional students factor in to their choices? 

And how do they integrate or compare this additional information with what they 

have already prioritized as informing their choice? 

Understanding the pragmatism that guides the college choices of many post-traditional students and knowing the prevailing conventional wisdom of what students 

and families need to know to make their college choices can improve the crosswalk 

between what students want to know and should know to find the ‘‘best fit’’ in their 

college choices. 

Targeted and appropriate information can improve college choices 

College choices are both influenced and constrained by educational expectations, 

knowledge of options, financial resources available, and the quality of academic 

preparation in high school. Studies have shown that Latinos are more likely than 

other racial/ethnic groups to value higher education, but have lower educational aspirations than other groups. It is hard to refute that strategic outreach and engagement could improve the actualization of college aspirations. Those who know the 

system, know there are resources and support structures available, even if in disparate locations and systems. Often, post-traditional students and families have limited knowledge about their college options and do not know how to navigate the college-going process without assertive institutional guidance. Today’s information assumes a depth of knowledge about the system of postsecondary educational options 

and costs that is out of synch with the data. Too often, policymakers assume the 

‘‘kitchen table’’ conversation of postsecondary education options routinely takes 

place. However, many post-traditional students do not have perfect information to 

inform their college choices. 

There have been recent efforts by the Federal Government to increase the amount 

and transparency of information to select and pay for college. This includes the net 

price calculator and the ‘‘shopping sheet.’’ The information found on these forms is 

useful, but one must consider how those tools are disseminated, and who uses them 

to make their college choices. Without intentional outreach and engagement of diverse communities that reaches those with the most need for information, these 

tools will not meet their intended purpose. There is broad awareness that this conventional information is easy to find, much less compare between institutions. 

Deployment of what is known about effective outreach and culturally competent 

strategies should be the norm rather than the exception when providing access for 

college options. While many students resort to the internet to find information about 

college options, the volume, quality, and ease of location for this information are 

often disjointed and complex. Other students rely on the information and experiences of other students and community members, and this can also lead to gathering dated, incorrect, or misleading information as often as accurate and useful information. Often post-traditional students have to navigate the complex and extensive options of college choices without their parents, and while counselors of trust 

are invaluable for post-traditional students, without strategic outreach and engagement, post-traditional students may not be aware of this resource option or these 

counselors may not be available to them. The figure below provides an example of 

simple information about college-going, attendance intensity, and associated costs to 

inform students in a user-friendly way of their options developed by the University 

of Texas-Brownsville and Texas Southmost College. It mimics the basic overall costs 

and time to a degree that can inform an individual education plan. The simple information also makes clear the tradeoffs for students in a side-by-side manner so that 

they can make a more informed decision that fits their needs but also makes them 

aware of the cost and time to a degree for each choice. 

19 

1The University of Texas, Brownsville posted in 2012 and retrieved January 2013, at http:// 

www.utb.edu/sa/studentsuccess/gc/Pages/TheBenefitsofGraduating.aspx. 

Source: The University of Texas, Brownsville (2012)1

Too much information can limit college choices 

An abundance of information about college options does not necessarily improve 

the chances of post-traditional students finding their ‘‘best fit’’ college. With more 

than 4,000 degree-granting institutions in the Nation, each with their own enrollment criteria, cost, course offerings, support services, mascots, and colors, comparing 

and contrasting all of these institutions is beyond the scope of most students and 

families (and even most experienced college counselors) who are concurrently juggling many other priorities. 

In this day and age, sophisticated search engines have been developed to simultaneously inform and guide consumer choices based on initial inputs and basic preferences. Take for example, Google, with its complex algorithms that rank material 

by what is most likely linked to an inquiry, or Amazon and Netflix and their sophisticated calculation based on previous views or recommendations. Help in narrowing 

options can facilitate the navigation of too much information so that potential students with limited time to become college experts can glean sufficient knowledge 

based on their interests that they can still find a ‘‘best fit’’ college. 

Is there a Federal role here in limiting college choice by helping to guide a student to narrow choices among viable and appropriate options? As the main source 

of data on all colleges in the Nation, and with this information provided by colleges, 

incentivizing the creation of a public structure that does not rank or rate colleges, 

but that allows a student to provide inputs to interface with a more robust dataset 

(behind the curtain) by an independent entity may be of great value to post-traditional students. 

Providing information early and often can influence college choices 

Providing useful information about college options early and often in an educational pathway creates awareness and knowledge among students and their families that can help them prepare for their access and success. For example, in work 

Excelencia completed with partners in California, the idea of offering information 

about paying and preparing for college at maternity wards for every new born developed. The California State University system offered a poster with a college roadmap from 3d grade to the college gates with academic criteria to meet at each grade. 

The information was to be provided in the current packet of information provided 

to all new mothers about important parenting issues, such as their instructions to 

complete social security cards for their newborn and vaccination needs. Since one 

out of every two births in California was to a Latina, we knew many Latinos would 

get information they could use to become better informed and build their educational pathway to college early. In that same vein, K–12 schools are building college-going cultures on their campuses, and community-based organizations are engaged in education strategies to provide information to prepare potential students 

with a roadmap to enroll in college so that their expectations and costs for persistence and completion are clear. 


94613-2.eps
20 

Identifying post-traditional students is needed to design tailored information and 

outreach. 

While the Federal Government does collect large amounts of data, this data is not 

often used in a manner that informs the targeted awareness and outreach that can 

facilitate information sharing on college options and choices. Disaggregating data by 

the very characteristics that define post-traditional students can improve the targeted and intentional strategies by Federal, State, institutional, and community programs to reach these students. If paired with effective outreach, this information 

can further inform the impact of those strategies for effectiveness. One constructive 

way to offer this data support to inform policy and practice is to link existing data 

through efforts such as a student unit record system that follows the progress of 

students and allows for timely interventions by institutions or other privileged providers. This does not imply a relaxation of student privacy, but rather an alignment 

of disparate data systems in a manner that can facilitate targeting of appropriate 

research and targeting of better information and options to post-traditional students. 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This short testimony offers some insights into the post-traditional students and 

families we have been privileged to work with over many years. While the examples 

and ideas do not delve into the greater complexity of information, I hope it helps 

to frame a more robust discussion about who these students are and the choices 

they make to get access and attain the American Dream of a college education and 

social mobility. 

Supporting access to postsecondary education remains essential for Federal policy, 

and the Federal role in helping to incentivize the development and dissemination 

of good information that can inform the college choices of current and future students is real. However, for the post-traditional student, access is not sufficient to 

guarantee completion. Too often we think getting students in to college is the biggest challenge. There is a Spanish saying reminiscent of this ‘‘access-only’’ approach 

to postsecondary education: ‘‘Vayan con Dios,’’ meaning, ‘‘Go with God’’ or more 

loosely explained, it may take divine intervention to facilitate your journey. Information that can guide college choice as well as the resources and strategies to persist 

to completion go hand in hand. The following is a summary of the perspectives and 

recommendations raised in this testimony. 

Low-income and potentially first-generation college-goers make pragmatic college 

choices. Whereas conventional wisdom asserts students to make college choices 

based on financial aid, institutional prestige, and academic programs offered, more 

contemporary research has found post-traditional students are increasingly making 

college choices based on college costs, institutional accessibility, and location. Understanding these distinctions can improve the crosswalk between what students want 

to know and should know to find the ‘‘best fit’’ in their college choices. 

Transparency of targeted and appropriate information on postsecondary education 

requires strategic outreach and engagement for maximum effectiveness. Detailed information has limited benefit if it does not reach those with the most need for it 

through intentional outreach and engagement of diverse communities. Implementing government outreach strategies that partner with organizations who are already aware and able to serve the information needs of post-traditional students can 

better support the college choices students make to find their ‘‘best fit’’ college option. 

An abundance of information about college options does not necessarily improve 

the chances of post-traditional students finding their ‘‘best fit’’ college. In this day 

and age, sophisticated search engines have been developed to simultaneously inform 

and guide consumer choices based on basic preferences (i.e., Google, Netflix, and 

Amazon). Help in narrowing options can facilitate the navigation of too much information so that potential students with limited college knowledge can still find a 

‘‘best fit’’ college. 

Providing useful information about college options early and often in an educational pathway creates awareness and knowledge among students and their families that can help them prepare for their access and success. Maternity wards, K– 

12 schools, and community-based organizations are viable venues along the educational continuum that can provide information to prepare potential students with 

a roadmap to enroll in college so that their expectations and costs for persistence 

and completion are clear. 

Identifying post-traditional students is needed to design tailored information and 

outreach. Disaggregating data by the very characteristics that define post-tradiVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:15 Apr 28, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\94613.TXT CAROL
21 

tional students can improve the targeted and intentional strategies to reach these 

students and can further inform the impact of those strategies for effectiveness. 

CLOSING REMARKS

Thank you for the opportunity to share my perspectives on the information students and families need to help their college choices and identifying their ‘‘best fit’’ 

institutions. Excelencia in Education’s strategies to accelerate Latino student success in postsecondary education by applying knowledge to policy and practice are 

consistent with the efforts you have demonstrated by holding these hearings with 

diverse representation but a common cause: to increase our Nation’s need for a 

highly educated workforce and engaged civic leadership. 

As you make progress in reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, Excelencia 

in Education stands ready to serve as a resource on the experiences of Latinos and 

other post-traditional students; the identification of what programs and practices 

work to improve their access, retention, and completion; and, the opportunity to engage with educators and leaders throughout the Nation that can inform your important efforts to serve all of us well and ensure our continued prosperity. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Ms. Santiago. 

Ms. Lightfoot. 

STATEMENT OF STACY LIGHTFOOT, VICE PRESIDENT OF COLLEGE AND CAREER SUCCESS INITIATIVES, PUBLIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION, CHATTANOOGA, TN 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Chairman Alexander, Ranking Member Murray, 

and members of the HELP Committee, thank you for the opportunity to be here to testify about consumer information in the college choice process. 

As a low-income African American female, statistics suggested 

that I would continue to live in poverty, work a low-wage job, and 

not obtain a college degree. My mother was a single parent. I came 

from a single-parent home, and my mother made less than $12,000 

a year when I went off to college. However, she made sure that I 

was surrounded by trusted adults and role models to supply me 

with great information. As a result, I knew the importance of an 

education. 

I was only familiar with my local options, a community college 

or a State school. My college counselor then—her name was Susan 

Chipley, now Susan Street—led me to research a jewel of a campus 

in the cornfields of Greencastle, IN that led me to DePauw University. She knew my family situation. She steered me in the right direction to a perfect college that met my personality, that matched 

my personality, my learning style, a college that met my family’s 

financial need, and offered study-abroad programs and various majors from which I could choose, a college that knew what to do with 

a student like me, a poor black girl from the South. It was the perfect fit. 

The information that Ms. Chipley stored in her head about colleges across the country was mind-blowing. She was associated 

with regional and national networks that enabled her to follow admissions trends, understand relevant data, and build a professional 

network that allowed her and gave her the power to be the best 

advocate for students like me. She was my translator. 

Because of the knowledge of one advocate, the trajectory of my 

life has changed, and that is the reason that I do what I do now, 

working with public school counselors to provide them with the resources and the information and the space to share best practices, 

to collect information and to understand the information to collect 

22 

to help students in the college choice process. Helping students find 

the right postsecondary fit for all students is why I do what I do. 

As stated in a white paper on college under-matching produced 

by the Tennessee College Access and Success Network, a good 

match is not defined purely by selectivity or prestige but by a complete series of factors that signify the institution will be able to 

nurture the student’s potential through a college degree. 

Students select colleges based on, obviously, location, major size, 

admissions requirements, and costs, extracurricular opportunities, 

those basic things that we know about. Students do not know to 

ask questions or know the implications of these factors: college 

graduation rates, retention rates, percentage of financial need met, 

average financial aid package, average of indebtedness at graduation, occupational outlook, and job placement rates. In the words 

of Kim Cook, executive director of the National College Access Network, 

‘‘Today’s students are in need of the right information to help 

them make decisions to attend a school that best matches their 

academic qualifications and provides the best environment to 

support the ultimate completion.’’ 

An additional strategy under the Higher Education Act could include requiring colleges to publish accurate data on long-term student outcomes on their websites. Much like the policy for postsecondary institutions participating in the title IV Federal student aid 

programs where colleges post the net price calculator to its consumers, it has been helpful in helping students understand a clear 

picture of their financial responsibility. An additional policy under 

the Higher Education Act could include colleges to accurately and 

easily post this information on their websites on job placement 

rates, financial aid outcomes, including default loan rates, that is 

readily available and accessible on each institution’s website. 

I applaud Senators Lamar Alexander and Michael Bennet for 

working together on revising and simplifying the format of the 

FAFSA. A simplified version of the FAFSA could reduce the frustration and encourage more families to apply for financial aid. That 

would be life-changing for a lot of students. Including prior prioryear income and asset data when submitting the FAFSA may address issues of accessibility and affordability. Providing clear data 

on Pell Grant recipient graduation rates will help college admissions professionals like myself and the admission professionals 

with whom I work guide their low-income, under-represented students to schools that will ensure their completion. 

In conclusion, of course students can Google their way to making 

a college decision, but that choice may not be the best fit. Vital elements are missing about college transparency around publicizing 

pertinent data, and these data are central to helping students select the best fit institution where they are most likely to succeed 

and graduate. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Lightfoot follows:] 

23 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF STACY LIGHTFOOT

SUMMARY

Chairman Alexander, Ranking Member Murray, and members of the HELP committee, thank you for the invitation to give testimony about consumer information 

that students and families need to make informed choices about college options; and 

also, to make recommendations on behalf of college access professionals from around 

the country for HEA reauthorization. I am a proud resident of Tennessee and have 

been for most of my life except for the years I was in college at DePauw University 

(Greencastle, IN) for my undergraduate degree; and, at the University of 

Roehampton (London, England) for my master’s degree. 

ABOUT ME

As a low-income, African American female, statistics suggested that I would continue to live in poverty, work a low-wage job and not obtain a college degree. My 

mother was a single parent who made less than $12,000 a year. However, she made 

sure that throughout my life I was surrounded by trusted adults and positive role 

models. 

As a result, I knew the importance of education. However, I was only familiar 

with my local options—a community college and a State school. My college counselor, Susan Chipley, led me to research this jewel of a campus in the cornfields 

of Greencastle, IN. She knew my family situation and steered me in the right direction—to a perfect college that matched my personality and learning style, a college 

that met my family’s financial need, offered study abroad programs and had various 

majors from which I could choose. A college that knew what to do with a student 

like me—poor, black girl from the south. It was the perfect fit. 

The information Ms. Chipley stored in her head about colleges across the country 

was mind-blowing. She was associated with regional and national networks that enabled her to follow admissions trends, understand relevant data, and build a professional network that would give her power to be the best advocate for her students. 

Ms. Chipley was my ‘‘translator’’. 

Because of one knowledgeable advocate, the trajectory of my life changed for the 

better. After graduating with my master’s degree, I entered the world of college access and success to impact the lives of students—to become a ‘‘Ms. Chipley’’ to other 

students. As the vice president of College & Career Success Initiatives at the Public 

Education Foundation (PEF), I am passionate about training college access professionals and informing the students and parents about the myriad of postsecondary 

options available—and helping to find the right postsecondary ‘‘fit’’ for all students. 

As stated in a white paper on college student undermatching produced by the 

Tennessee College Access and Success Network, 

‘‘A good match is not defined purely by the selectively or prestige of the institution, but by a complete series of factors that signify the institution will be 

able to nurture the student’s potential through to degree completion.’’ 

WHAT INFORMATION SHOULD STUDENTS KNOW TO MAKE THEIR COLLEGE CHOICE?

Students select colleges based on location, major, size, type, admission requirements, costs, and extra-curricular opportunities to name a few. However, other factors may not be as seemingly important to students and their families in the selection process—mainly because they don’t think about these aspects or their implications. However, savvy college access professionals encourage students to also think 

about the following as part of the college selection to determine ‘‘best fit’’: 

• College graduation rates, 

• Retention rates, 

• Percent of financial need met, 

• Average financial aid package, 

• Average indebtedness at graduation,

• Occupational outlook, and 

• Job placement rates. 

RECOMMENDATIONS

In the words of Kim Cook, executive director, National College Access Network, 

‘‘Today’s students are in need of the right information to help them make decisions to attend a school that best matches their academic qualifications and 

provides the best environment to support ultimate completion.’’ 

24 

An additional strategy under the Higher Education Act could include requiring 

colleges to publish accurate data on long-term student outcomes on each institution’s website. A student’s understanding of these data will go a long way to increasing their awareness on best fit college choice. 

I applaud Senators Lamar Alexander and Michael Bennet working together on a 

revised and simplified format for the FAFSA. A simplified version of the FAFSA 

form could reduce frustration and encourage more families to apply for financial aid. 

Also, using ‘‘prior-prior year’’ (PPY) income and asset data when submitting the 

FAFSA may address issues of access and affordability.

Providing clear data on Pell grant recipient graduation rates will help college admissions professionals guide their low-income students to schools that will ensure 

their completion. 

CONCLUSION

Sure, students can ‘‘google’’ their way to making a college decision, but that choice 

may not be the best fit. Vital elements are missing about college transparency 

around the publicizing of pertinent data. These data are central to helping students 

select the best fit institution where they are most likely to graduate. 

Chairman Alexander, Ranking Member Murray, and members of the HELP committee, thank you for the invitation to give testimony about consumer information 

that students and families need to make informed choices about college options; and 

also, to make recommendations on behalf of college access professionals from around 

the country for HEA reauthorization. I am a proud resident of Tennessee and have 

been for most of my life except for the years I was in college at DePauw University 

(Greencastle, IN) for my undergraduate degree; and, at the University of 

Roehampton (London, England) for my master’s degree. 

ABOUT ME

As a low-income, African American female, statistics suggested that I would continue to live in poverty, work a low-wage job and not obtain a college degree. My 

mother was a single parent who made less than $12,000 a year. However, she made 

sure that throughout my life I was surrounded by trusted adults and positive role 

models. These adults also made sure I was involved in extracurricular activities and 

participated in high impact programs that honed my leadership and academic skills 

and built my confidence. 

As a result, I knew the importance of education. However, I was only familiar 

with my local options—a community college and a State school. DePauw University 

isn’t a college that many Tennesseans attend, especially low-income, African American public school students from Chattanooga. Once again, it was a trusted adult 

that changed my life. My college counselor, Susan Chipley, led me to research this 

jewel of a campus in the cornfields of Greencastle, IN. I didn’t have money to attend 

college and knew I would have to depend on grants, scholarships and loans to make 

college a reality. Ms. Chipley knew my family situation and steered me in the right 

direction—to a perfect college that matched my personality and learning style, a college that met my family’s financial need, offered study abroad programs and had 

various majors from which I could choose. It was the perfect fit. My decision to work in the world of college and career advising stems from the 

support I had as a high school student. If a poor, black girl from the east side of 

Chattanooga can overcome barriers to attend college on full financial aid package 

and study abroad in Italy, other students can do it, too. Neither I nor the people 

around me let my background determine my fate. 

MY ‘‘TRANSLATOR’’ 

My college counselor was dynamic. Ms. Chipley had visited hundreds of college 

campuses, met countless admissions professionals, and knew hidden facts about colleges. She was regarded as ‘‘the college admissions guru.’’ The information she 

stored in her head about colleges across the country was mind-blowing. Little did 

I know then she was associated with regional and national networks that enabled 

her to follow admissions trends, understand relevant data, and build a professional 

network that would give her power to be the best advocate for her students. Ms. 

Chipley was my ‘‘translator.’’ My family and I didn’t know much about the college 

application process, but she had knowledge that matched me up to the best value 

and college option. She was armed with the ability to interpret information she’d 

gathered through her college contacts and professional development experiences. 

Had it not been for my ‘‘translator’’ and college admission advocate, I would have 

25 

gone to the local university and lived at home, which seemed like the best value 

and only option coming from a low-income background. 

Because of one knowledgeable advocate, the trajectory of my life changed for the 

better. She is the reason I now give back to my community. After graduating with 

my master’s degree, I entered the world of college access and success to impact the 

lives of students—to become a ‘‘Ms. Chipley’’ to other students. As the vice president 

of College & Career Success Initiatives at the Public Education Foundation (PEF), 

I am passionate about training college access professionals and informing the students and parents about the myriad of postsecondary options available—and helping 

to find the right postsecondary ‘‘fit’’ for all students. 

INTRODUCTION TO PEF AND MY WORK

At PEF, we believe there’s nothing more important to our community’s future 

than transforming our public schools. We’re an independent, nonprofit, communitybased organization that, for 25 years, has provided training, research and resources 

to teachers, principals, college and career advisors and schools in Chattanooga, TN 

and surrounding areas. Our mission is to increase student achievement so all students succeed in learning and in life. In pursuit of that mission, PEF’s college and 

career success initiatives focus on encouraging students to explore their options for 

postsecondary education, and provide them with support and access to tools to help 

them accomplish their goals. Through a variety of programs and supports, our work 

strives to continually increase the number of Chattanooga public school students 

who seek and matriculate to institutions of postsecondary training and learning. 

One of our signature initiatives is providing training for College and Career Advisors and school counselors who work part-time in all of our public high schools. We 

meet with a network of counselors and advisors and provide them a space to share 

best practices, inform them on the latest trends in college admissions and career development, and share data about their students—all to increase their knowledge so 

they can work more effectively with high school students and their families. Since 

PEF began supporting college advisors in 2005, the number of high school graduates 

going to college has increased by 30 percent (from 1,324 in 2005 to over 1,714 in 

2014). In 2005, our high school graduates matriculated to 121 colleges across the 

country; in 2014, the number of colleges and universities increased to 200. The number of scholarship dollars has more than doubled with the class of 2014 bringing 

in $20 million in scholarships. 

Intense support students receive from knowledgeable adults has been the key to 

our success. Our college access professionals work with students 1-on-1, in groups, 

host college and financial aid nights, plan college tours, and a host of other strategies that increase knowledge and postsecondary options for students. 


94613-3.eps
26 

THE STUDENTS AND THEIR CHALLENGES

As a former college advisor in the public school setting, I’ve worked with students 

from diverse socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds. Chattanooga’s demographics 

capture urban, suburban, and rural public school students. I’ve worked with students whose families had the means to pay out-of-pocket for college; and, those 

whose families had financial hardships like me. And, there’s everything in between. 

Ashlyn’s Story 

Ashlyn lived with her grandmother. She knew she wanted to go to college, but 

lacked the knowledge to choose the best fit. During May of her senior year, she 

planned to attend her State’s flagship institution, a choice she wasn’t excited about. 

She came to my office crying because the thought of going to a large institution 

overwhelmed her. I asked Ashlyn what she wanted from her college experience and 

she said, ‘‘A small environment where I can get personalized attention.’’ I called a 

colleague at a small liberal arts institution in a neighboring State and shared her 

story. The director of admission encouraged her to visit the next day. I paid for her 

Greyhound bus ticket and a representative from the college picked her up at the 

terminal. She toured campus and instantly fell in love. While visiting the financial 

aid office during this visit, they offered her over $30,000 in financial aid, which included the Pell grant. A few months later, Ashlyn started her freshman year at 

Oglethorpe University and completed a sociology degree in 5 years. It wasn’t an 

easy transition, and she struggled all throughout college with grades and balancing 

her time. However, the support she received from various departments and the individualized attention available to her at a small college ensured her success. It was 

a perfect fit. 

Robert’s story 

Robert had his mind set on Columbia College in Chicago to major in art. On one 

hand, Columbia College was a good fit. It was an institution Robert could see himself at for 4 years. He enjoyed being away from home and experiencing the city life 

of Chicago. However, the cost of Columbia College was well beyond what his lowincome family could afford. He wasn’t offered a substantial financial aid package, 

but he wasn’t familiar with other options that may be a good fit for his interest but 

more affordable. Robert felt that everything would fall into place once he enrolled. 

He saved some money, secured loans and used the Pell grant to pay for college. It 

still wasn’t enough. After the first semester, Robert had to drop out of college because he accrued a $6,000 debt from the first semester. Therefore, he wasn’t able 

to complete even his freshman year. Now, 26 years old, Robert can’t even enroll at 

the community college because of his previous debt and will not receive a degree 

until that debt is paid off. I see him from time to time working odd jobs around 

the city. His still has aspirations to finish college. 

I share these stories to highlight the challenges of the students who need postsecondary guidance the most. As stated in a white paper on college student undermatching produced by the Tennessee College Access and Success Network: 

A good match is not defined purely by the selectivity or prestige of the institution, but by a complete series of factors that signify the institution will be able 

to nurture the student’s potential up to degree completion. This match is of the 

utmost importance for low-income and first-generation students, because they 

often lack the necessary support systems to help them navigate not only the college-going process, but also college persistence. Statistics prove that some colleges successfully graduate more low-income and first-generation students than 

others. 

Both Ashlyn’s and Robert’s stories reflect the different aspirations and challenges 

associated with college selection for some students. What information would have 

steered Robert to make a better financial decision in his college selection? Would 

getting a financial aid package before May of his senior year convince him to consider alternative college options with better aid packages? Or by getting Columbia’s 

financial aid earlier, could he have had more time to save money to fill in the financial aid gap? Why would Ashlyn have settled for a college that wasn’t the best fit? 

Her campus visit to Oglethorpe University sealed the deal. However, her family 

couldn’t afford to send her on visits that happened outside of what her school 

planned. 

WHAT INFORMATION SHOULD STUDENTS KNOW TO MAKE THEIR COLLEGE CHOICE?

On the surface, the answer to this question is easy. Students select colleges based 

on location, major, size, type, admission requirements, costs, and extra-curricular 

opportunities to name a few. Students are asked to think about these criteria often. 

27 

Other factors may not be as seemingly important to students and their families in 

the selection process—mainly because they don’t think about these aspects or their 

implications. However, savvy college access professionals encourage students to also 

think about the following as part of the college selection to determine ‘‘best fit’’: 

• College graduation rates; 

• Retention rates; 

• Percent of financial need met; 

• Average financial aid package; 

• Average indebtedness at graduation; 

• Occupational outlook; and 

• Job placement rates. 

Had Robert had some of this information at his fingertips, would he have chosen 

to attend a college he could not afford or finish? I would like to think he would have 

made a better decision based on his financial situation. Unfortunately, this data is 

not easily accessible to counselors, students and families. College access professionals have to be familiar with sites such as College Navigator, College Score Card 

and other resources in order to use them effectively to guide students. Many public 

school counselors, especially those with high student caseloads, don’t receive adequate training to disseminate relevant information to families. Students who don’t 

have trusted experts in their corner will resort to ‘‘googling’’ their way to make their 

decision or taking unsound the advice from family or friends, like in Robert’s case. 

One colleague asserts: 

Ultimately, students want to know if a college is right for them, and that 

means knowing how a college or university will best serve their needs and aspirations. Students want to know if they will ‘‘fit in’’ to their college community. 

Will there be venues and resources to help cultivate an engagement in community life? In my experience, students learn best when they have a sense of belonging and purpose in an educational community. Some students also want to 

know about how to afford their education over 4 years. All students should 

know how this will happen. Students should know how much loan debt they 

might need to take on AND how much loan debt is advisable given their school, 

program, and career aspirations. Simply put, students should know three essential things when they make their college choice: 

• Will I be well-served by this college community, and will this be a place 

where I can engage and be productive? 

• Will I have marketable skills and career options coming out of this college? 

What resources will the college invest in me to ensure that I have a relevant outcome (career services, grad school counseling, internships, and research opportunities)?

• Can I afford this college, and is it advisable to take on a debt burden given 

my potential outcomes and career aspirations?—Joseph Freeman, The Randolph School. 

APPROACHES TO INCREASING AWARENESS AND AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT

Chattanooga is uniquely positioned to provide quality training for college access 

professionals. We have seen a significant increase in the number of students going 

to college as well as an increase in their postsecondary options. PEF puts time into 

training counselors and advisors on how to engage, connect and coach students and 

their families through the postsecondary process. Through training, PEF provides 

current and relevant information from the field. We build capacity within our 

schools through this team of professionals who take information back to teachers, 

students and parents. Each of our schools is growing their college-going culture and 

celebrating the successes of students who choose to attend apprenticeship and certificate programs, 2-year and 4-year colleges. PEF has dedicated staff collecting data 

on where our students are matriculating and where they are succeeding. That data 

is shared in our network and used to advance our work to increase student achievement. 

Just as our counselors and advisors use data to engage in conversations around 

what works and what doesn’t, students need data, too—data that is accessible, 

transparent, and accurate. A student’s understanding of an institution’s graduation 

and retention rates, graduate job placement rates, and financial aid outcome, will 

go a long way to increasing their awareness on best fit college choice. However, students can only get this information from knowledgeable adults who share it with 

students and translate it for them and their families. 

Supports for students must start before they step onto a college campus. There 

must be supports in place for students at the high school level because success 

28 

starts long before students enter college. Schools and other community-based organizations across the country are doing phenomenal work to ensure that public schools 

students, especially underrepresented students, are successful in the college application process. It would be ideal for the government to support schools and programs 

that offer college advising services; and, ensure that Elementary and Secondary 

School Counseling Programs (ESSCP) is protected and strengthened in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). There are model community-based programs, like PEF or Achieve MPLS, that could be grown and supported throughout 

the country. Although an ambitious dream, all public school students should have 

full-time experts who help them to navigate the college choice process, particularly 

high poverty schools. The work in Chattanooga has positively impacted students 

with the assistance of part-time college access professionals. I can only imagine how 

much greater the impact would be if full-time expert professionals were available 

to students around the country. 

HOW CAN LAWS CHANGE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF STUDENTS AND FAMILIES?

The policy for postsecondary institutions participating in the title IV Federal student aid programs to provide estimated net price information (net price calculator) 

to its consumers has been utterly helpful for students to get a clear picture of their 

financial responsibility based on their individual situations. An additional policy 

under the Higher Education Act could include requiring colleges to publish accurate 

data on long-term student outcomes that comprise graduation and retention rates, 

job placement rates, financial aid outcomes (including default loan rates) that is 

readily available and accessible on each institution’s website. Although this information can be gathered from various websites, students often aren’t savvy enough to 

know to look for and interpret these data. 

Applying for financial aid poses a challenge for many families, especially underrepresented families. Even for the most skilled parent, the process is intimidating. 

I appreciate Senators Lamar Alexander and Michael Bennet working together on a 

revised and simplified format for the FAFSA. A simplified version of the FAFSA 

form could reduce frustration and encourage more families to apply for financial aid. 

Also, using ‘‘prior-prior year’’ (PPY) income and asset data when submitting the 

FAFSA may address issues of access and affordability. In Robert’s case, understanding and interpreting his financial aid package earlier may have resulted in attending an institution that met more of his financial need. He now is in default on 

his loans. With guidance, Robert could have better anticipated the costs of a Columbia College education and made a different choice. 

Filing the FAFSA earlier would require intuitions to estimate State and Federal 

aid awards earlier, which poses a concern for colleges who feel that unless legislatures and Congress set funding levels for at least 1 year ahead, they would have 

to rely on estimates in order to package students. 

Reflecting on Ashlyn’s story, her college provided her with robust supports while 

she was a student. Oglethorpe understood her disadvantaged background and never 

gave up on her. It was an institution that was committed not only to admitting lowincome students, but their commitment manifested itself and extended into an 

‘‘arms around approach’’ to ensuring her college completion. The graduation rates 

of Pell grants students at institutions is a good gauge of an institute’s promise to 

the success of all its students. Measuring the success of low-income college students 

is a key goal of a Federal college rating plan originally outlined by President Barack 

Obama. However, it’s unclear if the government’s college ratings will be able to include that measurement, given the current inadequacies of the data collected by the 

U.S. Department of Education. 

U.S. News and World Report conducted their own study and gathered incomebased, 6-year graduation rate data. This information was collected in a statistical 

survey of colleges and universities in spring 2014. They used this data to show 

which schools they categorized as top performers, overperformers and underperformers when comparing the 6-year graduation rate for students from the fall 2007 

entering class who received Pell Grants and the 6-year graduation rate of the entire 

class. Providing clear data like this will help college admissions professionals guide 

their low-income students to schools that will ensure their completion. When students like Ashlyn or Robert ask the question, ‘‘How do students like me do at this 

institution?’’, the data can paint that picture. 

IN CONCLUSION

In the words of Kim Cook, executive director, National College Access Network, 

‘‘Today’s students are in need of the right information to help them make decisions to attend a school that best matches their academic qualifications and 

29 

provides the best environment to support ultimate completion. We are encouraged that a conversation is widening on the topic of information available to 

students.’’ 

My colleagues and I feel that all students deserve effective postsecondary advising. Ideally, students can get valuable information from their school counselors or 

college counselors. However, not every school has a college counseling department 

or professional. There must be a way that we can grow college access organizations 

in communities to impact the students who need it the most because those who need 

it most are at the greatest risk of not matriculating to college and/or succeeding. 

Our low-income and first-generation students are suffering and not competitive for 

high-wage jobs. 

Sure, students can ‘‘google’’ their way to making a college decision, but that choice 

may not be the best fit. ‘‘Vital elements are missing,’’ stresses Cook about college 

transparency around the publicizing of pertinent data. These data are central to 

helping students select the best fit institution where they are most likely to graduate. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Ms. Lightfoot. 

Ms. Mitchell. 

STATEMENT OF TALEAH MITCHELL, GRADUATE, SEATTLE 

CENTRAL COLLEGE, SEATTLE, WA 

Ms. MITCHELL. Good morning, Chairman Alexander and honorable committee members. Thank you for the opportunity to share 

information about my successful educational journey. I am very excited and pleased to be here. 

I would also like to thank Senator Murray from my home State 

of Washington for her steadfast support of adult basic education 

programs. 

Last but not least, I would like to thank you also for the Federal 

financial aid that has given me the opportunity to move from less 

than desirable circumstances into what has enabled me to pursue 

my dreams and go for more. 

When I was younger, I could have never imagined sitting before 

a congressional committee in Washington, DC. I am very honored 

and humbled to be here. 

My name is Taleah Mitchell. I am one of the hundreds of thousands of students who have transformed their lives at a Washington State community or technical college. For me specifically, 

the turning point was a basic education for adults program called 

I–BEST, which stands for Integrated Basic Education and Skills 

Training. In this testimony, I hope to share my personal story 

clearly, describe how it fits into the larger narrative of Washington’s community and technical college system, and provide ideas for 

how the Federal Government can strengthen information and support for non-traditional college students. 

In my opinion, we are a very important group of people that a 

lot of times are under-represented. There is quite a few of us and 

we have a colorful story and we are quite capable of achieving a 

lot more than what is thought of us and what is expected of us. 

To give you all a little bit of background information for me, I 

am 27 years old, and being a non-traditional student, I went to the 

fourth grade in San Francisco, CA. That is something that is somewhat typical for me as a Roma descendent, which is gypsy nationality. I studied quietly on my own, learning to read and write because at a young age I understood, for whatever reason, the value 

of education and knew that I wanted to achieve a lot more in my 

life. 

30 

At 16 in Chicago, I started studying for my GED. I passed the 

assessment with flying colors at the institution where I was studying. Five months later, I took the GED test. I scored extremely 

high percentiles in everything except for math. Instead of getting 

discouraged and giving up, I decided that I needed to take remedial 

math courses at a different setting, and that was at Harold Washington College in Chicago, and I was able to take regular collegelevel courses in conjunction with that. I was given a Starlight 

Award from Literacy Chicago because of a commitment to literacy 

and efforts as a public relations intern at the organization. 

During the second semester, I had to drop out and help run my 

family’s business. A year later, I took the GED again, this time in 

West Virginia and passed all the portions. 

Later on during that time in my life, things got really difficult 

for my family, and I was kind of thrown in chaos and moved 

around a lot. I worked entry-level jobs that were far beneath my 

capabilities and barely got my family and myself anywhere. The 

GED got me a job but it did not get me a career, and I was still 

going job to job and paycheck to paycheck. 

My turning point was at the age of 25 in Seattle at the YWCA. 

I saw a flyer for the I–BEST program through Seattle Central College. I learned that I–BEST offered a clear path to an in-demand 

field with a wide array of support services. A counselor explained 

that they would be with me every step of the way, and they helped 

me with everything that came from applying for financial aid, looking through course catalogs, planning schedules, finding classes, 

managing my time, and overall just being a life coach for my life, 

which is really imperative. 

With I–BEST, the hallmark is you have two instructors in the 

same classroom. This tag team teaching approach gives a student 

the opportunity to have lots of time with their instructors. One instructor teaches job skills, and with that, students learn 

foundational skills at the same time they are trained for in-demand 

jobs. The other instructor provides skills like reading, writing, 

math, and English language. It is really amazing. The information 

sticks because you have access to all these people, and with this 

two-for-one approach, students learn more thoroughly and in a 

shorter amount of time. 

I earned a certificate in business information technology, and as 

a requirement for graduating with that certificate, I had an internship and I served as a teaching assistant and a math tutor in I– 

BEST in the same classroom that I started with. I got to come full 

circle. 

At Seattle Central College, I was inducted into the honor society. 

I was one of the student body presidents. I served on a scholarship 

board. These are things I never dreamed I would be capable of 

doing. 

With I–BEST, I really want to emphasize that without the financial aid that was afforded to me, I would have never been able to 

go into any type of higher education institution. The BFET program, or Basic Food and Employment Training, which is Washington State’s version of the SNAP program, unemployment benefits, grants, and financial aid, including the Pell Grant, gave me 

31 

the reassurance that I would be able to not only do this but complete this. 

At Seattle Central College, I was approached by Amherst and 

Smith Colleges to actually pursue the degree that I wanted for 

women’s studies and computer science. My father fell ill during 

that time with cancer, and that opportunity for me was cut short. 

But, I do plan to continue my education with computer science and 

women’s studies, to continue and complete that. 

I would love to inform you that my brother at this point—my 

younger brother—has also enrolled in Seattle Central College and 

is following in my footsteps and is also looking at the government 

board as well. 

My final recommendations for you guys is that college career 

pathways gives us basic skills, workforce, academic transfer, and it 

is imperative that we continue to fund those programs. The old notion that basic skills education ends at the GED is very outdated, 

as I hope to witness to you. It did not get me as far as I would 

have like it to have gotten me. 

The WIOA program, which is Workforce Innovation Opportunity 

Act, enables I–BEST and programs like that to happen and enables 

students like myself to succeed. 

Some of my ideas is to remove the cost barriers to students by 

fully funding the program and expanding opportunities for students 

to repay loans based on how much they earn. Student debt, as you 

brought up, is a growing national crisis, and we need to be able to 

power through that. 

We also need a centralized education option for prospective students, so a central Federal portal that contains relevant college information, whether it be a website or possibly an app, I think 

would be really powerful. I was really lucky to find a flyer at the 

YWCA. It was pretty random that I just walked in and saw that. 

A lot of students do not have that opportunity—and prospective 

students—which is something that having a portal would enable 

them to do. 

In conclusion, the future of our country depends upon higher 

education, and I appreciate your dedication to ensuring all Americans can step up on this path anytime in their lives. I obviously 

would not be here without the opportunities you all helped afford 

and through funding our Nation’s 2-year colleges and the innovative programs created for adults like me. 

Thank you very much for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Mitchell follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TALEAH MITCHELL

SUMMARY

My name is Taleah Mitchell. I’m a 27-year-old, nontraditional, first-generation 

student of Roma descent. I grew up in San Francisco and went to public school 

through the fourth grade, when my formal education came to an end. Nevertheless, 

I continued to study on my own, learning to read and write. 

Halfway through my 16th year, while living in Chicago, I took the GED® test and 

scored in the top percentiles in all sections except math. I enrolled in a community 

college and took remedial math courses in conjunction with my college classes. During my second semester I had to drop out of school to help run the family business 

full-time. 

32 

After eventually passing all portions of the test, the GED® program got me a job, 

but it did not get me a career or move me out of a cycle of living from job-to-job 

and paycheck-to-paycheck, with no hope of saving any money. 

My turning point came when I discovered the I–BEST program at Seattle Central 

College at the age of 25. I–BEST gave me a clear path to an in-demand job, with 

a wide array of support services. Advisors helped me every step of the way, from 

start to finish and into a career. I–BEST uses a team-teaching approach that puts 

two teachers in the classroom: one to teach basic skills, the other to train students 

for in-demand jobs while using those basic skills. 

I earned a certificate in Business Information Technology and now work as an assistant manager at a major employer in Seattle. 

I am just one of thousands of nontraditional students who are changing their lives 

at one of Washington State’s 34 community and technical colleges. 

I’d like to share a few recommendations for the committee to consider during future discussions: 

• Remove cost barriers for students by fully funding the Pell Grant program, and 

provide funding for advisors who can help students navigate the financial aid process. Financial aid was a big factor in my success. Advisors helped me weave together a financial aid package that included Basic Food and Employment Training—the Washington State version of the Federal SNAP program—along with unemployment benefits, grants and financial aid. 

• Ensure that any centralized portal for college information clearly identifies programs like I–BEST that have defined pathways through college and into careers. 

Students need to know what’s available to them so they can make well-informed 

choices. 

• Provide legislation and funding support for college-to-career pathway programs. 

This includes fully restoring the Ability to Benefit option under the Pell Grant. 

The future of our country depends upon higher education and I appreciate your 

dedication to ensuring all Americans can step on this path at any time in their lives. 

Thank you. 

Chairman Alexander and honorable committee members, thank you for the opportunity to share information about my successful educational journey. I’d also like 

to thank Senator Murray from my home State of Washington for her steadfast support of Basic Education for Adults programs. 

Thank you, also, for the Federal financial aid that has given me the opportunity 

to move from low-income into college so that I can achieve my dreams in life. When 

I was younger, I could never have imagined sitting before a congressional committee 

in Washington, DC. I’m honored and humbled. 

My name is Taleah Mitchell. I’m one of the hundreds of thousands of students 

who have transformed their lives at a Washington State community or technical college. For me, the turning point was a Basic Education for Adults program called 

I–BEST (Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training). 

First, a little context on my background. 

I’m a 27-year-old, nontraditional, first-generation student of Roma descent. I grew 

up in San Francisco and went to public school through the fourth grade, when my 

formal education came to an end. 

From the ages of 10 to 16, I studied quietly, learning to read and write. 

Halfway through my 16th year, I learned I could study to receive a GED®. With 

this newfound knowledge, I found an organization called Literacy Chicago, an adult 

basic education organization. I passed the assessment test with flying colors and 

moved straight into GED® preparation classes. 

After 5 months, I took the GED® test and scored in the top percentiles in all sections except for math. Instead of getting discouraged, I decided to study math in 

a different setting while beginning my college career. I took a college placement 

exam at Harold Washington College in Chicago and placed straight into non-math, 

college-level courses. 

Because of my high marks, I was able to take remedial math courses in conjunction with my college classes. In 2006, I was given a Starlight Award from Literacy 

Chicago because of a commitment to literacy and efforts as a public relations intern 

at the organization. 

During my second semester at Harold Washington College, my family met with 

difficult times and I had to drop out of school to help run the family business fulltime. 

A year after my college experience, I took the GED® test once again—this time 

in West Virginia—and passed all portions of the test. 

33 

However, my life was thrown into chaos once again when the family business collapsed and we bounced around from several different States. At each place, I found 

myself only able to work entry-level jobs that were beneath my capabilities and 

barely kept my family afloat. 

The GED® program got me a job, but it did not get me a career or move me out 

of a cycle of living from job-to-job and paycheck-to-paycheck, with no hope of saving 

any money. 

I was trapped in a cycle of economic insecurity with no way out. 

My turning point was at the age of 25, when my family landed in Seattle. I wandered into a YWCA and saw a flyer for the I–BEST program through Seattle Central College. 

I learned that I–BEST offered a clear path to an in-demand job, with a wide array 

of support services. A counselor explained that they’d be with me every step of the 

way, from start to finish and into a career. And that’s exactly what happened. Advisors helped me apply for financial aid, look through course catalogs, plan schedules, 

find classes and manage my time. 

The hallmark of I–BEST is that it puts two instructors in the same class at the 

same time: one teaches basic skills like reading, writing, math and English language, and the other teaches job skills. Students learn foundational skills at the 

same time they train for in-demand jobs. 

The information sticks, because students can immediately apply what they’ve 

learned in a real-world setting. And, because it’s a two-for-one approach, the classes 

can be completed in a shorter timeframe. 

I earned a certificate in Business Information Technology. One of the final requirements was to have a working experience in the field of study. Interestingly, 

I served as a teaching assistant and as a math tutor in the same I–BEST class 

where I had been a student and in the very subject that I had struggled with earlier 

in my life. It was exciting to come full circle. 

During my time at Seattle Central College, I got into honors society, became student body president and served on a scholarship board. I never lost passion for education or for my fellow nontraditional students. 

Naturally, financial aid was a big factor for me. Advisors helped me weave together a financial aid package that included Basic Food and Employment Training—the Washington State version of the Federal SNAP program—along with unemployment benefits, grants and financial aid. This gave me reassurance that the 

rug wouldn’t be pulled out from under me, as it had so many times in the past. 

Today, I have a career as an assistant manager with a leading Seattle-based employer and intend to continue my studies. While at Seattle Central, I was approached by Amherst and Smith colleges, but my father fell ill and I chose to stay 

in Seattle. I’m happy to say my brother has followed my footsteps and is currently 

attending Seattle Central College. 

As I mentioned before, I am fortunate to sit before you as one of thousands of 

success stories made possible by Washington’s community and technical college system. 

WASHINGTON STATE’S COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES

The college I attended—Seattle Central College—is one of Washington State’s 34 

community and technical colleges. Altogether, they serve nearly 400,000 students 

each year. The college system dates back to 1967, when it was created by the State 

Legislature. In 1991, the Legislature added technical colleges to the system. The colleges are organized into 30 districts spread across mountains, cities, rivers, and islands touching every corner of the State. 

Colleges work together to present the State Legislature with a single operating 

and capital budget request. When those budgets are passed, the State funding goes 

to the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, which then allocates 

funds to the colleges. This allows colleges to serve their individual communities 

while forming a powerful network to advance Washington’s economy. 

The strength of this system is not only in its organization. It’s also in its mission 

to open the doors to higher education for all residents of Washington State, regardless of their personal or academic backgrounds. For nontraditional students, they 

offer a second chance for a new life. 

The education at these 2-year colleges is practical, promising and purposeful. Colleges use innovative instruction models, work closely with local employers and labor 

representatives, and partner with universities to serve the unique needs of nontraditional, 21st century students. 

34 

1SBCTC Fall Quarter Enrollment and Staffing Report . 

2Washington State Student Achievement Council presentation to House Higher Education 

Committee, Jan. 14, 2014. 3 2013 Roadmap: A Plan to Increase Educational Attainment in Washington, by Washington 

Student Achievement Council. 4SBCTC research findings: ‘‘Washington State Population and Employment Data 2010–2030, 

Implications for Community and Technical Colleges.’’ 5Fifty-seven percent per Washington State Office of Financial Management 2013–14 Budget 

Driver Report. 

The average Washington community or technical college student is 26 years old. 

Forty-three percent work, 28 percent are parents, and 42 percent are students of 

color.1

As you can see, the average student isn’t what it used to be. We are adults that 

need supported, accelerated, real-world services that save us time and money. 

The beauty of community and technical colleges is that programs are built and 

sustained locally to meet the economic and employment needs of the community. All 

of the job-training programs are led by customer advisory committees made up of 

community leaders, business and labor representatives, and college faculty and 

staff. These committees create and build curricula aligned with emerging industry 

demands and employers’ needs. 

COLLEGE AND CAREER PATHWAYS

In Washington State, education is a continuum—from early learning, through K– 

12 and college, and into a career. At the heart of the 2-year college system is a college and career pathway model that allows students at any skill level or life stage 

the opportunity to earn a college credential and climb a career ladder. I–BEST is 

a perfect example. 

In Washington State, the average annual income of the typical associate-degree 

graduate is 33 percent more than someone with a high school diploma alone. These 

income levels rise with each level of education earned and open greater possibilities 

for students and employers.2

The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) solidified the importance of a college and career pathway. States are now required to provide opportunities for employment, education and training needed for today’s global economy. 

WIOA requires college Adult Basic Education programs to move students past the 

GED® level and into college or careers. 

Connecting students to a college and career pathway has never been more important. By 2016, nearly three-fourths of available jobs in Washington State will require at least a postsecondary credential.3 Over the next 20 years, there simply 

won’t be enough high school graduates to meet the higher education needs of Washington State’s workforce. Our State will need to fill the gap with older adults—a 

faster growing population that is burgeoning in areas of the State with less educational attainment.4

I know from personal experience that Washington State’s community and technical colleges are key to filling employment gaps with skilled workers because they 

did that for me. It’s critical for underskilled, sometimes underemployed adults to 

have the same access to innovative, accelerated and meaningful educational and 

workforce training. And now they do. 

In addition to WIOA, the Washington State Basic Education Plan: Pathways 

to College and Careers for Washington’s Emerging Workforce is focused on 

getting students through college faster and into living wage jobs. Programs under 

this plan move people further and faster along well-defined pathways into college 

and careers. The plan builds upon the proven success of the I–BEST program in 

moving students rapidly toward industry-recognized credentials that lead to well 

paying, long-term careers. I’m an example of this program’s success: from where I 

started, to where I am today, and where I’m going tomorrow. 

Washington State’s community and technical college adult education providers 

partner with regional agencies, organizations, institutions, and industry leaders to 

build, scale and maintain demand-driven career pathways to meet emerging employer needs. Certificates are marketable and stackable, meaning that each certificate builds on the other to lead to a longer-term certificate or associate degree. 

These pathways connect education, training, and support services in new ways that 

foster success for all individuals as intended under WIOA. 

INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS

Washington State’s 2-year colleges serve nearly 6 out of every 10 students in public higher education.5 The community and technical college system focuses on three 

35 

6SBCTC, 2008–12 5-year; 2010–12 3-year American Community Survey estimates. 

7SBCTC, ‘‘’Educational Outcomes of I–BEST, WA State Community and Technical College 

System’s Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training Program,’’ Community College Research Center, Columbia University, May 2009. 8Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board, Workforce Training Results, 2014. 

mission areas: basic skills, workforce and academic transfer. All three mission areas 

share the same goal: move every student through college and into a life-sustaining 

job. 

Basic skills 

Basic Education for Adults (BEdA) programs teach foundational skills such as 

reading, writing, math and English language, so adult students can move through 

college and into living wage jobs. Unlike other States, BEdA programs are contained 

in the State’s 2-year college system instead of the K–12 system. Programs are 

aligned with the WIOA principle of a college and career pathway that contains crucial milestones and goals for students to reach along the way. Community and technical colleges partner with community-based organizations to help serve the estimated 650,000 to 700,000 Washington adults who lack the basic skills necessary to 

be successful.6

Washington State BEdA programs: 

• Serve adults at least 16 years old who have skills below a high school graduate 

or need English language skills; • Include General Educational Development (GED®) and high school diploma 

programs; • Use a team teaching approach such as I–BEST (Integrated Basic Education and 

Skills Training); • Integrate instruction with technology; and • Teach employability or ‘‘soft skills’’ such as communication, time management, 

problem solving and decisionmaking. 

High school completion 

Washington State’s community and technical colleges not only open the door to 

college, they also help students finish a high-school level diploma or credential. Colleges offer GED® preparation and testing, as well as innovative programs like High 

School 21+, a competency-based diploma for adults 21 and over that awards credit 

for prior learning and military and work experience. These programs give all Washingtonians, regardless of age or skill level, the opportunity to complete high school 

and connect to a college and career pathway that’s right for them. 

I–BEST 

As I mentioned, the I–BEST program was my ticket to a new life. Nationally recognized, the program is modeled in more than 20 States including Tennessee, Oregon, Wyoming, Wisconsin and Massachusetts. It uses a team teaching approach 

that combines basic skills classes with job training classes to move students faster 

to completion and into living wage jobs. This combined teaching method allows students to begin college-level coursework immediately, so they don’t have to move 

through a mandated sequence of basic skills classes first. Students save time and 

money and learn skills in ways applicable to their career goals. 

In my case, dedicated instructors helped me brush up on basic skills as I simultaneously learned information technology skills. 

I–BEST now serves nearly 4,000 students. Programs include healthcare, automotive, manufacturing, transportation, early childhood education, aeronautics and 

office technology. Students enrolled in I–BEST programs are: 

• Three times more likely to earn college credits and nine times more likely to 

earn an industry-recognized credential than students in traditional programs who 

must complete basic skills classes before training for employment.7

• Earn an average of $2,645 more in wages each year and receive twice the work 

hours per week (35 hours versus 15 hours) than similar adults who do not receive 

basic skills training in any form.8

WORKFORCE

Washington State’s workforce system includes multiple State agencies, organizations and stakeholders that partner to provide real-time education and training that 

directly align with high-demand jobs. The 2-year college system plays an important 

role in developing relevant curricula, job training programs for employers, and industry partnerships to keep pace with today’s changing workforce demands. Washington State’s community and technical colleges along with their former students 

36 

9 Economic Modeling Specialists, Inc., Economic Contribution of Washington’s Community and 

Technical Colleges: Analysis of Investment Effectiveness and Economic Growth, 2011. 10SBCTC BFET program, 2014–15. 11SBCTC, ‘‘The Role of Transfer in the Attainment of Baccalaureate Degrees at Washington’s 

Public Bachelor’s Degree Institutions, Class of 2011,’’ 2013. 

contribute approximately $11 billion to the State’s economy each year.9 I’m proud 

to be among them. 

With statewide business and labor, Washington State’s community and technical 

colleges offer a wide array of professional-technical programs in high-demand fields. 

These include agriculture, aerospace, business administration management, composites, nanotechnology, nursing, and welding. 

Basic Food, Employment and Training 

As I mentioned, I benefited greatly from the Washington State Basic Food, Employment and Training (BFET) program. The program provides training and jobsearch help for people who receive food assistance so that they can earn industryrecognized credentials and land living-wage jobs. Nearly 10,000 2-year college students are receiving BFET benefits with funding through the U.S. Department of Agriculture.10 All 34 colleges participate across Washington State. 

Work-based learning 

Washington State’s 2-year college system offers a variety of work-based learning 

opportunities that benefit both students and employers. Work-based learning allows 

students to experience how the things they learn in the classroom are connected to 

real careers. Examples include apprenticeships, intern or externships, and work 

study. 

Without a work-based learning option, I wouldn’t have had the opportunity to obtain important skills needed to be successful in today’s job market. These options 

are important for students starting in their careers or retraining for a new field. 

ACADEMIC TRANSFER

Washington State’s 2- and 4-year colleges and universities have one of the strongest transfer systems in the country. This includes but is not limited to: 

• Common course numbering, which makes it easier for students to transfer 

to different colleges within the 2-year system; 

• Prior learning assessment, which helps students start or continue college at 

the place that best fits their previous academic or workforce experience; and 

• Direct transfer agreements and major related pathways, which allow students to transfer at the junior level or enter directly into a major. 

Forty percent of all Washington public baccalaureate graduates started a 2-year 

college. These transfer students graduate with similar GPAs as those who start as 

freshmen.11

SERVING STUDENTS

Washington State’s 2-year colleges serve students from all academic backgrounds, 

skill levels and work experiences. Their educational goals are as varied as the 

dreams that led them to enroll. Colleges use multiple tools and resources to reach 

students with these unique backgrounds. As I’ve mentioned, I am one of these students. I directly benefited from advising and career counseling, not to mention multiple financial aid options to help me pursue college. 

Proactive or intrusive advising 

Student advising is a priority of Washington State’s community and technical colleges. Through proactive or intrusive advising, colleges: 

• Purposefully intervene to motivate students; 

• Build student trust through regular communication; 

• Inform students of all available postsecondary options; and 

• Work proactively to help students avoid difficulty. 

Students excel when they are supported and understand that each step of their 

pathway counts. That’s how I was able to finish my certificate and land a job in 

my current career field. My advisor at Seattle Central College helped me the entire 

time, from career counseling and class scheduling to writing resumes and pursuing 

work-based learning options. 

I also received help understanding and applying for financial aid options, which 

made a huge difference. 

37 

12Washington State Student Achievement Council, 2013–14. 13SBCTC, Academic Year Report, 2013–14. 14Washington State Student Achievement Council, 2013–14. 15 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 2013. 

Financial aid 

Student debt is a critical issue in Washington State and across the Nation. In 2013–14, 32,244 2-year college students borrowed an average of $5,617 in student 

loans.12 Nearly half of the students in eligible programs receive financial aid.13

While tuition at a Washington State 2-year college seems like a bargain at ap- proximately $4,000 per year, it can pose significant challenges for students who 

don’t have extra financial resources to cover college expenses. Students not only 

have to pay for tuition, but required textbooks and materials to complete 

coursework. 

State Need Grant 

In addition to receiving a Federal Pell Grant, I also received the Washington 

State Need Grant to help cover the cost of my college education. For more than 40 

years, the State Need Grant has been providing financial aid to disadvantaged students. Eligible students with a household income less than $58,500 (for a family of 

four) are able to use the grant at 2- and 4-year higher education institutions as well 

as many accredited private or independent colleges, universities, and career schools 

in Washington State. 

After the Great Recession, Washington, like many other States, experienced significant budget constraints. With approximately 32,000 eligible students not receiving State Need Grants due to lack of funds,14 cost continues to be a barrier for many 

students in completing college and succeeding in today’s job market. 

RECOMMENDATIONS

As part of my testimony, I have a few recommendations for the committee to consider as discussions continue on national higher education policy. 

• Remove cost barriers for students. With over $1 trillion in loans,15 student 

debt is a growing national crisis. The Federal Government is in a unique position 

to help students and higher education institutions with this problem. Removing cost 

barriers makes a big difference in access and affordability for nontraditional students. 

Instead of creating new loan programs that may burden low-income students with 

more debt, consider increasing resources to grant programs, like Pell, that are already a proven success. Without the Pell Grant, I would have been unable to pursue 

college and obtain my current management position with a leading Seattle employer. 

I also recommend providing financial support for college advisors to help students 

navigate the financial aid process and find scholarships. It’s not an easy process, 

particularly when there’s no one in your family who has been through it before. 

• Centralize educational options for prospective students. A central Federal 

portal that contains all relevant college information for prospective students could 

be helpful. However, some college completion calculations paint an incomplete picture of community and technical colleges. For example, as a nontraditional returning student, I wouldn’t have been counted in the U.S. Department of Education’s 

College Scorecard. 

This type of portal can, however, provide better visibility for programs like I– 

BEST. This will help students and high school advisors make informed choices. I 

was fortunate to see a flyer at a YWCA, but the programs deserve greater visibility 

and students need to know about available opportunities. 

• Support college and career pathways. As I mentioned, a clear career pathway and proactive advising model were critical for my success as a student. I encourage continued support for these pathways through legislation and funding to ensure all students have the opportunity to plug into college and ultimately, a career 

at any point in their lives. 

For those without a high school diploma or credential, it is critical these prospective students have access to Ability to Benefit under the Pell Grant. This provides 

tuition assistance, allowing students to afford college, obtain an industry-recognized 

certificate or degree, and move into a living wage, high-demand job. 

In closing, I would like to once again thank you for this tremendous opportunity. 

The future of our country lies within higher education and I appreciate your dedication to ensuring all Americans can step on this path at any time in their lives. My 

journey has led me from a difficult past into a much brighter future. 

38 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Ms. Mitchell. 

We will now begin a series of 5-minute rounds of questions. 

Ms. Lightfoot, Senator Bennet and I and others have introduced 

the FAST Act, which would simplify student aid forms. You referred to it. 

Would you explain to the committee why it makes a difference 

to provide students with their financial aid eligibility information 

in their junior year in high school rather than their senior year. 

What difference would that make in their college search? 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Absolutely. Most families can file their FAFSA’s 

in January. Some colleges will get financial aid packages—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Of their senior year. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Of their senior year, absolutely. January of the 

senior year, and they need the prior year taxes. When a student 

fills out the FAFSA and their families fill out the FAFSA in January, some colleges can get those packages back in March, some in 

April, some in May. Some State schools do not give students their 

financial aid award letters until June, which does not give students 

enough time to make informed decisions, especially if there is a financial gap where the student may not have enough money to go 

to their first choice. 

The CHAIRMAN. Where a student might be expected to begin college in August. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Absolutely. 

In my written testimony, I talked about a student who received 

a financial aid package and did not have enough money to complete 

his first semester of college, and that student had to drop out of 

school after his first semester and at the age of 26 can no longer 

enroll in another school because he had acquired debt from his first 

semester going to a particular college. Had he had information the 

year before, he could have spent that year making up the difference, working longer hours, and using more strategies, applying 

for more scholarships to fill in the financial aid gap. It does not 

give students enough time to plan. A lot of our low-income, underrepresented students—families do not plan financially for their 

education, and they rely on Federal funds and State funds to do 

that. 

The CHAIRMAN. If I could go on to another question. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Absolutely. 

The CHAIRMAN. I have got a limited amount of time. That is very 

helpful. 

Mr. Schneider, you have been on both sides of it. You have been 

in the Government collecting information, and you have been out 

in the private sector trying to help States disseminate that information to students to make the right choice. 

This is the 900-page document. If I understand this correctly, 

this is what every institution has to disclose because we require 

them to. Now, how do you get this information into the hands of 

students in a useful way to choose among the 6,000 institutions we 

have? 

What you say in your testimony is while the Federal Government 

can be a powerful actor in creating databases, it is far from the 

best actor when it comes to disseminating the data in a usable 

form. The long and contentious history of gainful employment and 

39 

the shorter but equally fraught history of the current attempts to 

create a college rating system show the dangers of Federal overreach. I believe the Federal Government should help create high 

quality databases and then make the data widely available. Many 

efforts will follow as States, companies, other efforts experiment 

with different user interfaces. 

How much data should the Government collect? Is all this needed? And second, who should try to put the data in the hands of the 

students? You seem to think the Federal Government is not particularly good at that part of the job. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. That is correct. The statute of limitations on me 

apologizing for IPEDS has expired. When I was at NCES, I spent 

a lot of time apologizing for it, but that is gone. 

Yes. You have to remember, of course, that IPEDS has just expanded over time. It fulfills many, many purposes. 

The CHAIRMAN. Explain IPEDS. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data 

System. 

The CHAIRMAN. That is this? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. That is that. That is a printed version of that. 

As you noted in the white paper you put out about consumer information, much of the data collected in IPEDS is congressionally 

mandated. At NCES, we tried very hard to reduce some of the burden on institutions, but the fact of the matter is that we could not 

say we are not collecting these data because various laws said 

these data must be collected. A lot of the data that is collected has 

been mandated by Congress for a variety of purposes, not necessarily for consumer information. 

There was remarkable agreement among the witnesses about a 

handful of measures, if we are really serious about consumer information. There is a handful of measures that students need to 

know, and I have listed the five questions that I thought could 

structure the data that is required or that is needed for students 

to understand what their choices are. 

I believe that the Federal Government can, for example, do a 

much better job in collecting the wage data and the labor outcome 

data than any State or private institution can do. The fact of the 

matter is that those data need to be disseminated to other Federal 

agencies, to State governments, to researchers, to companies so 

that we could all experiment with different kinds of interfaces 

apps—different kinds of applications. Websites that would help students make a much better choice about where to go and what to 

study. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Dr. Schneider. 

Senator Murray. 

Senator MURRAY. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Mitchell, thank you. Truly inspirational story. I really appreciate your sharing it. 

I wanted to ask you when you walked into that YWCA in Seattle 

and saw a poster for I–BEST, what attracted you to that? What 

was it that made you say that is what I want to do? 

Ms. MITCHELL. There were two sentences that literally just spoke 

to me. One was college-bound program, and clear pathway to success. I was like what is that. I can actually get back to school. This 

40 

is a program where I can actually get back to college and have a 

clear pathway to get where I want to go. 

Senator MURRAY. You talked about going on to get your bachelor’s degree—to a bachelor’s program at some point. What factors 

are most important to you as you consider different college options 

to do that? 

Ms. MITCHELL. The success rate of the colleges, the graduation 

rate of the colleges is important to me, but also the staff, the teachers, and how accessible the school is and how much support the 

school gives the students. The support services are the most important thing to me. That is what has carried me through everything. 

There were times when I thought I am never going to be able to 

do this, or I might not be able to finish, or when I just needed 

someone to give me direction, having that support changed everything. It is a game-changer. When looking at universities, Smith 

and Amherst, for example, I got to meet the recruiters and the people at those schools, and so I got to learn that these people are 

really in your corner and they motivated me as a student without 

even being in their school, and that is what made me really just 

want to go there. 

Senator MURRAY. Ms. Lightfoot, you are nodding. Is that what 

you hear? 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Absolutely. The question that students have is 

how do students like me do at this institution and as a translator— 

and Ms. Santiago mentioned it. Students need translators, and how 

do we buildup a team of translators where students like Taleah can 

get the information and know that this is a school that has a robust amount of support that can work with students like her. It is 

the information that I can gather as a practitioner on graduation 

rates and how well do Pell Grant students do at the school where 

I can lead students to schools like Smith or Amherst or Oglethorpe 

or the University of the South where I can say as a practitioner 

this school does a great job with students like you, with poor students, with first-generation students. Collecting that information 

and in a place where it is easy for me and other practitioners to 

access is very helpful to lead Taleah to schools like a Smith and 

Amherst or UTK, et cetera. 

Senator MURRAY. Thank you. 

Mr. Schneider, you recommended that the Federal Government 

should do a better job of creating high quality data and then making the data widely available to States and community organizations that work with students. What kinds of vital information are 

we missing today? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. I believe that, as I noted, the concern about institution level data is wrong because so much happens at the program level. We need things like graduation rates at the program 

level. We need the economic outcomes, job placement numbers, 

wages. Right now I work with seven States or I have worked with 

seven States to track the students into the labor force and track 

their earnings 1, 5, and as much as 10 years afterwards, and this 

is all at the program level. There is a wide range of outcomes at 

the program level. That institution level data which, for example, 

the College Scorecard will pick up is just not going to catch it. 

Senator MURRAY. How do we collect that data? 

41 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Well, this is where the Federal income tax data 

is the most useful. I believe we should start with matching FSA 

data to the income tax data, and ultimately I believe that we 

should allow States to work with the IRS to match their data. We 

have to have rigorous safeguards, privacy safeguards in place, but 

we can do that. I believe that the States have very detailed student 

level data, and that could be merged with these outcomes data for 

information like job placement, career growth, and earnings. 

Senator MURRAY. Ms. Santiago, you recommended that we 

disaggregate Federal data and higher education much like we do 

under ESEA by the very characteristics that define what you call 

post-traditional students. Do you think we have enough information on student outcomes today? 

Ms. SANTIAGO. I do not believe we have sufficient information. 

The challenge for me in sufficient information is that the current 

measures we have do not capture those post-traditional students. 

If you are a returning student or a transfer student enrolled parttime at any point, you are not in those graduation rates and it does 

not tell you an accurate picture of their outcomes. I think that is 

a challenge in figuring out how to inform and compel action for the 

students we have today and in the future. 

Senator MURRAY. How do we collect that? 

Ms. SANTIAGO. I think we need to try to create competent cohorts 

that might be similar to graduation rates. That is not first-time 

full-time. We know we have the data already to create cohorts of 

part-time, first-time students, and we can cut the existing data in 

different ways to get there. I do not think there is any perfect way 

to do it, but we do need to make sure we include part-time students. We have experimented, including creating an FTE and looking at completion that way. The challenge is people do not understand how you do that, but we can do that with existing data. We 

have just not done it, and I think we should start with what we 

currently have rather than adding more and then making sure we 

are looking at it by those characteristics, students who need remediation and others. We have a lot of that data. We have to make 

better use of it. 

Senator MURRAY. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Murray. 

Senator Cassidy. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR CASSIDY

Senator CASSIDY. Ms. Santiago, I really like what you just said. 

Let me toss it over to Dr. Schneider. It almost seemed like you 

need a regression analysis. It is not just program graduation rates. 

It is the characteristics of the student. 

Now, the for-profits, I have toured some for-profits, they make 

the point that their student population is quite different than that 

of a young man or young woman who goes to a State college, et 

cetera, et cetera. I think we have good testimony at the end of 

something which is quite different. 

Is it practical to have a regression analysis in which you take the 

characteristics of these students and you say, listen, you can selfselect? We are not saying, listen, if you are this ethnic group or 

this family background or this income level, we predict your future. 

42 

Rather, you click and you say at this institution someone of the 

background I choose will have this immediate, intermediate, longterm income, et cetera. Any thoughts? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. I have done a lot of work on the issue of riskadjusted metrics, which is part of what your question is about, and 

that is, students come with different characteristics, and therefore 

we expect or empirically their success rates are different—in different domains varies. 

One problem is the regression analysis—which variables do you 

put into this? 

Senator CASSIDY. I bet you if you took Census track age, there 

would be two or three things that just leap out as statistically significant. Ms. Santiago is nodding her head yes. Feel free to weigh 

in. It seemed like you took two or three things. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. There are two or three things that we absolutely 

know have to be included, and after that, we start getting into 

much more complicated issues. 

I work with ‘‘Money Magazine,’’ ‘‘Money’s’’ ranking of the best 

colleges. We do value-added. We do the kinds of empirical analysis 

that you are talking about. That is a private magazine. If you do 

not like our ratings and you do not like the variables we choose, 

do not read the magazine. 

What I worry about is when the Federal Government gets involved in the risk-adjusted metrics business, the models become 

really much, much more important. 

We also allow our readers to change the weights on some of these 

things so then they care much more about certain of these characteristics than others. 

I take your point very seriously, and that is that we should allow 

personalized computation of ROI, personalized computation of how 

much it is going to cost. I have built applications where students—— 

Senator CASSIDY. I only have a couple minutes left. 

Ms. Lightfoot, I really love what you are doing. Let me ask because I have found that young people are often financially illiterate. My wife borrowed money in medical school, went to Australia, did not pay it off until after we married. If I sound bitter, 

I am. 

[Laughter.] 

When you send a young person off to Smith or Oglethorpe—those 

are very expensive schools. I am sitting here thinking what is the 

ROI on that? You follow what I am saying? If they went to Tennessee, Chattanooga, they probably would pay less. I am asking. It 

almost seems like we would have to have a spreadsheet where you 

would put in your financial aid and you would put in what you are 

going to bring to the table, and then you would put in your career 

path and then you would put out the immediate kind of metrics 

that you are saying could vary. When I graduate, I am either going 

to be an Occupy Wall Street activist or I am going to earn six figures. If it sounds like I have a child going to college, yes, I do. 

Do you have that? It almost seems like you have to do a financial 

literacy for these young folks who are taking off for school. Otherwise, they will do exactly as you described one person ending up 

43 

at age 26 having exhausted their loaning capacity with nothing but 

debt and no degree. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Absolutely. My point to that is having the translator. Because students do not go into college with that type of financial literacy, they are relying on a trusted adult, just as I relied 

on a trusted adult, to send me to a college 20 years ago that cost 

$25,000. Again, my mother only made $12,000. Susan Chipley 

would not have sent me to a college that did not meet my need. 

I trusted her enough to not put me in a situation where I 

would—— 

Senator CASSIDY. That is a remarkable set of circumstances, but 

sometimes there are charlatans as much as there are people of 

good will. It seems like we need to have something, I hate to say 

formalized because there is always going to be a bias, but there 

still seems like there has to be some sort of mechanism. A Good 

Housekeeping stamp of approval. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Absolutely. How can the Federal Government 

support more programs to buildup the team of translators so that 

every public school student can have access to a trusted and expert 

professional, college access professional, to lead them on the right 

direction. A lot of private schools will have counselors, a 30 to 1 

ratio of counselor to student ratio, and in public schools there are 

400 students to one counselor. 

Senator CASSIDY. Just to say something that Dr. Schneider describes where someone could log on and put in their variables. 

Could that supplant these personnel? Because personnel are very 

expensive, whereas the app could be something that would be 99 

cents on iTunes. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. If the variables were right—and I would have to 

think about those a little bit more as to what variables they would 

be—it is something that I will try as a practitioner to see if it 

would lead me to some of the schools that I know in my head that 

do a great job putting their arms around students who are underrepresented. I would have to just think a little bit more about what 

those variables would be. 

Senator CASSIDY. It sounds like a good workshop. 

I yield back. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Cassidy. 

Senator Franken. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR FRANKEN

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I think we all agree—I think there is total agreement here—that 

we want to be able to get useful information into the hands of prospective students in a timely fashion, at the right time. 

A number of you in your testimonies mentioned the importance 

of net price calculators. Last year, I introduced a bill with Senator 

Grassley of Iowa that would improve net price calculators which in 

an early manner, it sounds like the way students get this information is either through a counselor but very often by going to a 

search engine, browsing, finding it, and you get the schools. You 

are not getting it through the Federal Government. You are getting 

it from the school. 

44 

In 2008, Congress required all colleges to post a net price calculator on their website, but very often they are not easy for students 

and families to find on those websites or to use. My bill would have 

colleges and universities put the calculators on the pages of their 

websites where prospective students are likely to look, such as the 

financial aid or tuition and fees page. I think the chairman said 

that the ‘‘Washington Post’’ said what am I looking at. 

We want to have this net price calculator. This is so that kids, 

before they even apply, are not ruling out schools where they think 

they cannot pay for it, but my goodness, it turns out that maybe 

they could. 

We were talking about getting financial aid statements so late 

that you do not know. Even before you apply, you can go to a net 

cost calculator and put in your information and find out what that 

is. 

I am working to get this done in my bill, but in the meantime, 

does anyone have any ideas how we can make sure these colleges 

place their calculators on web pages that are easy for students to 

find? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. May I just speak to that? Again, there are about 

200 campuses, colleges that at the current time refuse to allow 

their net price calculators to be picked up by aggregators like the 

College Advocates. Schools originally hid their—they still do hide— 

their net price calculators deep in the bowels of their websites. 

NCES publishes—and the College Navigators—those links, but 

they should be prominently displayed. Also, the failure of the 

schools or the blocking of these net price calculators being picked 

up by aggregators is a serious problem that I think needs to be 

dealt with. There are over 200 schools at the current time that prevent that kind of aggregation. 

Senator FRANKEN. OK. I think I am going to move on because 

I want to ask about later in the process, once you have gotten into 

the school, you get a financial award letter. I think we are all saying this net price calculator is important, and it is important that 

it be in a prominent place. OK, good. 

Ms. Santiago, many students’ families do not have a clear picture 

of how much college is going to cost them. Some schools’ financial 

aid letters do not distinguish between loans and grants. I have another bipartisan bill that would require universities to use a uniform financial aid award letter so that students and their families 

will know exactly how much college will cost them. 

When I first proposed this, I got emails from lots and lots of people, including counselors, who said families cannot, the kids cannot, 

I cannot make out the difference because some will say subsidized 

Stafford loan. It will say that. Others will have an F6302. I am not 

sure if they use that, but you get my point. 

How would a uniform award letter—most people when they 

think of a loan, do not think so much that it’s an award. It is on 

an award letter. To make them distinguish, how would this help 

to have a uniform letter so that you can know exactly what you are 

getting? 

Ms. SANTIAGO. I think it would be invaluable in the choices students make. We have found that letters just put a total amount at 

the bottom, and too many families, especially for low-income, firstVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:15 Apr 28, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\94613.TXT CAROL
45 

generation, think that is the amount of money they will not have 

to pay back, and that actually includes loans and others. A uniform 

letter that clearly distinguishes between what they have to pay 

back versus what they are able to keep and it is free, that distinction is summarily important not just to list it, but to summarize 

it and having two numbers so that the families understand so 

when they do side-by-side comparisons, they can choose. 

Right now, there is no uniform letter, and we are having to 

translate not just through languages but like 15 different languages-plus, and I think that is not fair for students who are trying 

to make the best fit decision for them. I think uniform letters are 

absolutely critical. 

Senator FRANKEN. OK. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thanks, Senator Franken. 

Senator Warren. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR WARREN

Senator WARREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We have been talking a lot about data, but I want to talk about 

a different database than the kind we have been talking about. 

The Department of Education maintains databases that are loaded with information on Federal student aid, on loans, on scholarships. Researchers, policymakers, and students cannot get answers 

to even the most basic questions. In a recent ‘‘New York Times’’ column, one researcher asked some pretty basic stuff. How many borrowers are delinquent on their loans? How does delinquency differ 

by level of education or amount of debt? Which colleges are doing 

a good job of graduating students who can pay their debt and 

which are leaving students under water? Pretty key stuff. 

Dr. Schneider, does the Department of Education have data to 

answer any of these questions? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Absolutely. 

Senator WARREN. OK. They have the data. 

As Commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics, 

was it your job, ‘‘to disseminate full and complete statistics on financial aid?’’ 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. It was my hope to be able to do that. 

Senator WARREN. Was it supposedly your job to do that? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. No. 

Senator WARREN. You were not supposed to—I am looking at the 

statute here. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. I am sorry. There is a difference between what 

I hoped to do and what I was able to do and what I was mandated 

to do. 

Senator WARREN. OK. Let us put it this way. Did you release 

this data? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Well, we released very preliminary data or very 

aggregated data through IPEDS. 

Senator WARREN. Did you answer these questions? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. No. We could not answer them. 

Senator WARREN. OK. Now the question is why not. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Because FSA is not designed to provide those 

data to either the Federal Government, to other branches of the 

46 

Department of Education, to other agencies in the Federal Government, or to anybody else. FSA is a big bank. The data systems are 

designed for business operations, not for the dissemination of—— 

Senator WARREN. Let me ask this another way. Did the Education Department make these data available to you so that you 

could answer these questions? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. We negotiated several times with FSA to share 

data with NCES. We offered to pay for data runs. We asked them 

to provide us information about Pell Grants, about the success 

rates of Pell Grants. 

Senator WARREN. Would they give you these data? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. I do not know if they would but they did not. 

Senator WARREN. OK. I will take they did not. I have got that 

as an answer. 

As I understand it, Federal student aid is this group within the 

Department of Education that is collecting these valuable data, but 

it will not make those data public. They hide it from the public, 

from policymakers, even from others at the Department of Education and the National Center for Education Statistics. This is 

nuts. The data are already collected and the Education Department 

will not turn them loose. 

Last year, I introduced an amendment to the Education Sciences 

Reform Act reauthorization bill to require the Secretary of Education to protect student privacy but to make these data available. 

I withdrew the amendment on the understanding that we would 

address this issue in the Higher Ed Reauthorization Act. And I 

hope that Chairman Alexander and Ranking Member Murray will 

work with me to make sure that we use the data we are collecting 

because we cannot fix student aid programs if the Department of 

Education refuses to tell Congress, to tell researchers, or to tell the 

public or even the rest of the Department of Education what it is 

that it knows. I just think this one is critical, Mr. Chairman, and 

I hope that is what we will focus on. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thanks, Senator Warren. I remember our discussion about that last year, and I did say that and we will work with 

you on that in the Higher Education Act. 

Senator WARREN. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Murphy. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR MURPHY

Senator MURPHY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Mitchell, your story is really extraordinary. I do not want to 

put words in your mouth, but as we are seeking to figure out what 

data, what information is important to students, I assume that the 

reason that you were so committed to your journey to get your degree was because you wanted a higher quality of life, a better quality of life for yourself when you graduated. Is that correct? 

Ms. MITCHELL. Absolutely. 

Senator MURPHY. Ms. Lightfoot and Ms. Santiago, when you are 

talking to students whose main goal is that upon graduation of college, that they have a better quality of life than had they not gone 

to college or that they have a better quality of life because they 

went to this particular college versus that particular college, and 

that generally means that they are going to be able to get the job 

47 

that they want. They are going to be able to make enough money 

to pay back their loans. 

What is the data that you use in order to compare one college 

against another in order to judge whether or not that person is 

going to be able to get the job they want or to be able to make the 

salary they want? What is the data that is available to you to make 

that comparison for students? 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. I will start. 

My approach is about fit, what postsecondary opportunity is the 

best fit for the student. If it is a 2-year college based on the student’s circumstances, based on the student’s personality, then we 

will look at those options. 

Senator MURPHY. Let us say I am just a student. I just want to 

know. I want to know whether this college is going to get me a certain job. I want to know what chances I have to make this amount 

of money if I go to this school. Are you sort of saying that there 

is no one place where you can go and get that information for students today? 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Based on my professional journey and the information that I am able to collect from colleagues, from associations, 

I am able to match that information up. It kind of happens when 

you have savvy professionals who are trained like myself and other 

college access professionals to match that information up. I am 

thinking about Pell Grant students and the graduation rates for 

Pell Grant students. Or if I am talking to a student who will be 

a Pell Grant recipient, I am not going to send them to a school that 

does not do a great job graduating low-income students. So that is 

a piece. 

Senator MURPHY. Listen, I think you are fantastic at your job 

and there are other professionals that are fantastic at their jobs. 

It is really easy for you to go figure out what the student-to-teacher 

ratio is at a particular school. That is data that is available. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Absolutely. 

Senator MURPHY. It is not a problem to go find out what the cost 

is of a particular school. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. You got it. 

Senator MURPHY. But, it is not easy to find out what the average 

earnings of a graduate of a particular school is or what their ability 

to get a job in their major is. 

Mr. Schneider, I assume that is in part because in 2008 we 

passed a law prohibiting the Federal Government from collecting 

data on a student record basis that would allow us to track how 

a student does after they graduate college. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Yes. In part the ban on student level data is essential to blocking this kind of movement forward. Yes, that is 

true. Though as Senator Warren notes, the FSA already has an incredible database that could be merged and matched with other 

data. 

The States that I work with actually use the State unemployment insurance data, merging it back with the State’s student level 

data to track outcomes into the labor market and wages going forward. Tennessee is actually one of—— 

Senator MURPHY. Well, as you note in your testimony, that has 

pretty significant limitations. 

48 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Well, we believe it has significant limitations. 

We do not have a basis to check because the IRS has not shared 

its data with States despite the fact that we have asked the IRS 

to match the data with all the privacy concerns in place. We do not 

know what the bias is actually. 

Senator MURPHY. The colleges lobbied hard for this prohibition 

on student records that track students after colleges. The reason 

that was given was because of these potential problems with data 

protection. You said in your testimony you believe that a lot of 

those concerns can be answered and have been answered in terms 

of the ability to protect data. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Absolutely. Sometimes this concern for privacy is 

really a smoke screen to protect schools from the truth actually. 

Senator MURPHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Can I make a comment? I mentioned this in my 

testimony, but graduation rates, retention rates, percent of financial aid met, and average indebtedness at graduation, year 1 to 

year 2 where retention is very important for me to help guide a 

student on best fit. 

Senator MURPHY. My only point is that, of the five things that 

you mentioned, Mr. Schneider, No. 5 to me, is the one that we have 

the hardest time translating to students. How much am I going to 

make? Am I going to get a job in the field that I am studying? If 

we add anything to the data collection that we require, that would 

seem to be the most useful. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. That should be at the program level, not at the 

institution level. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Murphy. 

Senator Whitehouse. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR WHITEHOUSE

Senator WHITEHOUSE. I think I am the last one at this point. We 

are coming to the end of what has been a very interesting hearing. 

We have just come to the end in this committee of a very successful process with regard to elementary and secondary education, for 

which I commend both our Chairman and our Ranking Member. 

One of the principles that emerged from that process was the notion of the dashboard in the context of what the signals are that 

a particular school may be failing or may be failing certain of its 

students. It strikes me that the dashboard concept—when you are 

dealing with a lot of information of trying to extract from that information a simple, comprehensible—you can look at it on one 

screen measure, which would then allow you, if you see something 

that concerns you, to look back into the data more deeply would be 

a sensible model to have in mind as we approach this question. Do 

you agree with that thought or disagree with that thought? Anyone. 

Ms. SANTIAGO. I agree with that. In my testimony, I suggested 

in this era of having Netflix and Amazon, and you can start with 

a preference and go deeper and deeper as you start the process, 

that we have the ability to create an interface that will do that. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. It is not so much the question that there 

is a lot of data and there is a lot of information. That is not the 

problem. The problem is that we do not have that simple series of 

49 

interfaces that gives you the depth of information that you need at 

the level that you want. 

Ms. SANTIAGO. It allows you to filter, and a dashboard can give 

you the first step. But, as any choice you make, we need to go deeper and deeper to make sure it is a fit. The way you do that is to 

go from a dashboard into more challenged information that you 

need. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. You may not be very interested in going 

deep into your engine and pulling the oil at the end of the stick 

and finding out whether it is good or full or not, but when that little red light comes on, suddenly it gets interesting to do that and 

you are supposed to. It is the dashboard that facilitates that as 

well. Correct? 

Ms. SANTIAGO. Yes. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Does anybody disagree with that? OK. 

Let me ask a second question, which is that it is a tale as old 

as time, but where the profit motive goes, fraud and predatory behavior can often follow. It does appear from a considerable number 

of stories that we have seen that the profit motive’s incursion into 

higher education has been followed by fraud and predatory behavior, particularly a for-profit model that seeks very intensively to recruit students, seeks very intensively to milk them of their funds, 

particularly their grant and loan funds. As to the actual quality of 

education that is then produced or as to the actual job placement 

that should follow, it appears from the stories that we have seen 

that in many cases, the business model appears complete once the 

check has been cashed, and the rest is sort of caveat emptor. 

That seems to be a new concern that has emerged in this area. 

You might have had schools before that did not do a very good job, 

but that was often because they just did not know how to do any 

better. The predatory nature of some of what we have read about 

perhaps might be something that we should be looking at or that 

might create new risks as we try to make sure that students have 

the right kind of information. 

Do any of you have any thoughts on that concern? Dr. Schneider? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. I believe that the kinds of measures that we are 

talking about should be applied to every school regardless of its 

status, whether or not it is for-profit, not-for-profit, public. Students are going to choose schools and they need much better information. They do not even know if a school is proprietary or notfor-profit or whatever. In some ways it is irrelevant. What they 

really need to know is, as I said, am I going to get in, am I going 

to get out, how long is it going to take, how much will it cost, and 

how much will I earn. We need to measure those things, report 

those for every school, for every program regardless of who is offering them. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Ms. Santiago. 

Ms. SANTIAGO. I do think the added point here to what you 

shared is the predatory part. We do find many low-income, firstgeneration students who they have actively reached out to engage. 

I do think there is an added responsibility to make sure that they 

are getting good information, they are aware of the potential predatory nature of what is out there. Because they are trying to reach 

the American dream, they think if it comes to them, that they are 

50 

wanted, they work around their schedule, help them get aid and 

a job, only to find out that that was a bill of goods that they did 

not come through on. I think we have a responsibility to our young 

people and those who are not so young to make sure that we protect them from that. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Certainly the TV ads show nothing but 

sunshine and success. 

Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Whitehouse. 

Senator Scott. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR SCOTT

Senator SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I wanted to ask Dr. Schneider a couple questions. I appreciated 

your five important questions of getting in, getting out, the 

timeline, how much will it cost, and how much will you earn. 

I think one of the important parts of breaking the bachelor’s addiction is having the information about success. In South Carolina, 

we have a great need for middle skills. I think what you were talking about really leads in that direction in the conversation. I would 

love to hear your input and your perspective on our ability to fill 

the pipeline with students who understand and appreciate the necessity of more than a high school diploma but perhaps you can 

make a very good income without a college education, without the 

4-year baccalaureate degree. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. This is one of my missions in life right now, and 

that is to try to alert students to the value of technical degrees that 

are granted most often by community colleges. If we go to the detailed data that I present in many States, not South Carolina by 

the way, but in Tennessee, Texas, Colorado, or Minnesota, it is a 

consistent pattern that students with technical degrees can fit into 

the middle class. If you know how to fix things, if you know how 

to fix people and you have a technical degree or certificate, an associate of applied science or a certificate in those kinds of technical 

degrees, you can be in the middle class and you could earn more 

than bachelor degree students. 

Senator SCOTT. Absolutely. We need to work on getting that information more available throughout my great State of South Carolina. 

That really does bring me to another question for Ms. Lightfoot. 

Listening to your story of rising out of poverty through the power 

of education reminds me in some way of my story of growing up 

in a single-parent household and through the power of education, 

rising out of poverty as well. 

I would have suggested to you, had I known you then, that you 

could have come to the University of South Carolina, Charleston 

Southern, Clemson University, Presbyterian College. There are lots 

of great choices. We will have that discussion at another time. God 

bless the education anyway. 

I do think that there is an opportunity—and I would love to engage you in this conversation about how we help our students 

make better decisions from a cost perspective, understanding and 

appreciating perhaps the opportunity of technical schools or 2-year 

51 

schools, coupled with a Pell Grant to really reduce the burden longterm, which actually improves the return on the investment longterm as well. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Absolutely. You all will hear me scream and 

shout how important it is to have that college access professional— 

the trained professional—to lead students in a path to learning 

about what those middle skills are. When students hear the word 

‘‘college,’’ they automatically think of a 4-year degree, but where 

are they getting the messaging about a high-quality credential? I 

think the language needs to change around that so students can 

find their place in the apprenticeship program, in the technical program in the 4-year school, in the State school, and the private sector as well. I really think it is about the language and the message 

around college and where that student fits in to be led to some of 

the phenomenal opportunities there are at lower-cost institutions. 

Again, just because it is a better cost-effective value does not 

mean that it is going to be a good fit for the student. That student 

needs to be led, whether it is assessing their basic skills values, 

their values, their career interest with their skills matching them 

up to the best fit postsecondary opportunity. 

Senator SCOTT. I was referring back to part of your written testimony and you alluded to it in your oral presentation that the student who was unable to finish their education because of the financial hurdles during the first semester. With good information, it is 

definitely available, but having that good information accessible to 

the student at the right time, not when you are graduating from 

high school, but perhaps during their junior year, as you and Senator Alexander spoke about, I think would be very important. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. I know. I think that would be life-changing 

using prior prior-year asset information and encouraging colleges to 

get that information to the students earlier so the students will 

have time to fill the gap and accumulate the funds to make college 

affordable. 

Senator SCOTT. I would just make my last point, not really ask 

a question, though I did want to talk to Ms. Santiago about being 

bilingual or trilingual with the data being the third part of that. 

We will have to have that conversation another time. 

I do think it is important that while we are pretty decent at 

gathering information perhaps as a Federal Government, I am not 

sure that we are in the right place to start with the dissemination 

of the information for the average student and the average place 

because according to most of the studies that I have read, most of 

the statistics that I have digested, we may gather the information 

well, but it does not seem like the average student, particularly 

adult students, are looking to the Federal Government to figure out 

how to make choices. 

I reached out to a fantastic high school senior from South Carolina who has made the decision, much like yourself, not to go to 

school in South Carolina, which I do not understand that decision. 

He had a great teacher who helped him understand and appreciate 

the options around the Nation that did not come from the information. It came from a relationship. A part of the conversation I think 

we need—at least a part of my thought process is I think I would 

like to have invested in the conversation or woven into the conVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:15 Apr 28, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\94613.TXT CAROL
52 

versation is the importance of relationships because most students 

find their best sources not through public information, but perhaps 

information that is available publicly, but you have to have some 

conduit, some mediator in the middle of that. It seems to be teachers and parents and making sure that those folks have access to 

the information is incredibly important as well. 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. That is music to my ears. 

Senator SCOTT. Yes, ma’am. You do not want to hear me sing it. 

That is for sure. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Scott. 

Senator Murray. 

Senator MURRAY. Yes. I just had one other area I wanted to ask 

Dr. Schneider about. Your institution conducts research to develop 

tools to improve and provide assistance regarding school crime and 

safety. According to that research, the number of forcible sex 

crimes reported is up 52 percent in the past decade. Half of those 

crimes in your data took place in residence halls at 4-year institutions. 

How can the Federal Government use that data to help improve 

college safety and climate? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. The way I think about any of these kinds of indicators—there are two fundamentally different ways of thinking 

about it. 

On the first hand, there is consumer information, and that is getting the information out, understandable, usable, and used. We 

have an obligation to put those data out into the world and then 

let the consumers change their behavior, their choices based on 

that information. 

The second is regulatory. That is your business not my business. 

I do not know how you regulate on that kind of information, but 

I do believe that the consumer information part—we need to make 

any kind of data about safety, any kind of data about student outcomes, any of those kinds of data—we need to choose the data that 

is the most important to students and make it easily understood 

and easily accessible. Data that is hidden in data warehouses is not 

useful. 

Senator MURRAY. For a student or their family who is trying to 

decide a college option, how should they evaluate that data and the 

national trend? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Well, I think the problem is—and someone mentioned this earlier—everybody thinks that they are the exception 

not the rule. I do believe that these kinds of data need to be made 

available to students. 

I must admit that I am totally in support of shaming people and 

shaming institutions. I do not have a problem with marking things 

red, yellow, green. You get a red sticker, you are really off the 

chart on this measurement in a bad way. I think shame is a powerful motivator. 

Senator MURRAY. Right now, that is not out there and available. 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. No. I agree. We need to make that more widely 

available. 

Senator MURRAY. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. I just have a couple more questions. 

53 

Ms. Lightfoot, Tennessee has a new program called Tennessee 

Promise. That means community college tuition is free to all qualified high school graduates or technical institutions. There are approximately 66,000 high school seniors in the State of Tennessee. 

Of that number, 44,000, or 68 percent, completed a FAFSA application, a student aid form, through April 24. That is a big increase. 

Last year it was 55 percent instead of 68 percent, a 23 percent increase. 

In my conversations with Tennesseans—this is what I have 

heard, and you are in the midst of this. Tell me if I am right or 

wrong about this. The Governor, in order to promote Tennessee 

Promise, recruited a number of volunteer mentors to help with the 

students who have to fill out these 108 questions that are on the— 

I raise my hand because I hold that thing up a lot—108 questions. 

The mentors tell me that they are spending most of their time not 

advising the students about their lives, the amount of loans available, or where to go to school, but helping them fill out this form. 

You talked a lot about translators and how valuable it is to have 

a translator to take all this information on community colleges and 

make it useful to do what Dr. Schneider said he hopes more people 

will do. If we are successful in simplifying the FAFSA from 108 

questions to 2 or 5 or 10 or 12 or 15 questions, would that save 

time of college employees such as yourself or high school counselors 

who could spend their time serving as translators for where a student might go to school rather than filling out a form filled with 

unnecessary questions? 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. Absolutely. Definitely a simplified form of the 

FAFSA would ease a lot of burdens on students and families, even 

those who do not choose to go to a 2-year college. A more robust 

training around the mentorship program I think would be extremely helpful as well. 

The CHAIRMAN. Does UTC and the community college have employees who spend a lot of time helping students fill out these 

forms? 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. A lifetime, no, but definitely a couple of days 

and waiting for students to get their taxes back and explaining 

what it means. I think a lot of time, once that professional is there 

to help the student, it is interpreting what the FAFSA means and 

what the FAFSA will get them that takes even more time than 

completing that particular form. 

The CHAIRMAN. As you stated, in Knoxville, they told me they 

hired two people to help students fill out the FAFSA. Why would 

it not be better to hire two people to serve as translators to help 

them figure out what school to attend? 

Ms. LIGHTFOOT. I think increasing the capacity of every school, 

every college, 4-year, 2-year college to make financial aid more accessible and easily understandable would be a key and not just for 

2-year colleges and students who are going to the Tennessee Promise. So absolutely, increasing the capacity of these colleges in their 

financial aid departments and their student advising departments 

because at the end of the day it is about student completion as 

well, and if they can whiz through the FAFSA and get that out of 

the way and understand what the FAFSA means and what the 

54 

FAFSA will get them in terms of financial aid, scholarships, grant 

dollars, it will make a lot of lives a lot better. 

The CHAIRMAN. My last question. Dr. Schneider, your testimony 

reflects my bias or my understanding, and I think it might be not 

so different than what I heard from Senators today, which is that 

the Federal Government does a good job of collecting data but is 

probably not the best entity to put it into a form that is most useful to students. 

Senator Durbin was telling me yesterday about how the FBI’s 

computer system was so bad that the photographs of the 9/11 conspirators had to be hand-carried and mailed because they could not 

be sent on their computer system. They then wasted $800 million 

trying to fix it. 

The Obamacare website got a lot of attention. 

Senator Murray and I are working on what to do about the electronic medical records. The Government just does not seem to be 

able to do that kind of thing very well. 

On the other hand, some universities do a good job. The University of Texas president came by to see me, and he was talking 

about just what you talked about, about anybody who wants to go 

there can go onto a website, select the program—I think you may 

have had something to do with creating that—but select the program and they tell them about the program, tell them how much 

it would cost to go to that program, and then when they got out, 

what the job placement was for that. Now, that would seem to be 

ideal. 

How do we, in a practical matter, as legislators take this information about community colleges and cut it down to size so that 

we do not waste anybody’s time collecting information from almost 

2,000 public and private community colleges or technical institutes? 

How do we encourage the dissemination of it in useful ways? If we 

try to do it ourselves, we will end up like the electronic medical 

records or the Obamacare website or the FBI computer system. 

How do we encourage that? Our temptation often is, well, here is 

a problem, we will fix it, and we do not fix that kind of thing very 

well. How do we cut this down to size? Then how do we enable others to take this information and make it useful? 

Dr. SCHNEIDER. Clearly that is a congressional task because so 

much of the data that is collected has been mandated by Congress. 

My suggestion would be to work closely with NCES which tracks 

the usage of IPEDS data, just find out what is not being used, and 

then we will need congressional action to eliminate it. Everything 

in IPEDS had a reason at one time, and much of it has no reason 

or the burden of collecting these data are in excess of the benefit. 

I think every decision we make about data has to be a benefit-cost 

analysis about it. My suggestion would be working closely with 

NCES to track the usage of these things and just start eliminating 

many of these surveys that have accumulated over time. 

In my written testimony, I suggested some of the kinds of data 

that could be used to track the wage outcomes much more effectively than I am doing at the current time, that my State partners 

are doing at the current time, including the State of Tennessee 

using UI data, the unemployment insurance wage data. I have 

worked with the State of Tennessee asking the IRS to provide the 

55 

match data, and we thought we had an agreement and that agreement disappeared. The UT system, the State of Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, other States have been asking for the 

merged wage data so that we could get much more accurate tracking of students into and through the labor market. At the current 

time, the IRS is saying that they do not have the statutory authority to do it, which I disagree by the way. 

In terms of dissemination—I think everybody I know is waiting 

for the merged FSA–IRS institution level data that is supposedly 

going to come out sometime this summer. What I am going to do 

with my work with ‘‘Money Magazine’’ is take that data and plug 

it into the work we are doing at the current time. I think we just 

need to make sure those data are put out in the public domain and 

let everybody go at it. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Dr. Schneider. 

Let me invite Dr. Schneider, Ms. Santiago, Ms. Lightfoot, and 

Ms. Mitchell if things occur to you today or if you want to emphasize something that you had in your testimony or that you think 

about when you go home, particularly if there are specific suggestions of things we ought to do or the way we ought to do it, we 

would welcome that. We would invite you to send that to us. You 

are the experts. We are not. We are going to be passing a law in 

the next few months that will affect things for the next several 

years. If a specific change needs to be made, please tell us, and we 

will do our best to include it. 

If Senators have additional questions, they will ask them. The 

hearing record will remain open for 10 days to submit additional 

comments and any questions for the record Senators have. 

We plan to hold the next hearing of this committee on reauthorizing the Higher Education Act on Wednesday, May 20. 

It has been a very useful hearing. I thank the witnesses. Ms. 

Mitchell, thank you for coming all the way from Seattle. That is 

a long way to come. Senator Murray does it every weekend. 

Ms. MITCHELL. Thank you for having me. 

The CHAIRMAN. I know it can be done, but we are glad you came. 

Ms. Lightfoot, it is good to see a Tennessean. 

Ms. Santiago, thank you. 

Dr. Schneider, thank you. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:38 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

Æ