BACKGROUND PAPER

Inequalities in the

Educational Experiences

of Black and White Americans

September 1977

' . •

Congress of the United States

Congressional Budget Office

Washington, D.C.

INEQUALITIES IN THE EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCES

OF BLACK AND WHITE AMERICANS

The Congress of the United States

Congressional Budget Office

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, B.C. 20402

;

 Stock No. 052-070-04242-7
NOTE

Throughout this paper, unless otherwise noted, the term

white applies to Caucasians, including those of Hispanic heritage. The term nonwhite applies to blacks (which may include some

persons of Hispanic heritage), American Indians, and Orientals.

Whenever possible, data for blacks were separated from those for

other nonwhites in order to focus specifically on their experiences .
PREFACE

Inequalities in the Educational Experiences of Black and

White Americans is part of a series of studies undertaken by

the Congressional Budget Office to examine the causes of and

possible remedies for racial inequalities. The paper was prepared at the request of Parren J. Mitchell, Chairman of the House

Task Force on Human Resources and Louis Stokes, Chairman of the

House Budget Committee Task Force on Community and Physical

Resources. Topics of the related papers include inequalities in

health and wealth.

This study was prepared by Steven Chadima and Richard

Wabnick of CBO's Division of Human Resources and Community

Development, under the supervision of David S. Mundel and Robert

D. Reischauer. The authors wish to thank Cheryl Smith, David

Allen, Carlene Crumpton-Bawden, Arnold Mitchem, and Nathaniel

Thomas for helpful comments and assistance. The manuscript was

prepared for publication under the supervision of Johanna Zacharias with the assistance of Tricia Knapick. Special thanks

go to Betty Ingram, Jill Bury, and Martha Anne Mclntosh for their

patience and skill throughout the production of this paper.

In keeping with CBO's mandate to provide nonpartisan and

objective analysis, this paper offers no recommendations.

Alice M. Rivlin

Director

September 1977

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Preface lii

Summary ix

Chapter I. Introduction 1

Chapte r II. Inequalities in Elementary and Secondary

Education 3

Trends in Enrollment, Attainment, and Achievement ... 3

Factors That May Contribute to Disparities 9

Current Federal Policy and Its Impact 13

Chapter III. Inequalities in Postsecondary Education . . 25

Trends in Enrollment and Degree Attainment 25

Factors That may Contribute to Disparities 28

Distribution and Impact of Federal Postsecondary

Assistance 35

Chapter IV. Impact of Budgetary Increments to Federal

Programs on the Education Experiences of

Black Americans 45

v

LIST OF TABLES

1. Percent Enrolled in School, by Age and Race, October

1955, 1965, and 1975 3

2. Students Suspended at Least Once During the 1972-1973

School Year 4

3. School Enrollment of 3- to 1.9-Year-Old Population

(White and Nonwhite), October 1975 5

4. Mean Educational Attainment of Men by Race and Year of

Year of Birth, 1973 7

5. Population, Percent Enrolled in College, and Percent

in Population of 14- to 34-Year-Old Persons by Race

for 1965 to 1975 26

6. Percent of Population 25 to 34 Years Old Who Completed

Four Years of College or More 28

7. College Enrollment Rates of High School Seniors by

Income Quartile and Race in Fall 1972 29

8. Percent of Primary Family Members 18 to 24 Years Old,

Enrolled in College by Income and Race, October 1975 30

9. College Enrollment Rates by Race and Measured Ability,

Fall 1972 32

10. Plans to Attend College of High School Seniors 14 to

34 Years Old, by Race, 1972 to 1975 34

11. Amounts Spent, Recipients, and Average Awards of

Campus-Based Student Assistance by Race for Fiscal

Year 1973 38

12. Strengthening Developing Institutions (Basic and

Advanced Institutional Development Program) Awards

for Fiscal Year 1976 39

13. Enrollment at Developing Institutions (Funded Under

Title III) by Race in Fiscal Year 1976 39

14. Percent Distribution of "Trio" Students by Race for

Fiscal Year 1976 40

15. Major Federal Education Programs Disproportionately

Assisting Black Students 46

A-l. College Enrollments by Race for 1965 Through 1975 . . 55

A-2. First Time, Full Time Freshmen by Race for 1970

Through 1975 56

vii

SUMMARY

The inequalities in the educational experiences of blacks

and whites are widely known. Black students tend to have lower

grade point averages in school than do white students, and they

are suspended more often and for longer spells than whites.

Fewer black students remain in secondary schools beyond the

compulsory attendance age, fewer graduate from high school, and

fewer attend college and graduate school. A recent examination

of the nation's 17-year-olds by the National Assessment of

Educational Progress revealed that 92 percent of white children

but only 58 percent of black children were functionally literate.

Partly as a result of these educational inequalities,

the postschooling experiences of blacks and whites are dramatically different. The unemployment rate among blacks is nearly

twice that of whites. In recent months, nearly 40 percent

of all black teenagers who are looking for work have been unemployed. Even with governmental cash assistance included as

income, more than one-fourth of all black families remained in

poverty in 1975, compared with less than 8 percent of white

families.

This admittedly bleak situation is nevertheless an improvement over that of recent years. The differences between the

number of years of schooling completed by blacks and whites has

been narrowing. Among persons born in the early 1900s, black

males completed about seven years of school while white males

completed around 10.5 years. The school attainments of persons

born about 25 years ago, however, are far more similar: black

men have completed an average of just less than 12 years of

school, while white men have completed just over 13 years. While

there are no accurate data available on degrees attained, one

indicator suggests that twice the percentage of blacks are

completing four or more years of college now than 15 years

ago.

IX

95-922 O - 77 - 2
FACTORS THAT MAY CONTRIBUTE TO DISPARITIES

In elementary-secondary education, the inequalities in the

school experiences of blacks and whites have been attributed to

four major factors: differential school resources, segregated

schooling, the inappropriateness of standard programs for

minority pupils, and other, nonschool factors. Studies of these

major hypotheses almost uniformly conclude that differences among

children's family backgrounds and the social and economic characteristics of their communities are the most significant

factors in explaining inequalities.

Nearly every major study of the effects of differential

school resources on student sichievement has concluded that there

is very little tie between the two. Once other factors, such as

family background and the influence of peers, are considered,

knowing the amount and kind of resources in a child's class helps

very little in predicting how well he or she will do in school.

However, the availability of supplementary compensatory education

generally has not been considered in these studies; such compensatory programs may provide enough of the right resources

to make a difference.

Segregated schooling, per se, appears to have negative

effects on black children. A majority of reliable studies

examining the effects of desegregation on the achievement of

black and white children have noted increases in the achievement

of black students with no'measurable effect on whites. However,

most of these gains have been attributed to factors (such as

teachers' attitudes) that are very difficult to measure.

The appropriateness of standard school programs for many

black students is often questioned. As mentioned previously,

most of the differences between the performance of blacks and of

whites in standard school programs can be explained by socioeconomic factors. Economically disadvantaged children, a

disproportionate number of whom are black, often come to school

with fewer of the skills their more advantaged peers have assimilated from their home environments or preschool experiences.

These differences are often compounded in the schooling process.

Consequently, many disadvantaged students never meet their full

educational potential in a system geared toward the so-called

"average" student. Compensatory programs are often needed to

combat these initial disadvantages.

x
At the postsecondary level, researchers have concluded that

two factors (which have been measured) appear most important in

influencing attendance: family income and academic proficiency.

Other factors, such as motivation, have been suggested as strongly influential, but these have been insufficiently studied

to draw implications for policy decisions.

The differences in family income between blacks and whites

have a dramatic influence on the overall, rate of attendance of

both groups. Within given ranges of family income (e.g., $0-

$7500, $7500-$10,000) black students almost always enroll at

rates equal to or greater than white students. However, because

the majority of black students fall in lower income brackets, in

which rates of attendance are lower for all students, the average

enrollment rate of blacks over all income groups is less than

that of whites.

The differences in measured academic proficiency of blacks

and whites have a similar effect on college enrollments. If

students are divided into groups according to achievement in high

school (measured by grade point average), blacks and whites

enroll in college at nearly the same rates. However, because

more black children tend to fall into lower achievement groups,

their overall rate of enrollment is lower than that of whites.

THE FEDERAL RESPONSE

The Congress has enacted few laws that directly address

these black/white differences. However, during the last 12

years, new programs aimed at students from low-income families

have had the effect of disproportionately assisting black children and thereby indirectly addressing racial differences.

In preschool education, the major federal program of support

is Head Start. About half of the children served in this program

are black, and at least 90 percent are supposed to come from poor

families (about two-thirds actually do, according to a recent

report by the General Accounting Office). Recent evaluations

have revealed that enrollees have made substantial achievement

gains on their nonparticipating peers. In addition, after

enrollment in elementary school, they have had to repeat the same

grade less often and have needed less special assistance.

xi
At the elementary-secondary level, the Congress has enacted

two major programs of support: Title I of the Elementary and

Secondary Education Act and the Emergency School Aid Act (ESAA).

In addition, special programs for the disadvantaged are authorized through the Vocational Education Act.

Title I provides compensatory education assistance for

low-achieving children who attend schools in areas with concentrations of families in poverty. Program regulations require

that Title I schools receive the same amount of nonfederal school

resources as other schools in a district so that Title I funds

will provide supplemental services for these disadvantaged

children. A major series of evaluations of the Title I program

is in progress, but early results as well as previous studies

indicate that Title I children are gaining on their higher

achieving peers during the school year, though much of these

gains may be lost over the summer months.

The ESAA program assists school districts with special

needs associated with desegregation efforts., Evaluation results

indicate that the process of distributing funds has benefited the

most needy schools and students. While achievement gains have

been noted for students in ESAA schools, further study of these

claims is in progress.

Federal vocational education funds provide' special assistance for disadvantaged students through two programs: a special

set-aside of funds from the basic vocational education grant to

states, and a separately appropriated program of special vocational assistance to disadvantaged students. The percentage of

black students in these programs is about twice that in regular

vocational programs. However, recent evaluations of these

vocational programs have questioned their effectiveness.

In postsecondary education, most federal funds are directed

at need-based student aid programs with some funds going to

institutional aid. The student aid programs include Basic

Grants, Supplemental Grants, Guaranteed Loans, Direct Loans, and

College Work-Study. Two major programs help postsecondary

institutions. One, Strengthening Developing Institutions (Title

III of the Higher Education Act), supports schools that need

financial bolstering to reach their academic and managerial

potential. The other, Special Programs for Students from Disadvantaged Backgrounds, offers remedial counseling, information,

and referral services through Talent Search, Upward Bound Special

Services, Educational Opportunity Centers, and newly authorized

service learning centers.

xii
About half of all federal postsecondary student assistance

funds will go to students from families with incomes lower than

$7,500 in fiscal year 1977. An additional 20 percent will go to

self-supporting students who generally also have low incomes.

This targeting of federal aid has undoubtedly funneled substantial assistance to needy minority students. While the precise

magnitude of the effect of federal aid is unknown, it is noteworthy that the percentage of 18- to 24-year-olds from families

with incomes under $6,000 enrolling full time in college has

increased since 1970, while the percentages for students from all

other income groups have declined slightly.

Except for the Upward Bound program, institutional assistance programs have, in general, not received high marks from

evaluation studies. The Strengthening Developing Institutions

program lacks solid eligibility criteria; Talent Search has not

clearly defined its target population; and Special Services has

not significantly improved the academic performance of its

clients. Upward Bound has shown some measurable success in

improving the chances that students will graduate from high

school, but the postsecondary aspects of the program (enrolling

and retaining students) have yet to be tested.

IMPACT OF FUNDING CHANGES

Because each of the foregoing programs is oriented toward a

different set of goals, it is hard to compare the effects of

funding changes across programs in terms of final student outcomes. However, it: is useful to note the effect of funding

changes on both the number of students served and on the proportion who are black. The Summary Table (see pages xv and xvi)

describes the effect of an additional $100 million in each of

these program areas.

In elementary-secondary education, most federal programs

serve only a small part of the eligible population. In the Head

Start preschool program, an additional $100 million would provide

full-year services for an additional 66,000 children. About 15

percent of the eligible population are served at present; an

additional $2.5 billion would be needed to serve this group

fully. Each $100 million added to the Title I program could

provide services for an additional 265,000 regular school year or

one million summer school students, or raise per pupil spending

by about $19. Providing summer programs to combat achievement

xiii
losses for 50 percent of the regular school year Title I students

who could be expected to participate would require about $275

million. To serve fully the eligible student population in

eligible schools with regular school year programs would require

an additional $2 billion over fiscal year 1977 appropriations.

An additional $100 million in ESAA funding would extend support

to school districts with applications on file but unfunded at

present spending levels, or might serve 100,000 to 160,000

students through the magnet school program. An additional $100

million in vocational education funding would not likely add to

the level of services unless earmarked for disadvantaged students .

In postsecondary education, the impact of funding additions

is somewhat more complicated. Final spending decisions would

require additional program decisions on how new funds were to be

used, or would depend on the actions of persons outside the

federal government such as financial aid officers or bank lending

officers. More spending for student aid programs would likely

help a group more affluent than the current set of recipients.

However, student financial aid officers could use additional

studesnt aid funds to recruit more low-income students, but the

extent of this possible effect is unknown. For institutional

assistance programs, an additional $100 million institutional

assistance programs would significantly expand these efforts.

Such an increase would almost double the number of colleges

participating in the Title III program and would more than double

the number of students being served by the Trio programs (Talent

Search, Upward Bound, and Special Services).

In general, however, funding increases would assist black

students substantially, though probably to a lesser extent

proportionally than do the dollars currently expended. Absolute

levels of services to black students would remain high. But in

no case does the current state of research permit an estimate of

how much a program would close the educational gaps between

blacks and whites. The educational process is so complex that

federal efforts cannot alone achieve the goals of equality.

Only if financial resources are accompanied by a strong commitment to high quality educational programs by both parents and

school personnel will the experiences of blacks and whites begin

to become more similar.

xiv
MAJOR FEDERAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS DISPROPORTIONATELY ASSISTING BLACK STUDENTS

Program

Fiscal Year 1977

Appropriation

(in millions

of dollars)

Number of

Recipients

Percent

Black

Dollars

Per

Student

Effect of An Additional $100 Million

Head Start

Emergency

School Aid

Vocational

Education

Student

Assistance:

Basic Grants

475

ESEA, Title 1 2,285

275

612

1,904 fj

349,000

5,605,000 b/ 34

2,200,000 cj 40-60

16,000,000

1,975,000

50 1,505 a/ Would serve an additional 66,000 in full-year programs

at current per child spending rates.

377 Would either increase per pupil spending from $377 to

$396 or add 265,000 new regular year pupils, or open

one million summer school slots, or some combination

of these.

125 &/ If added to state apportionment program, would fund

districts with application levels; if added to other

area, e.g., magnet schools, would add students not

served in regular LEA programs (OE estimates 50,000-

80,000 new students per $50 million in magnet schools).

15 e/ 38 Would increase federal subsidy to $44.50. Would not

likely add to number of students served or level of

service, unless earmarked for special programs.

27 gj 911 Could raise ceiling $100 reaching new middle-income

eligibles; tighten contribution schedule by reducing

income breakpoint to $3,000 increasing under $10,000

incomes share of funds by 3 percentage points; loosen

contribution schedule with opposite effect.

a_l Full-year cost for 292,000 children; the 46,000 children in summer programs are served at $175 per child.

_b/ Includes children served by state agencies as well as by local educational agencies (LEAs).

.c/ Excludes students served by educational television (3,218,056) and counts only once students served by more than

one ESAA project.

d/ Ranges from $50 to $1,000 per student, depending on program and characteristics of LEA or nonprofit group sponsoring

services.

e_/ 15.1 percent of total vocational students are black; however, about 30 percent of students in special programs for

the disadvantaged are black.

f/ Available funds total $1,700 million.

_g/ Estimated.
(Continued)

Fiscal Year 1977

Appropriation

Program (in millions Number of Percent

of dollars) Recipients Black

Supplemental 250 445,000 54 h/

Grants

College Work- 390 891,000 26 h/

Study

Direct Loans 311 834,000 23 h/

Guaranteed 357 866,000 14 ±/

Loans

Institutional

Assistance:

Developing 110 758,000 k/ 35 I/

Institutions

Special Programs 85 275,000 50

for Disadvantaged

Dollars

Per

Student Effect of An Additional $100 million

562 At current average award would serve 178,000 more students

of which about 40 percent would be low-income dependent

students .

525 At current average award would aid 229,000 additional

students — 30 percent to students from low— income families.

690 2.1 At current average loan would disburse 159,000 more loans —

over 20 percent to students from low-income families.

1,210 2.1 Increased subsidy commitments of $100 million would require

the disbursement of about 970,000 new loans at the current

average amount; new subsidy provisions suggest that these

loans would go to middle- and upper-middle income families.

145 About twice the number of institutions would be served with

significant expansion at urban institutions .

309 About 324,000 new eligibles could be served.

_h/ These are Fiscal operations data from fiscal year 1973.

in each year since the inception of Basic Grants.

_i/ Survey estimate for fiscal year 1973.

2.1 Average loan per borrower.

_k/ Enrollment at Title III schools.

_!/ Percent of enrollment at Title III schools.

They probably overstate the percent of blacks served
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION

The concept of educational equality has been widely discussed in the last quarter century. Since the landmark 1954

Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education, there has

been considerable debate over the measurement of and remedies for

the differing educational opportunities and experiences of the

various racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups in the United

States.

Two major reasons underlie the national concern for educational equality. First, the opportunity for a quality educational experience for everyone is directly desired — that is,

regardless of the ultimate value of an education, many seek an

equal opportunity in the educational system as an end in itself.

Second, educational equality is sought because of its role as a

contributor to greater equality in other areas of American

life — income, employment, and social and political influence

among racial and ethnic groups.

That nonwhites and whites have unequal postschooling experiences is not a point of contention in current debate. For

example, the unemployment rate of nonwhites has traditionally

been about twice that of whites. The incomes of blacks and

whites also differ substantially. In 1975, the median black

nonfarm family income was $8,871; the median white nonfarm family

income was $14,391. In that same year, 27.1 percent of black

families had incomes below the official poverty level, while only

7.7 percent of white families were so situated. _!/ These differences result not only from different educational experiences, but

also from family and other social situations, and from discrimination in the labor market. 2/

.!/ Income includes money income before taxes and other deductions. It does not include the value of in-kind benefits

such as housing or food stamps, but does include social

security, public assistance, and other cash payments.

2_l See Congressional Budget Office, The Unemployment of Nonwhite

Americans; The Effects of Alternative Policies, Background

Paper No. 11 (July 19, 1976).

95-922 O - 77 - 3
While one can measure the educational experiences of blacks

and whites along a multitude of dimensions, two direct measures

are of major importance: an individual's performance in the

schooling process (achievement), and the amount of schooling a

person obtains (attainment). This paper examines these key

measures and the factors that: may contribute to the disparities

in achievement and attainment among various population groups.

It also examines the current federal effort in education and its

effect on these disparities.
CHAPTER II. INEQUALITIES IN ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

TRENDS IN ENROLLMENT, ATTAINMENT, AND ACHIEVEMENT

The gap between blacks and whites in enrollment, attainment,

and achievement has been narrowing in recent years. Large

differences still exist, however, particularly in measures of

achievement.

Enrollment

Among the elementary-secondary age population (5 to 17

years old), school enrollment is nearly universal (see Table 1).

In 1955, 90.8 percent of nonwhite children and 94.4 percent of

white children 5 to 13 years old were enrolled in school, a gap

of 3.6 percentage points. By 1975, this difference had narrowed

to less than half a percentage point, with more than 98 percent

of both groups enrolled in school. A similar trend has occurred

among secondary students (14 to 17 years old). Twenty years ago,

82.2 percent of nonwhites and 87.5 percent of whites in this age

group were enrolled in school, a difference of 4.7 percentage

points. By 1975, this gap had declined to 1.2 percentage points,

with more than 92 percent of both groups enrolled.

TABLE 1. PERCENT OF POPULATION 5 TO 17 YEARS OLD ENROLLED IN

SCHOOL, BY AGE AND RACE, OCTOBER 1955, 1965, and 1975

5 to 13 years old 14 to 17 years old

Year White Nonwhite Difference White Nonwhite Difference

1975

1965

1955

98.4

96.1

94.4

98.1

94.4

90.8

0.3

1.7

3.6

93.8

93.4

87.5

92.6

91.7

82.8

1.2

1.7

4.7

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports.

Series P-20, "School Enrollment," No. 162 Table A, and

No. 303 Table 1.
These similar enrollment rates for blacks and whites may

mask considerable differences in the actual amount of time spent

in school. Data collected in 1972 and 1973 by the Office of Civil

Rights indicate that black secondary students were nearly twice

as likely and black elementary students three times as likely as

white students to be suspended at least once during the school

year (see Table 2) . The average length of each suspension was

also longer for black students than for white students. Many of

these differences may be due to discriminatory application of

disciplinary rules, but no systematic analysis of school suspensions has been done to test this widely held conclusion.

TABLE 2. STUDENTS SUSPENDED AT LEAST ONCE DURING THE 1972-1973

SCHOOL YEAR

White Black

Elementary and Secondary Schools

Students suspended at least once (in percent) 3.1 6.0

Average length of suspension (in days) 3.55 4.46

Elementary Schools

Students suspended at least once (in percent) 0.5 1.5

Average length of suspension (in days) 3.25 3.91

Secondary Schools

Students suspended at least once (in percent) 6.0 11.8

Average length of suspension (in days) 3.57 4.55

SOURCE: Children's Defense Fund, School Suspensions; Are They

Helping Children? (Washington Research Project, Inc.,

1975), Appendix B, Table 1, p. 125. Data obtained from

OCR form OS/CR-102 for fall 1972 and fall 1973 as filed

by local school districts.
Substantial differences also exist in the age at which

students leave high school and in their status upon leaving (see

Table 3). In October 1975, 21.3 percent of nonwhite 18- and

19-year-olds were enrolled below the college level, while only

8.4 percent of whites of the same age were in secondary schools.

Among 18- to 19-year olds, a substantially greater percentage of

whites was enrolled in college. Among those not enrolled,

proportionally more whites were high school graduates.

TABLE 3. SCHOOL ENROLLMENT OF 3-TC) 19-YEAR OLD POPULATION (WHITE

AND NONWHITE), OCTOBER 1975

Percent Enrolled Not Enrolled

Not

High High

Below In School School

Population College College Graduate Graduate

White

3-4 years

5-15 years

16-17 years

18-19 years

Nonwhite

5,518

34,981

7,043

6,855

30.8

98.4

85.8

8.4

3.5

38.1

a/

2.3

38.9

69.2

1.6

8.4

14.7

3-4 years

5-15 years

16-17 years

18-19 years

1,158

6, 718

1,270

1,169

34.9

98.0

84.4

21.3

—0.1

2.9

28.2

—

—3.3

26.3

65.1

2.0

9.5

24.0

SOURCE: U. S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports,

Series P-20, No. 303, "School Enrollment," Table 1.

ji/ Less than 0.1 percent.

NOTE: Totals may not add to 100 percent because of rounding.

5
Economic factors may also influence high school (and postsecondary) enrollment. In a recent analysis of patterns of

school enrollment and retention rates of 16- to 17-year olds over

postwar business cycles (1947 to 1974), researcher Linda Nasif

Edwards found that the enrollment rates of rionwhite males varied

countercyclically with business conditions (that is, nonwhite

males were more likely to remain in school during periods of

high unemployment than in periods of low unemployment) . _!_/ White

males did not appear to respond to changes in business conditions. The enrollment rates of both white and nonwhite

females varied procyclically (that is, white and nonwhite females

were less likely to remain in school during periods of high

unemployment). This may be true because during high unemployment

cycles women often enter the labor market in search of additional

sources of family income.

Attainment

Corresponding to recent trends in enrollment, the differences in attainment between nonwhites and whites appear to be

narrowing (see Table 4) . In 1973, black men born between 1907

and 1916 (those then about 60 years old) averaged 7.14 years of

schooling; while white men of the same age averaged 10.57 years

of education, a difference of more than 3.4 years. At the

same time, black men born between 1947 and 1951 (about 25 years

old then) averaged 11.9 years of schooling and white men 13.01

years, a difference of just over one year.

JL/ Linda Nasif Edwards, "School Retention of Teenagers Over the

Business Cycle," Journal of Human Resources, Volume XI, No. 2

(Spring 1976), pp. 200-208.
TABLE 4. MEAN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT OF MEN BY RACE AND YEAR OF

BIRTH IN 1973

Year of Birth Black Hispanic aj Other b/

1947-1951

1937-1946

1927-1936

1917-1926

1907-1916

11.90

11.43

10.05

8.61

7.14

11.04

10.14

8.90

7.87

7.55

13.01

12.86

12.23

11.64

10.57

SOURCE: Robert M. Hauser and David L. Featherman, "Equality of

Schooling: Trends and Prospects" (University of Wisconsin-Madison, Institute for Research on Poverty, Reprint

193, 1976), Table 8.

_a/ Includes all nonblack males who reported that the original

nationality of their father's family was Mexican, Puerto

Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or Spanish.

Jb/ Includes whites (other than those described in previous

footnote) and nonwhites other than blacks.

Achievement _2/

Among the most comprehensive, nationwide examinations of

the achievement of children in various age groups are those

administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

In 1971 and 1975, tests of reading, mathematics, science, and

other subjects were administered to national probability samples

of nine-, 13-, and 17-year-old children. During that four-year

2_l Considerable controversy surrounds the measurement of

achievement. Many widely used standardized tests are considered faulty measures of what schools are teaching, and are

criticized as biased in their methods of testing the abilities or achievement of children from nonmajority cultures.

The argument in defense of such tests is that, flawed though

they may be, they are the only systematic method available

for assessing the achievement of students.
period, only in the youngest group of children did achievement

levels increase. At all age levels, the gap between blacks and

whites was substantial.

Among nine-year-olds tested for reading ability, the average

percentage of correct responses to test questions among black

children was 49.7 in 1971 and 54.5 in 1975, an increase of 4.8

percentage points. White children, however, on an average

responded correctly to 6.4 percent of the items in 1971 and 67.7

percent in 1975, a gain of 1.2 percentage points. In 1975,

the gap between the performance of black and white children was

still more than 13 percentage points. While the increases for

white children were uniform in all regions of the country, the

major increases among black nine-year-olds occurred in the

Southeast. There, gains of 7.7 percentage points were recorded,

compared with a 2.8 percentage point increase for blacks in the

rest of the country.

A somewhat different trend was observed in science achievement among nine-year-olds. Scores on this National Assessment

test declined for all groups except blacks in the Southeast,

for whom a gain of 2.8 percentage points was noted. Even in

that region, however, the gap between black and white students

remained substantial (a difference of 16.5 percentage points

nationally, 14.7 points in the Southeast).

Analysis of reading test scores among 13- and 17-year-olds

revealed no significant change for any group between 1971 and

1975.. In both years, the performance level of black children was

about: 17 percentage points behind that of whites for 13-year-olds

and about 19 percentage points for 17-year-olds. The National

Assessment reported similar results in other subject areas.

In a different examination of the nation's 17-year-old

population, the National Assessment (under contract with the U.S.

Office of Education's Right to Read program) found substantially

different results for a less comprehensive reading measure,

"functional literacy" (as defined by Right to Read). In that

test, students were asked to respond to 86 questions on reading

items they might normally enounter (such as street signs, store

coupons, and telephone directories). The Right to Read program

determined that any 17-year-old responding correctly to at least

75 percent of the questions in the assessment could reasonably be

considered functionally literate. In 1975, 87 percent of those

tested met this guideline. Among white students, 92 percent

8
reached the criterion, a gain of 2 percentage points since 1971.

However, among black 17-year-olds, despite a 5 percentage point

gain in four years, only 58 percent of those tested were considered functionally literate.

FACTORS THAT MAY CONTRIBUTE TO DISPARITIES

Attempts to explain the sources of disparities in enrollment, attainment, and achievement among blacks and whites have

occupied researchers for decades. Four major areas which may

contribute to these differences have been suggested: differential

school resources, segregated schooling, the appropriateness of

standard school programs for minority students, and other,

noneducational factors.

Differential School Resources

The effects of differential school resources on student

outcomes have been widely studied, with differing results.. The

two most extensively reported and debated studies, the "Coleman

Report" _3/ and Christopher Jencks' Inequality kj found little

evidence to suggest that school resources make a measurable

difference on student achievement. (It should be noted that the

Coleman data were used extensively in the Jencks study.) Other

studies, particularly those of intervention programs such as

compensatory education, have shown positive results. Even these,

however, have not shown a strong correlation between level of

funding and student outcomes, but simply that the existence of an

intervention program has improved student achievement. Harvey

Averch, in a review of research findings, notes that

Overall, the input-output studies provide

very little evidence that school resources,

in general, have a powerful impact on student

outcomes.... .The results from the input-output

James S. Coleman, Equality of Educational Opportunity, U.S.

Department of Health, Education and Welfare (1966).

Christopher Jencks, Inequality; A Reassessment of the

Effect of Family and Schooling in America (Basic Books,

1972).

95-922 O - 77 - 4
approach do not mean that school resources fail,

actually or potentially, to affect student outcomes. We simply observe that so far these

studies have failed to show that school resources do affect student outcomes. _5_/

Problems in the accurate collection of data, the inability

of researchers to measure key variables, the lack of longitudinal

data, and the use of poorly conceived statistical models have

made many of these studies of questionable use in policy decisions.

Segregated Schooling

It is often suggested that segregated schooling per se

(i.e., independent of differences in school resources) contributes to the lower achievement of black students. The major body

of research examining this question has focused on the learning

effects of desegregation. _6/ However, much of this research is

critically flawed and cannot be used to draw inferences for

public policy. Of those studies which have tested carefully

controlled groups of children, the conclusions are mixed.

The majority of studies suggest positive effects on the

achievement of black children in desegregated schools with no

measurable effect on the learning of white children. One of the

most extensive studies of this type was a 1973 evaluation of the

federal Emergency School Assistance Program (ESAP). ]J

5_/ Harvey A. Averch, "How Effective is Schooling: A Critical

Synthesis and Review of Research Findings," in Donald

M» Levine and Mary Jo Bane (editors) , The 'Inequality'

Controversy; Schooling and Distributive Justice (Basic

Books, 1975), p. 72.

jj./ See Meyer Weinberg, Minority Students; A Research Appraisal,

U.,S. Department of Health, Education arid Welfare, National

Institute of Education (March 1977).

l_l Robert L. Grain, Southern Schools: An Evaluation of the

Effects of the Emergency School Assistance Program and of

Desegregation (National Opinion Research Center, October

1973).

10
Researchers found that the achievement scores of black male high

school students attending ESAP schools were half a grade level

higher than their counterparts in non-ESAP schools by the end of

the period examined. These differences were attributed to

improvements in the racial climate which affected the motivation

of the students. Studies of the schools in Pittsburgh and

Boston by Nancy St. John found similar achievement results among

black students in integrated schools. J5/ Again, the improvement

of black children in these environments was attributed to the

skill and support of understanding school personnel, particularly

teachers.

Other studies of multiracial schooling have found mixed

results or no discernible effect on student achievement. Only a

very few studies have found desegregation to have negative

effects on the learning rates of white or nonwhite students.

These latter studies are, again, riddled with methodological

problems which discount much of their usefulness. _9/

The Appropriateness of Standard Programs for Minority Students

The curriculum in most elementary and secondary schools is

based on certain assumptions about the backgrounds and attitudes

of students. Elementary school reading curricula, for example,

assume that students arrive with certain prereading skills

assimilated from their home environments or preschool experiences. Most secondary schools assume that students arrive with

particular skills that allowed them to complete the primary

grades. For the majority of students at each grade level, these

assumptions result in an appropriate curriculum. For a number of

other students, however, the assumption of a "standard" background or preparation is not appropriate and does not allow many

children to meet their full potential within the standard curriculum. Included among them are the handicapped, the gifted and

talented, and children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Black

children are disproportionately represented among the disadvantaged and, consequently, often seem to respond less well to

regular school programs than other children do.

JJ/ See, for example, Nancy H. St. John, School Integration,

Classroom Climate and Achievement. ERIC ED-052-269 (January

1971).

J9/ See Weinberg, op. cit.

11
Within supplemental compensatory education programs, black

children appear to be improving at approximately the same rate as

other children during the school year. Many of these special

programs are designed by black teachers for predominantly black

groups of children. However, there is no evidence to indicate

that black children perform any better under these circumstances

than in a predominantly white compensatory education environment.

(Further discussion of the efficacy of compensatory education

appears later in this chapter.)

Noneducational Factors

Most of the analyses of enrollment, attainment, and achievement data arrive at the same conclusion: that differences

between blacks and whites along these educational measures are

attributable largely to noneducational factors. Family income,

parental education, and socioeconomic status of the student's

community consistently explain more of the variance in the

educational experiences of blacks and whites than do school

factors such as dollars spent per pupil or teacher experience.

This is not to suggest that schools could not do a better job of

educating particular students than they now do or that school

resources are not important. It simply means that, on the

average, other factors are more influential in determining

educational outcomes of students from both racial groups.

In examining data on educational attainment described

earlier (see Table 4), University of Wisconsin researchers Robert

Hauser and David Featherman found that the narrowing gap in

average years of schooling between blacks and whites was largely

due to differences in their social and economic experiences.

They noted that

The disadvantages in schooling associated

with...black skin or Spanish origin appear to

be declining, but those associated with poorly

educated or low status fathers and with large

families have persisted. Family origins

consistently explain at least 55 percent of

the variance in schooling, and perhaps as

much as 70 percent. 10/

10/ Robert M. Hauser and/ David L. Featherman, "Equality of

Schooling: Trends and Prospects" (University of Wisconsin-,

Madison, Institute for Research on Poverty, Reprint 193,

1976), p. 99.

12
Many of the same conclusions appear throughout the literature on nonschool factors influencing student achievement. The

"Coleman Report" concluded that factors beyond the control of

the schools were most directly responsible for differences in

student achievement; the report cited especially socioeconomic

characteristics of schools and family background characteristics of students. Jencks, in reexamining the Coleman data and

other studies, concluded that even those measures were only

weakly influential and that the explanation for differences in

student scores rested outside variables which were measured in

any of the studies reviewed. As was mentioned earlier, however,

these studies may conceal the effects of major influences on

student achievement.

Very little work has been done on the effects on student

achievement of secondary factors such as housing or family

health. In a recent paper, Henry Aaron noted that

All such research contains an enormous bias

toward finding no statistically significant

results because data are poorly measured,

because models omit important variables, because mathematical forms are incorrectly specified, or because only cross-sectional data are

available when longitudinal surveys or experiments are required, ll/

He concluded that "social science provides no justification for

advocating policies in each of these...areas because of favorable impacts 6n education." 12/

CURRENT FEDERAL POLICY AND ITS IMPACT

Federal Preschool and Elementary-Secondary Education Programs

Partly in response to the disparities in the experiences of

blacks and whites (arid other groups) and the perceived sources of

those differences, the Congress has taken three major legislative

ll/ Henry Aaron, Healthy. Wealthy, and Wise; Backdoor Approaches

to Education (July 1976; mimeo), p. 12.

12/ Ibid., p. 13.

13
initiatives: Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education

Act, the Head Start program, and the Emergency School Aid Act

(and its predecessor, the Emergency School Assistance Program).

In addition, special programs for the disadvantaged in vocational

education and research sponsored by the National Institute of

Education's Educational Equity Group focus on these issues.

Together these responses address the first three factors mentioned above — differential school resources, segregated schooling, and standard programs that ignore minority needs. Other

federal programs (such as medicaid, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, food stamps, arid various housing assistance programs) have focused on nonschool influences. The discussion

here, however, will be confined to educational initiatives.

ESEA Title I. Title I of the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act (ESEA) is the major national effort in compensatory

education. Through this program, over $2 billion in federal

funds are expended annually. The U.S. Office of Education estimates that state spending on state-sponsored compensatory

education programs is about one-fourth that amount. 13/ No

estimate of local spending on compensatory education has been

made. In contrast to compensatory education, federal spending

for general education services for the general student population

is minimal. 14/

Title I funds are targeted on schools serving high concentrations of children from low-income families; these funds

provide reading, mathematics, and language arts instruction,

resource centers, and some medical and dental services. Children

are selected to participate in Title I programs based on their

need for compensatory services independent of family income.

About 34 percent of students in compensatory programs are black,

compared to about 14.5 percent of elementary-secondary school

enrollment.

13/ U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of

Education, State Compensatory Education Programs, Publication No. (OE)75-07107.

14/ See Congressional Budget Office, Elementary-Secondary and

Vocational Education; An Examination of Alternative Federal

Roles (January 1977).

14
A major component of the Title I program directly addresses

the question of differential school resources, in this case among

schools serving different socioeconomic groups. In order to

receive Title I funds, a school district must assure the Office

of Education that the amount of resources devoted per child in

Title I schools is roughly equal to that in non-Title I schools,

excluding Title I monies. While no data were collected to

monitor the shift of funds among schools in districts as they

complied with these comparability requirements, it is widely

believed that this provision greatly aided schools in areas with

large concentrations of poverty-level families.

In addition, Title I also directly addresses the problem of

the inability of standard programs to meet the needs of certain

students. Compensatory education programs are designed to aid

those, regardless of race, whom the schools' regular programs

have insufficiently affected.

Head Start. The Head Start program is a comprehensive

preschool program that includes medical, nutritive, and social

services for recipient children, over half of whom are black.

Head Start, as the name implies, attempts to improve the chances

of eligible children to participate effectively in regular school

programs. Head Start also provides differential resources to

those children who enroll, 90 percent of whom are supposed to be

from poor families.

Emergency School Aid. In June 1972, the Congress enacted

the Emergency School Aid Act (ESAA) to provide financial assistance to meet the special needs of school districts undergoing

desegregation. Additionally, the Act would encourage voluntary

reduction in minority group isolation and aid school children in

overcoming the educational disadvantages of such isolation. The

fiscal year 1977 appropriation of $240 million will be apportioned among the states largely on the basis of the number of minority group children 5 to 17 years old in each state. The Office

of Education estimates that between 40 and 60 percent of the

students in ESAA programs are black.

ESAA addresses all three major sources of disparities

between black and white students. First, it attempts to overcome

the disadvantages of segregated schooling by assisting desegregation efforts. Second, it provides additional school resources

for a variety of purposes, including educational television,

training and advisory services, and other special projects. And

third, ESAA provides funds for programs designed to meet the

needs of minority children. These include remedial instruction.

15
Vocational education. Federal funds provided through the

Vocational Education Act are intended primarily to encourage and

subsidize expenditures of state and local agencies for services

of their own choosing. For every federal dollar received, states

and local educational agencies (LEAs) spend an average of more

than $6 on vocational education. Data from state reports to the

Office of Education indicate that 15.1 percent of vocational

students are black.

About 18 percent of federal vocational education dollars in

fiscal year 1975 (about $97 million of total federal outlays of

$536 million) supported special services for disadvantaged

students, about 30 percent of whom were black. These special

services are provided through two major efforts. First, 20

percent of the federal grant to states for vocational education

is to be set aside for programs for the disadvantaged. In 1975,

when the set-aside was 15 percent, these funds were matched on an

average of over two-to-one by the states. Second, a special

program, appropriated directly by the Congress, provides additional assistance for disadvantaged students. The states spent

less than 50 cents of their own funds on this program for every

federal dollar received (there is no matching requirement for

this program). It should be noted that these figures do not

imply any degree of federal leverage over state and local funding: federal law requires, at most, a one-to-one matching of

state/local and federal funds.. Additional spending by states is

discretionary.

The Effects of Federal Programs

In examining the effects of federal education programs, it

is important to make distinctions among the types or stages of

those effects. First, one can ask, are federal funds delivered

to the intended schools and children? Second, when the funds are

delivered, are they supplementing regular school resources or are

they supplanting local revenues? Third, if federal funds represent additional resources that would not otherwise be available,

do they result in increased services or do they subsidize increases in the costs of current inputs (such as salaries)?

And finally, if new services result, are they effective in

improving achievement or attainment (where appropriate) or are

the effects dissipated by other factors?

16
Delivery of federal funds. After somewhat stormy beginnings , it now appears that funds from two of the federal programs

which disproportionately assist minority students (Title I and

ESAA) are being delivered to the intended schools and children.

The extent to which this is true for Head Start and special

vocational funds has been questioned.

An HEW analysis of 1969-1970 data found that Title I funds

went to districts with low family incomes and to urban and rural

districts in a greater proportion than would be expected if they

were distributed randomly. Title I expenditures were also found

to be neutral with respect to the property value of recipient

districts. 15/ A major update of this study, which includes all

federal education programs, is in progress.

In a recent summary of evaluations of the Emergency School

Aid Act, the Office of Education reports that

Evaluation results indicate that the grant

award process effectively targeted funds to

educationally needy school districts; school

districts targeted ESAA funds to needy schools;

schools, in turn, focused their ESAA funds on

basic skill programs directly related to student needs; and finally, at least at the elementary level, the intensity of basic skill

services received by students was directly

related to the severity of their needs. 16/

The Head Start program has not been as successful in targeting services on poor children as the Congress had intended. In a

1975 audit, the General Accounting Office (GAO) reported that at

six of eight sites examined the number of children from nonpoor

15/ Alan Ginsburg, '"Patterns of Federal Aid to School Districts,"

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Planning and Evaluation,

Technical Analysis Paper (February 1975).

16/ U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of

Education, Annual Evaluation Report on Programs Administered

by the U.S. Office of Education. Fiscal Year 1975. p. 174.

17
families exceeded the Head Start guideline of 10 percent. 17/ At

those six sites, 34 percent of the cases which they examined were

children from nonpoor families. A detailed income analysis was

performed at three of the sites, and the GAO found that twothirds of the nonpoor families exceeded the eligibility limits by

more than $1,000. While this small sample may not be nationally

representative, it does suggest that the Head Start program is

targeted less on the poor than intended.

A recent examination of vocational education programs for

the disadvantaged (conducted by Olympus Research Centers for the

Office of Education) indicates that these special federal funds

may not be reaching their intended recipients. 18_/ The report

suggests that there is considerable confusion at the state and

local levels as to the meaning of the term "disadvantaged." In

addition, half of the project directors interviewed did not

believe that the students enrolled in these federally funded

programs were disadvantaged. However, this study, like many

others in this area, is considerably flawed by a lack of accurate

data on the characteristics of program participants and its

results should be viewed with that perspective in mind.

Supplementary impact of federal funds. Title I and ESAA

programs are operated by school districts who might use federal

dollars to replace local resources which might otherwise have

been utilized. These federal programs therefore require local

educational agencies (LEAs) to insure that federal funds are

supplementing regular school expenditures. The degree to which

the restrictions placed on LEA spending are effective is uncertain. However, research on "fiscal substitution" in the Title

I program is in the final stages of preparation for the Compensatory Education Project of the National Institute of Education.

Professor Martin Feldstein of Harvard University indicates that

each Title I dollar allocated to a school district results in

about 67 cents in additional total expenditures on compensatory

17/ General Accounting Office, Project Head Start: Achievement

and Problems. MWD-75-51 (May 1975).

18/ John Walsh and Jan L. Totten, An Assessment of Vocational

Education Programs for the Disadvantaged Under Part B and

Part A Section 102(b) of the 1968 Amendments to the Vocational Education Act (Olympus Research Centers, December

1976).

18
programs. That is, about one-third of the Title I funds go

either to noncompensatory programs or to local tax relief. The

same study found that a dollar of unrestricted and unmatched

state foundation grant money (state general aid to education)

resulted in only J.9 cents of additional total spending.

The degree to which other federal programs (such as ESAA)

result in expenditure patterns more like that of Title I than

those of unrestricted state grants is uncertain. Examinations of

the ESAA predecessor, ESAP, revealed that funds were being used

in some instances for general aid purposes rather than for

desegregation. These findings were considered in drafting the

ESAA legislation. However, the fact that the restrictions on

ESAA, vocational education, and other programs are less stringent than those on Title I would seem to indicate that they are

less likely to be as fiscally effective.

While there are no studies of the degree to which Head Start

funds are used for other educational purposes, the structure of

the program minimizes the possibility of fiscal substitution.

Unlike other federal education programs, Head Start grantees

include local nonprofit organizations, such as community action

agencies, as well as school districts. In addition, the target

population (preschool children) is not normally served in school

systems.

Service increases resulting from federal funds. When a

school district does find itself with additional resources, how

does it allocate them among competing priorities? Several

studies indicate that discretionary funds are largely though not

totally spent to increase services to students. One of the most

recent studies of this question is by Stephen Barro and Stephen

Carroll of RAND for the National Instiute of Education. 19/

Barro and Carroll examined the way in which school district

spending patterns changed when budgets were increased. They

found that while increments above base-year levels were largely

spent on teachers, the amount so distributed was proportionally

19/ Stephen M. Barro and Stephen J. Carroll, Budget Allocation by

School Districts; An Analysis of Spending for Teachers and

Other Resources (RAND, R-1797-NIE, December 1975).

19
less than in the base budget and was more often used to reduce

class size than to increase salaries. They also found that

dollars were directed in greater proportion than in the base

budget to one-time or limited-duration expenditures for such

things as specialists, supplies, and equipment. Spending on

administrative personnel was also proportionally less than in the

base budget.

Program effects on students. There is a large body of

evidence, particularly from studies completed in the last five

years, indicating that three of the programs examined in this

paper (Title I, Head Start, and EmergencySchool Aid) have positive effects on the achievement of recipient students. The

effects of these programs on enrollment or attainment have not

been systematically studied, however.

While increased academic achievement is only one of the many

goals of Title I, it is" the one which has received the most

attention from researchers. A number of studies have been

completed which indicate that, during a school year, Title I

students on the average seem to gain on noncompensatory students

in the number of correct responses on reading tests. 20/ One of

the methods chosen by researchers to express these changes was to

compute the number of correct responses by compensatory students

as a percent of the number of correct responses by noncompensatory students. Gains during a school year averaged five points

at the fourth and sixth grade levels. For example, compensatory

students increased their number of correct responses from 70

percent to 75 percent of the correct answers of students in

schools without compensatory programs at the fourth grade

level. Increases of 13 percentage points wer«; noted at the second

grade level. These data also reveal that, within the school

year, black children in compensatory programs learn at the same

rate as other compensatory students.

Evidence is beginning to accumulate that, while Title I

students gain in ability during a school year, they lose some of

their gains during the summer. In particular, those students who

started out at the lowest achievement levels (and made the most

dramatic improvements) appear to experience the greatest summer

losses. Black children seem to be disproportionately represented

20/ See U.S. Office of Education, Office of Planning, Budgeting,

and Evaluation, A Study of Compensatory Reading Programs; A

Technical Summary (1976), and supporting documents.

20
in this group. However, additional studies of this question are

under way and will be available during the debate over the

reauthorization of ESEA.

Research has recently been completed on the effectiveness of

various types of supplementary instruction on blacks and whites

alike. Abt Associates, in examining the success of various

models of instruction used in the planned variation experiments

of the Follow Through program, 21/ has found that programs that

stress basic skills through traditional, formal instructional

methods are generally more effective in raising the achievement

score levels of participating students than are less structured

methods.

A major review of Head Start research of the last ten years

was recently completed by the Social Research Group of The George

Washington University for HEW's Office of Child Development. A

majority of studies examined by the group showed gains in achievement and cognitive development were made by program participants. For example, one study found that Head Start participants, entering the program with 18-month deficits in language

development, improved an average of 13 months during an eightmonth period. Another study found average I.Q. gains of 5.6

points over those of nonparticipants. Children who have shown

gains in cognitive development often lose these advantages; when

placed in regular school programs and require additional assistance through the Follow Through or Title I compensatory programs.

However, researchers have generally found that "Head Start

participants performed equal to or better than their peers when

21/ Because of its small size ($59 million in fiscal year

1978 appropriations) and the experimental nature of its

operations, the Follow Through program was not examined in

detail in this paper. The program was designed to provide

supplementary educational services for those Head Start

preschool children who needed additional assistance once they

entered a regular school program.

21
they began regular school and there were fewer grade retentions

22_l and special class placements." 23/

The differences in achievement by Head Start participants of

different races are currently under study. The Office of Child

Development reports that at this stage of the analysis it appears

that black children generally make greater achievement gains than

white children (though a gap between the two still exists at the

end of the test period), and that greater gains are made by

children from low-income and single-parent families. It should

be noted, however, that black children are disproportionately

represented among these latter groups. The improvement of black

children independent of these social and economic characteristics

has not been thoroughly studied and no conclusions can be drawn.

The degree of effectiveness of ESAA-funded instructional

programs of effectiveness is uncertain. A major study of ESAA

program participants found considerable achievement gains. 24/

At the end of a five and one-half month observation period, ESAA

students were achieving at the same rate or better than average

children in average schools. However, further analysis revealed

that students in non-ESAA schools in the same districts were

experiencing the same achievement gains. Researchers found

that districts were apparently motivated to find additional

resources to fund ESAA-type programs in their remaining needy

schools (an unintended benefit of the program). Other evaluations are planned to determine the extent of achievement

gains resulting from this program.

Vocational education and its federal support are difficult to characterize as either success or failure. The principal

22/ "Grade retention" is polite phraseology for "flunking a

grade."

_23/ Ada Jo Mann, Adele Harrell, and Maure Hurt, Jr., A Review of

Head Start Research Since 1969 (working draft prepared

by the Social Research Group, George Washington University,

for Office of Child Development, U.S. Department of Health

Education and Welfare, December 1976), p. 5.

J.E. Coulson, et al., The First Year of Emergency School Aid

Act (ESAA) Implementation; Preliminary Analysis (System

Development Corporation, September 1975).

22
goal of vocational education is to improve the employment skills

and resulting job opportunities of participating students.

Unfortunately, there are a number of difficulties in examining

these effects. Vocational educators usually measure program

success by growth in enrollments, growth in completions, and the

percentage of students looking for work who find jobs in their

general area of training. While these factors are surely important, each is an incomplete measure of success. More appropriate

measures of program success would include the differences between

vocational and nonvocational students in wage rates, the average

time before job placement, and average hours and earnings during

the first year or two. The fact that such data are not systematically collected is a major impediment to the evaluation of

vocational education. Few of the studies using some or all of

these measures have noted any differences in success in the job

market between vocational education and general or academic

students looking for work. What few differences there are seem

to vanish within five years. 25/ These general experiences seem

to apply equally to blacks and whites. A study at North Carolina

State University's Center for Occupational Education has found,

perhaps significantly, that available manpower data are rarely

used by vocational administrators and counselors to alter curricula to meet changing labor market demands or to improve job

opportunities. 26 /

25/ See, for example, John T. Grasso, The Contributions of

Vocational Education. Training and Work Experience to the

Early Career Achievements of Young Men (Ohio State University, Center for Human Resources Research, July 1975).

26/ D.W. Drewes and Douglas S. Katz, Manpower Data and Vocational Education; A National Study of Availability and Use

(North Carolina State University at Raleigh, Center for

Occupational Education, 1975).

23

CHAPTER III. INEQUALITIES IN POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION

TRENDS IN ENROLLMENT AND DEGREE ATTAINMENT

Enrollment

Between 1965 and 1975 there was a substantial increase in

the enrollment of black students in college. This increase

raised their share of enrollments from 4.8 percent in 1965 to 9.8

percent in 1975 (see Appendix Table A-l). However, blacks have

been and continue to be underrepresented in college when compared

to their share of the 14- to 34-year-old population.

The gap between the percent of blacks enrolled in college

and their percent of the population has been narrowing (see Table

5). In 1965, 4.8 percent of all enrolled students 14 to 34 years

old were black, while 11.1 percent of that age group in the

entire population were black — a gap of 6.3 percentage points.

By 1975 this gap was down to 2.1 percentage points. The growth

of student financial assistance and prevailing economic conditions perhaps influenced black student enrollments to a gjreater

degree than white enrollments. The evidence, though, does not

allow a precise explanation of these changes.

In 1970, 6.2 percent of the 1.6 million first-time, fulltime college students were black. \J For the same year blacks

were 7 percent of total enrollment (full- and part-time). 2.1

Similarly, for the following four years, the percent of blacks

enrolled among all students equaled or exceeded the percent of

new full-time students who were black, primarily because blacks

are more heavily represented among the part-time student population (see Appendix Table A-2).

_!_/ American Council on Education and Cooperative Institutional

Research Program, The American Freshman: National Norms

(1970). The National Norms for Freshmen tabulates enrollments of first-time, full-time students by race and other

student-reported social and financial characteristics.

J2/ U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Report, Series

P-20, "School Enrollment," Nos. 162, 222, 303.
TABLE 5. POPULATION, PERCENT ENROLLED IN COLLEGE, AND PERCENT IN

POPULATION OF 14- to 34-YEAR-OLD PERSONS BY RACE FOR

1965, 1970, and 1975

Black

Year

1975

1970

1965

Total

14- to 34-

year-old

Population

73,523

62,873

54,190

All

Races

Percent

Enrolled

13.2

11.8

10.5

Percent

of

enrollment

9.8

7.0

4.8

Percent

in

Population

11.9

11.7

11.1

Percent

Representation

82.4

59.8

43.2

Degree Attainment

Since 1960 the percent of both the white and black 25- to

34-year-old population that has completed at least four years of

college has almost doubled. In 1960, 4.1 percent of the black

population in this age group had completed four years of college,

while 11.9 percent of the white population had. In 1974, 8.1

percent of the black population and 21.0 percent of the white

group had. In 14 years, progress was made for both racial

groups, but blacks still remained significantly behind whites in

postsecondary educational attainment (see Table 6).

26
TABLE 5. (Continued)

87.8

91.2

93.7

White Other

Percent

of

Enrollment

Percent

in

Population

Percent

Representation

Percent

of

Enrollment

Percent

in

Population

Percent

Representation

86.3

87.2

87.7

101.7

104.6

106.8

2.4

1.8

1.5

1.8

1.2

1.2

133.3

150.0

125.0

SOURCE: Data from U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population

Report. Series P-20, "School Enrollment," Nos. 162, 222,

303.

However, these data would tend to underestimate the attainment of blacks because students who received degrees at community

colleges are not included, nor are students who were affected by

the dramatic growth in need-based federal student aid programs

since 1972. Minority students were much more likely to be

represented among these groups, although an exact accounting is

not possible because data on specific degree attainment by race

are not collected nationally, routinely, and comprehensively for

all levels of postsecondary education. _3_/

I/ Beginning in fall 1976 the Office of Civil Rights (OCR)

required institutions to report degree completion data by

race. (These data will soon be available for examination.)

For these data OCR relies, primarily, upon self-identification data collected by the .institutions. Since the

institutions cannot require students to report their race,

many institutions have a high percentage of nonrespondents.

27
TABLE 6. PERCENT OF POPULATION 25 TO 34 YEARS OLD WHO COMPLETED

FOUR YEARS OF COLLEGE OR MORE

Year Black White

1974

1970

1966

1960

8.1

6.1

5.7

4.1

21.0

16.6

14.6

11.9

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, The Social and Economic

Status of the Black Population in the United States,

Series P-23, No. 54.

FACTORS THAT MAY CONTRIBUTE TO DISPARITIES

Many variables may explain the differences in postsecondary

enrollment and educational attainment among racial groups.

Among them are income and other measures of financial strength,

academic proficiency, school choice, motivation, and cultural

differences. From the perspective of federal postsecondary

policymakers, these variables fall into two groups, divided by

the degree of control that the federal government can or does

exert on them. Financial and educational variables (income,

academic ability, school type, motivation, etc.) can and have

been influenced to some degree by direct federal action, while

social and cultural variables (language problems, etc.) have not

been considered as problems to be dealt with through federal

postsecondary policy. No matter what degree of federal control

is present, these factors all work toward producing different

enrollment and completion rates among racial groups.

Differences in Income or Financial Strength

Comparing families with about the same ability to pay,

proportionately more black students enrolled in college in

fall 1972 than white students. Among those students with

incomes under $7,500, the enrollment rate for blacks was 49

28
percent and for whites, 44 percent (see Table 7). k_l In three

of the four income quartiles, the enrollment rate of black

students exceeded that of whites. Overall enrollment among

blacks, however, stayed lower than that of whites (53 percent for

blacks, 58 percent for whites) because a greater proportion of

blacks fell in the lower income quartiles; in the lower quartiles, enrollment rates were lower for all students in general.

TABLE 7. COLLEGE ENROLLMENT RATES OF HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS BY

INCOME QUARTILE AND RACE IN FALL 1972

Family

Income O.uartiles

(approximate

income ranges)

All

Students' Black White Other

(Percent of Enrollment in Parentheses)

Lowest

($0-7,500)

Second

($7,500-10,500)

Third

($10,500-15,000)

Highest

($15,000 and up)

45 49 (60) 44 (21) 47 (57)

53 56 (21) 52 (22) 49 (22)

55 (12) 58 (29) 49 (16)

72 77 ( 7) 72 (28) 53 (12)

All Incomes 57 57 (100) 58 (100) 48 (100)

SOURCE: National Longitudinal Survey Of High School Seniors In

1972, tabulated by College Entrance Examination Board

for the National Center for Education Statistics.

W Surprisingly, these enrollment rates occurred prior to the

surge in federal student assistance which began in the

1973-1974 academic year with Basic Grants.

29
A similar conclusion can be drawn from October 1975 Bureau

of the Census data which show the percent of 18- to 24-year-old

dependents enrolled in college by race and income class (see

Table 8). In every income group, except that between $15,000 and

$20,000, the enrollment rate of 18- to 24- year old blacks

exceeded that of white students,. 5/

TABLE 8. PERCENT OF PRIMARY FAMILY MEMBERS 18-24 YEARS OLD, ENROLLED IN COLLEGE

BY INCOME AND RACE, OCTOBER 1975: INCOMES IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS

All No

Incomes 0-5 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25 Response

and above

Black

number

percent

White:

number

percent

2,890

21

19,666

27

1,001

16

2,079

14

955

24

4,779

14

467

24

4,951

22

161

34

2,695

34

57

47

1,793

41

44

66

1,832

58

203

16

1,536

31

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Report. Series P-20, No.

303, "School Enrollment."

Differences in Academic Proficiency b_l

Of a national sample of 1972 high school seniors 21 percent

of the white students and 60 percent of the black students were

5/ However, the small sample used to obtain the black distribution introduces significant sampling errors which could

negate the conclusions drawn from the data.

67 Most techniques that measure educational achievement, proficiency, or ability have been criticized as culturally biased,

by intent or accident. Grade averages, rank in class, and

college entrance test scores have all been questioned as

sound measures of how well students really perform and learn

in school. The basic argument for their continued use is the

lack of a widely acceptable substitute.

30
in the lowest "measured ability" quartile. ]_/ However, within an

ability quartile, results from the same sample found college

enrollment rates to be slightly higher among blacks in the first

two quartiles, somewhat lower in the third, and almost the

same in the fourth (see Table 9) . 8/

Differences in School Choice

The school in which students initially enroll may have

considerable effect on their chances of obtaining their desired

years of schooling. For minority students, as for other students, the variables that primarily influence school choice —

peer pressure, parental advice, lack of information, cost, and

financial aid — may in fact limit their range of schooling

opportunities, excluding some schools that may better promote

their educational potential. A recent research study revealed

that almost two-thirds of all 1972 high school seniors applied to

only one postsecondary institution. However, in general,, the

schools applied to by an individual student who did apply to

several schools were similar. _9/ This suggests that some students perhaps are not aware of or are unable to afford a wide

range of available opportunities, while others may, in fact, have

substantial information and resources to do so but choose not to.

However, there has been little research measuring the strength of

]_/ "Measured ability" is a composite index of high school rank

in class and grade point average; it does not reflect: the

results of any standardized achievement test. It is the

measure of academic ability used in this particular survey,

a nationally representative longitudinal data base. The

Congressional Budget Office's reporting of the results does

not imply an endorsement of this measure.

_8/ Again, as when measuring enrollment rates by income group,

the small sample size within quartiles introduces the potential for sampling error which could, within any one quartile,

reverse the black^white relationship.

_9_/ Gregory Jackson, "Financial Aid to Students and the Demand

for Postsecondary Education," (Ed.D. dissertation, Harvard

University School of Education, 1977). Similar type is

measured by control (public or private) and scope (two year,

four year or university).

31
federal financial aid in altering a student's decision about

which school to attend; nor has there been adequate research on

the effects of. one type of school or another on completion rates.

A study designed to answer these questions is currently under way

for the Office of Education. It is scheduled for completion in

fall 1978.

TABLE 9. COLLEGE ENROLLMENT RATES a./ BY RACE AND MEASURED

ABILITY, FALL 1972

Measured Ability Quartiles b/

All

Lowest Second Third Highest Ability Levels

(percent of enrollment in parentheses)

All Students 35 50 62 75 57

Black Students

White Students

39

(27)

34

(20)

54

(34)

50

(27)

52

(20)

63

(22)

74

(19)

75

(32)

53

(100)

58

(100)

SOURCE: Tabulation of data from National Longitudinal Survey

of High School Seniors in 1972 by College Entrance

Examination Board under contract to the National Center

for Education Statistics.

aj Percent of spring 1972 high school graduates who enrolled

in fall 1972.

b/ "Measured ability" from a composite index of high school rank

in class and grade point average.

32
Differences in Motivation. Aspirations, and Social Pressure

The combination of peer, parental, educational, and other

social stimuli molds an individual's values, motivations, and

aspirations including his desire for postsecondary education.

The importance of each factor differs for each person and is not

readily measurable. Those with lower aspirations or motivation

are less likely to enroll. A student's motivation for postsecond

ary education can only be superficially measured by examining

students' plans for college attendance.

The data suggest there is substantial motivation (measured

as students' plans) among blacks and whites to attend school

beyond high school. However, tying these data with enrollment

rates suggests that black students fulfilled their plans, at

most, 60 percent of the time, compared to 69 percent of the time

for white students.

Between 1972 and 1974 the percent of high school seniors who

planned to attend college decreased. Among black students the

percent who planned to enroll decreased from 89 to 82 percent,

while that for white students fell from 85 to 81 percent. Most

of the decline was among male students, perhaps in response to

changes in the draft laws. In 1972, 86 percent of male high

school seniors had plans for postsecondary education. By 1974

this proportion had dropped to 81 percent. At the same time,

plans of female high school seniors remained fairly constant,

except for a 3 percent decrease in those desiring to attend

vocational school.

In 1975 there was an upsurge of interest among high school

seniors to attend postsecondary education over the prior two

years. According to the fall 1975 Census Bureau data, 84 percent

of all students planned to (or might) attend some form of postsecondary education: 83 percent of white students, and 86

percent of black students (a rise of 4 percentage points from

1974). (See Table 10.)

Cultural Differences

Language barriers, the treatment of women in certain cultures, family structure, the value placed on education, and other

cultural differences can play a part in explaining enrollment and

attainment differences between racial groups in postsecondary

33
TABLE 10. PLANS TO ATTEND COLLEGE OF HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS 14 TO 34 YEARS

OLD, BY RACE, 1972 TO 1975 a/

Race Number

of Reporting

Student College

and Plans

Year (thousands)

Percent

Percent Percent Plan or

Plan To May

Attend Attend

Percent Per- PerSubtotal cent cent

May Attend Post- No

Vocational Secondary School All

College College School Plans Plans Plans

White

1975

1974

1973

1972

Black

2,780

2,927

2,858

2,785

49

44

43

46

24

26

28

26

10

10

11

12

(83)

(81)

(82)

(85)

17

20

18

15

100

100

100

100

1975

1974

1973

1972

462

422

451

413

41

36

39

45

35

32

34

33

11

15

10

11

(86)

(82)

(83)

(89)

13

18

18

11

100

100

100

100

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, College Plans of High School Seniors.

Series P-20, No. 299, Table B.

a_l Excluding seniors not reporting..

education. The extent of the influence of these factors is not

accurately known but they can be presumed to inhibit many potential students from entering and successfully completing higher

education. Except for language barriers, which have received

some attention through federal bilingual demonstration projects

at the elementary and secondary levels, these problems are not

addressed by the federal government at the postsecondary level.

34
DISTRIBUTION AND IMPACT OF FEDERAL POSTSECONDARY ASSISTANCE

The federal objective of equalizing educational opportunity

applies to all potential students who are considered educationally or financially "disadvantaged." A good portion of

federal postsecondary assistance flows to minority students as a

result of their overrepresentation among these kinds of "dis

advantaged" students. However, racial inequities in postsecondary education are not addressed directly through present

federal postsecondary education programs.

Funds flow to minority students largely through the major

Office of Education student assistance programs and some institutional assistance programs, 10/ through veterans' readjustment

benefits, and through social security educational benefits;. In

fiscal year 1977, outlays for these programs will total about

$8.4 billion.

Through 1974 about 10 percent: of the 4.4 million cumulative

beneficiaries in the veterans' education program were black; they

received about 9 percent of the 10.8 billion in cumulative

benefits, ll/ Among the 680,000 social security educational

beneficiaries at the end of 1974, 16 percent were black and

they received 13 percent of the $900 million in benefits!. 12/

Since the Congress can do little directly to alter the chances

that a minority family per se receive social security or veterans' educational benefits, the following section will concentrate

on the racial distribution of recipients and funds spent In the

more discretionary Office of Education programs.

10/ Included here are Basic Grants, Supplemental Grants, College

Work-Study, Direct Loans, Guaranteed Loans, Strengthening

Developing Institutions, and Trio programs.

ll/ An estimate based on data from "Voucher Funding of Training:

A Study of the G.I. Bill," prepared by Dave M. O'Neill and

Sue Ross, Center for Naval Analysis, (PRI: 312-76).

12/ Office of Research and Statistics, Social Security Administration. The percent of funds received by blacks is slightly less than the percent of beneficiaries who are black

because, on average, black insured workers earn less during

their working lifetime and qualify for lesser benefits.

35
Participation in Office of Education Postsecondary Programs

Student assistance programs. Basic Educational Opportunity

Grants (Basic Grants) and Guaramteed Student Loans (GSL) are the

two major programs that do not routinely solicit racial or ethnic

data on theiri application forms. The three other major student

assistance programs do require institutions to report recipients

and funds spent by race. They are the Supplemental Grants,

Direct Student Loans, and College Work -Study programs. These

data collection differences make it difficult to construct

a clear picture of the racial distribution of student aid.

The "need targeting" of Basic Grants guarantees that minority students, who tend to be disproportionately represented among

the more financially needy, receive a substantial share of

awards. In fiscal year 1977 about 85 percent of Basic Grants

funds will flow to dependent and self-supporting students with

family incomes and student incomes below $10,000. 14/ If blacks

are as equally represented in the Basic Grants program as they

are among enrolled students with family incomes under $10,000,

about 27 percent of Basic Grants recipients would be black.

A special sample survey showed that in fiscal year 1973

about 14 percent of Guaranteed Student Loan borrowers were black,

85 percent were white, and 2 percent were classified under other

races. 15 / The average loan of black borrowers was somewhat less

than that of white borrowers. Attendance by black students at

13/ The Basic Grants program does not collect any racial or

ethnic data, and none are available from any other reliable,

nEttional source. In the Guaranteed Loan program, the only

evidence available is from a comprehensive survey of lenders

arid borrowers that supplies borrower characteristics by race

through fiscal year 1973.

14/ See Congressional Budget Office, Postsecondary Education;

The Current Federal Role and Alternative Approaches (February

1977) , for further discussion.

15/ Analysis of Student Borrower and Loan Characteristics in the

Guaranteed Student Loan Program, (prepared by Systems Group,

Inc. for the U.S. Office of Education under contract no. OEC-0-

73-1362, 1974).

36
lower-cost schools and their access to assistance under other

federal student aid programs may partially explain this difference. When more recent data become available, it would not be

surprising to discover that the difference between average loans

by race has increased, s-ince the expansion of Basic Grants in

conjunction with existing programs may be sufficient to fully

meet many black students' needs without reliance upon the Guaranteed Loan program.

In fiscal year 1973, 16/ over $900 million was spent on

about 1.3 million students for the three "campus-based" student

aid programs — Direct Loans, Supplemental Grants, and College

Work-Study (see Table 11). Black students received 28 percent of

the funds spent ($257 million) and were 24 percent of all recipients (313,000). The average white recipient was granted $677

from these sources; the aVerage black awardee received $821.

Though black students received smaller average awards under two

of the three campus-based programs, a black student was about

five times as likely as a white student to receive multiple

awards. This is why

 v their overall average surpasses that for

white students.

Institutional assistance programs. Among the dozen or so

federal programs that assist postsecondary institutions, two have

the intended purpose of targeting aid to disadvantaged students

through the secondary or postsecondary schools they attend.. One

program, Strengthening Developing Institutions (1977 appropriations: $110 million), supports those schools which require

financial bolstering in order to reach their academic and managerial potential. The other program, Special Programs for

Students from Disadvantaged Backgrounds (1977 appropriations: $85

million), offers remedial counseling, information, and referral

services through Talent Search, Upward Bound, Special Services,

Educational Opportunity Centers, and the newly authorized service

learning centers.

Under the Developing Institutions program about 250 schools

are assisted. Black students comprise about 35 percent of the

enrollment at these schools, and predominantly black institutions

receive about 50 percent of the program's funds (see Tables 12

and 13) .

16/ The last period for which final and reliable fiscal operations data are available.

37
TABLE 11. AMOUNTS SPENT, RECIPIENTS, AND AVERAGE AWARDS OF

CAMPUS-BASED STUDENT ASSISTANCE, BY RACE, FOR FISCAL

YEAR 1973

Programs

Direct Supplemental College

Loans Grants Work-Study Total

Amounts Spent in Millions of Dollars

All Races

Black

White

Other

All Races

Black

White

Other

433

94

272

67

640

145

392

103

(100)

(22)

(63)

(15)

Number

(100)

(23)

(61)

(16)

189

75

79

35

(100)

(40)

(42)

(19)

of Recipients

331

178

105

48

(100)

(54)

(32)

(15)

Average Assistance

All Races

Black

White

Other

677

648

694

650

571

421

752

729

296

88

160

48

in

538

138

319

81

in

550

638

502

593

(100)

(30)

(54)

(16)

918

257

511

150

(100)

(28)

(56)

(16)

Thousands a/

(100)

(26)

(59)

(15)

Dollars

1278

313

755

209

718

821

677

718

(100)

(24)

(59)

(16)

SOURCE: Division of Student Financial Aid, Bureau of Postsecondary Education.

NOTE: Numbers in parentheses are column percents.

aj "Total" column and "All Races" row are unduplicated counts of

recipients.

38
TABLE 12. STRENGTHENING DEVELOPING INSTITUTIONS (BASIC AND

ADVANCED INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM) AWARDS FOR

FISCAL YEAR 1976

Average

Type of Number of Total Funds Per

Institution Institutions Funds Institution

Predominantly Black

Institutions 68 $54,580,000 $802,650

Predominantly White

Institutions 169 $55,420,000 $327,930

All Institutions 237 $110,000,000 $464,135

SOURCE: Advisory Council on Developing Institutions, Annual

Report, March 1977.

TABLE 13. ENROLLMENT AT DEVELOPING INSTITUTIONS (FUNDED UNDER

TITLE III) BY RACE, IN FISCAL YEAR 1976

Number Percent

Race Enrolled Enrolled

Black 267,800 35.3

White 389,100 51.3

Other 101,400 13.4

Total 758,300 100.0

SOURCE: Division of Institutional Development, Bureau of Postsecondary Education, unpublished data.

39
Iii three of the special programs for the disadvantaged

(the Trio of Talent Search, Upward Bound, and Special Services)

50 percent of the students served were black; 23 percent were

white. A greater than average percent of those receiving intensive a.cademic and counseling services through Special Services

(at the college level) or Upward Bound (at the high school level)

were black students. (See Table 14.)

TABLE 14. PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF "TRIO" STUDENTS, BY RACE,

FISCAL YEAR 1976

Race

All Students Percent Percent Percent

Number Percent Black White Other

Upward Bound 62,732 23 57 27 16

Special Services 89,753 33 51 21 28

Talent Search 122,810 44 45 21 34

TOTALS 275,295 100 50 23 27

SOURCE: Compiled for CBO by the Mid-America Association of

Educational Opportunity Program Personnel from U.S.

Office of Education data.

The Impact of Student Assistance Programs

The Basic Grants program has brought a substantial amount

of federal aid to minority students during its growth from a

funding level of $122 million in fiscal year 1973 to $1.9 billion

in fiscal year 1977. Aid under the campus-based student assistance programs, which totals about $1 billion in fiscal year 1977,

has been used to augment students' awards by building up from

the Basic Grants award. Through these programs federal post

secondary assistance has concentrated, in recent years, on

lower-income, more financially needy students.

40
There are no completed studies which assess the impact on

enrollment and retention of these student assistance programs

since the introduction of the Basic Grants program in 1973-1974.

However, it is generally believed that reducing the perceived

price of postsecondary education to students will induce more

students to attend. One recent study suggests that between 1968

and 1972 "expanded financial aid programs may have increased the

likelihood individuals would attend college by somewhere between

0.3 and 2 percentage points." 17/

Certain provisions of the Education Amendments of 1976 may,

however, shift the focus of student assistance. First, the

"liberalized" Guaranteed Student Loan program — with expanded

subsidy eligibility to students from families with incomes

between $15,000 and $25,000 18/ — would facilitate loans to

students from middle- and upper-middle income families. Second,

the legislated increase in the Basic Grants maximum award from

$1400 to $1800 would allow small awards to newly eligible students from middle-income families and slightly higher awards for

some students, but no increase in awards to low-income students

who attend low-cost institutions. These provisions would tend to

reduce minority students' share of student assistance funds. But

new student consumer information provisions and the new service

learning centers may offset some of this proportionate loss by

identifying and informing more disadvantaged students of available

financial aid and educational opportunities.

The Impact of Institutional Assistance Programs

Aid to institutions will affect both the schools and their

clientele. The degree of influence on these two groups will

depend upon the interpretation of legislative intent, the administrative regulations, and the attitudes of those implementing

the program. As an example, the Developing Institutions pro17/ George B. Weathersby, Gregory A. Jackson, and others, The

Development of Institutions of Higher Education; Theory and

Assessment of Impact of Four Possible Areas of Federal

Intervention; Final Report, Appendix E, Abstract, (Harvard

University, Graduate School of Education, January 1977).

18/ This is adjusted family income which equals $19,000 to

$31,000 in adjusted gross income.

41
gram's mandate is to assist those institutions that are "out of

the academic mainstream" by improving institutional resources,

managerial skills, etc. However, a GAO evaluation study found,

among other things, that 25 percent of the administrators at

developing institutions who were polled believed that the "program should be directed toward low-income students' needs," while

70 percent believed that the "primary purpose was to strengthen

the institution." 19/ With many institutional aid programs, like

Developing Institutions, it is difficult to measure effectiveness

until there is an agreed upon set of goals or a readily identifiable target population.

Developing Institutions. The most recent evaluation and

developmental study of Developing Institutions could not assess

the program's impact on institutional development because the

available quantitative data provided no measures of development.

20/ As a remedy, the evaluators suggested that close monitoring

and well-defined eligibility criteria be established to identify

schools that would be suited for initial or advanced assistance

(Basic and Advanced Program). This suggestion was meant to guide

institutions better into and through the program and to dislodge

those that can no longer be classified as "developing."

This study also examined the impact of student aid on

developing institutions and concluded that "the only effect of

student-directed federal aid on black colleges was their share of

its modest but general effect on students' inclinations toward

college." Overall, the study argues that: student aid doesn't

disproportionately help these institutions; the effect of direct

institutional support cannot, at present, be measured; and the

measures of institutional activity (more library volumes, more

Ph.D. faculty, etc.) at Title III schools are not significantly different than at nonfunded institutions.

Trio programs. The Talent Search program placed 42,000

clients in postsecondary education in academic year 1974-1975.

About: 13,000 actual or potential dropouts were persuaded to

return to school or college. Slightly more than 3,600 were

19/ General Accounting Office,, Assessing The Federal Program For

Strengthening Developing Institutions Of Higher Education,

Report No. MWD-76-1 (October 31, 1975).

20/ George B. Weathersby, et al., op. cit.

42
enrolled in high school equivalency programs. In addition,

12,800 veterans were placed in postsecondary education, and 7,100

were enrolled in high school equivalency programs throug;h the

Talent Search effort of the Special Veterans component of the

Upward Bound program.

Program records for Special Services show that in 1974-1975

almost 15,000 students successfully completed the program: about

6,500 students showed adequate academic and personal adjustment

and moved out of the program into the regular academic channels

of the host institutions, about 5,500 graduated from the host

institutions, and about 2,500 left the host institutions to

transfer to other colleges.

The latest available Upward Bound program data show that in

1974 almost 11,000 participants completed high school and that

about 70 percent of these were planning some form of postsecondary education. About 6,300 of the 1974 graduates actually

enrolled in college the same year. The postsecondary enrollment

rate of Upward Bound high school graduates was significantly

higher than the rate for the comparison group. Also Upward

Bound enrolled a much larger proportion (76 percent) of its

students in four-year colleges than did the comparison group (45

percent), and fewer in two-year colleges and vocational-technical

schools.

However, the Trio programs suffer, in varying degrees, from

a failure to identify clearly their target population. Talent

Search seems to suffer most "from a lack of clear definition and

logic" while "its intervention models are not well-defined or

coherent." Special Services showed "little positive indication

of any significant impact...on the academic achievement of the

target population." Upward Bound, in contrast, has had a

pronounced and measurable effect on the postsecondary participation of its students, but its effectiveness in improving the

college performance or retention of participants has yet to be

tested. 21/

21/ U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Annual Evaluation Report on Programs Administered by the U.S. Office of

Education, Fiscal Year 1975, pp. 310 and 318.

43

CHAPTER IV. IMPACT OF BUDGETARY INCREMENTS TO FEDERAL PROGRAMS

ON THE EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCES OF BLACK AMERICANS

During the last 12 years, the Congress has enacted a variety

of legislation that indirectly addresses the disparities in

educational achievement and attainment between blacks and whites.

Through the Head Start preschool program, Title I elementary and

secondary compensatory education program, emergency school aid,

the Trio programs and postsecondary student assistance programs,

blacks are provided educational and financial resources in

greater proportion than their numbers in the school age population. Each of these programs has generally been shown to be

somewhat effective in meeting its particular goals. Together,

the programs can be considered a federal strategy which, among

other purposes, tries to improve the educational opportunities

and performance of minority children.

The current state of research, however, does not allow a

direct comparison of the relative effectiveness of the various

programs discussed in this paper, for at least two reasons.

First, each is aimed at (and measured by) different goals. For

example, the effectiveness of the Head Start program can be

measured in part by the performance of enrollees on achievement

tests. In contrast, the success of the Basic Grants student

aid program can be gauged by its effects on the enrollment of

low-income students. And second, most of these programs have not

existed long enough to allow researchers to measure their effects

on the one goal it could be argued they all share: to improve

the post-schooling opportunities of recipient children. Until

such research is performed, there is no hard evidence to conclude

that any one "intervention" strategy is any more effective than

another.

Meanwhile, it is useful to note the effects of different

funding strategies on the number of students served and the

proportion of additional funding that will help minority students. Table 15 summarizes the effects of each additional $100

million in the various programs thcit substantially assist minority students. In general, because most of these programs include

an income measure in order to allocate funds to those in greatest

economic need of assistance, and because blacks are dispropor-
TABLE 15. MAJOR FEDERAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS DISPROPORTIONATELY ASSISTING BLACK STUDENTS

Program

Fiscal Year 1977

Appropriation

(in millions Number of

of dollars) Recipients

Dollars

Percent Per

Black Student

Effect of An Additional $100 Million

Head Start

ESEA, Title 1

Emergency

School Aid

Vocational

Education

Student

Assistance:

Basic Grants

475

2,285

275

612

1,904 fj

349,000 50 1,505 a/ Would serve an additional 66,000 in full-year programs

at current per child spending rates.

5,605,000 b/ 34 377 Would either increase per pupil spending from $377 to

$396 or add 265,000 new regular year pupils, or open

one million summer school slots, or some combination

of these.

125 d_/ If added to state apportionment program, would fund

districts with application levels; if added to other

area, e.g., magnet schools, would add students not

served in regular LEA programs (OE estimates 50,000-

80,000 new students per $50 million in magnet schools).

15 e/ 38 Would increase federal subsidy to $44.50. Would not

likely add to number of students served or level of

service, unless earmarked for special programs.

2,200,000 c/ 40-60

16,000,000

1,975,000 27 &/ 911 Could raise ceiling $100 reaching new middle-income

eligibles; tighten contribution schedule by reducing

income breakpoint to $3,000 increasing under $10,000

incomes share of funds by 3 percentage points; loosen

contribution schedule with opposite effect.

aj Full-year cost for 292,000 children; the 46,000 children in summer programs are served at $175 per child.

W Includes children served by state agencies as well as by local educational agencies (LEAs) .

_c/ Excludes students served by educational television (3,218,056) and counts only once students served by more than

one ESAA project. .

&.I Ranges from $50 to $1,000 per student, depending on program and characteristics of LEA or nonprofit group sponsoring

services.

ej 15.1 percent of total vocational students are black; however, about 30 percent of students in special programs for

the disadvantaged are black.

fj Available funds total $1,
TABLE 15. (Continued)

Fiscal Year 1977

Appropriation

Program (in millions Number of Percent

of dollars) Recipients Black

Supplemental 250 445,000 54 h/

Grants

College Work- 390 891,000 26 h/

Study

Direct Loans 311 834,000 23 h/

Guaranteed 357 866,000 14 jj

Loans

Institutional

Assistance:

Developing 110 758,000 k_/ 35 _!/

Institutions

Special Programs 85 275,000 50

for Disadvantaged

Dollars

Per

Student Effect of An Additional $100 million

562 At current average award would serve 178,000 more students

of which about 40 percent would be low-income dependent

students.

525 At current average award would aid 229,000 additional

students — 30 percent to students from low-income families.

690 j_/ At current average loan would disburse 159,000 more loans —

over 20 percent to students from low-income families.

1,210 j_/ Increased subsidy commitments of $100 million would require

the disbursement of about 970,000 new loans at the current

average amount; new subsidy provisions suggest that these

loans would go to middle- and upper-middle income families.

145 About twice the number of institutions would be served with

significant expansion at urban institutions.

309 About 324,000 new eligibles could be served.

h/ These are Fiscal operations data from fiscal year 1973.

in each year since the inception of Basic Grants.

_i/ Survey estimate for fiscal year 1973.

j_/ Average loan per borrower.

_k/ Enrollment at Title III schools.

I/ Percent of enrollment at Title III schools.

They probably overstate the percent of blacks served
tionately represented in the lowest income groups, a substantial

portion of current assistance goes to black students. Because

any new students who will be served as a result of additional

funds in most of these programs will generally be from families

with slightly higher incom.es than those currently served, the

proportion of new black students will be less than in the group

presently served. However, their absolute numbers will remain

substantial.

In the Head Start preschool program, an additional $100

million would result in full-year services for an additional

66,000 children. At present funding levels, only about 15

percent of those eligible to receive services are enrolled; each

additional $100 million could increase that level by about 3.5

percentage points. To serve the eligible population fully would

require an additional $2.5 billion. Because new monies could be

utilized by the Office of Child Development to fund additional

centers, and the groups to be served would be quite similar to

the present enrollees, the proportion of black children added to

the program would be the^same as now, around 50 percent.

The impact of additional Title I funds is less certain.

School districts could use new monies to increase the level of

services to those currently in the program, or they could choose

to serve more children. An additional $100 million would allow

LEAs to increase average spending per child from the present $377

to about $396, or to serve an additional 265,000 children at $377

per student, or some combination of the two. Because the most

disadvantaged students are now served, the proportion of added

students who would be black would be somewhat less than the

current one-third. Just over 50 percent of the eligible children

in Title I-eligible schools are now being served. At current

levels of spending per child, around $2 billion in additional

spending would be needed to serve all of these eligible students. \_l

Another proposal receiving increasing attention is to offer

Title I programs during the summer for all regular school year

students who choose to participate. In this way the major

]L_/ $2 billion (in-addition to fiscal year 1977 appropriations of

$2.285 billion) does not include any additional funds which

may be needed annually to counteract the effects of inflation

on Title I programs.

48
drawback to the present program, the loss over the summer of

achievement gains made during the school year, might be directly

attacked. Stanford Research Institute personnel who have

been extensively studying this question indicate that if all

districts currently offering Title I programs during the school

year were to make available a summer program, about half of the

regular school year Title I children would participate. However, the researchers have also found, that summer programs are

somewhat more expensive than the regular school year offerings.

Because summer programs must often underwrite the costs of

transportation, food, and other expenditures the school district

finances during the regular school year, an average eight-week

summer program would cost about $100 per child (compared to about

$377 for a full school year Title I program in fiscal year 1977).

Very few of the more than five million Title I students now

receive summer services. To implement summer programs for the

current Title I recipients at the anticipated participation rate

of 50 percent, about $275 million would be required.

Emergency School Aid consists of a number of separate

programs; therefore, the effect of an additional $100 million

would depend considerably on where the money was directed.. If

the funds were added to a state apportionment program, school

districts with applications on file but unfunded at present

appropriation levels could be served. If the $100 million were

added to one of the other programs, such as magnet or neutral

site schools, _2_/ students who may not be served by the regular

LEA program could be reached. The Office of Education estimates

that an additional $50 million for magnet schools would assist

50,000 to 80,000 students. The proportion of these students who

_2_/ "The term 'magnet school' means a school or education center

that offers a special curriculum capable of attracting

substantial numbers of students of different racial back

grounds." (Section 720(9), ESAA.) "The term 'neutral site

school' means a school that is located so as to be accessible

to substantial numbers of students of different racial

backgrounds." (Section 720(12), ESAA.) These two devices

are commonly used by districts attempting to reduce the

concentrations of minority students in particular schools as

part of a voluntary desegregation effort. Federal funds for

these purposes are allocated to districts or groups of

districts on a project grant basis and are not apportioned

among the states (as is the case with the majority of ESAA

funds).

\

49
would be black is not known, though about half those in current

programs are black.

An additional $100 million in vocational education funding

would have little effect, both on service levels in general and

for black students in particular, unless it were specifically

earmarked for special programs for disadvantaged students. The

current federal role in the financing of vocational education

would allow the additional $100 million, if added to the basic

grant to states, to be utilisied by states and LEAs to finance

increasing costs and not to increase levels of service to students. However, an additional $100 million in special programs

for the disadvantaged would increase fivefold the current appropriation. _3/ Currently, 162,000 students are served through

this program, about 30 percent of whom are black. Approximately

450,000 additional disadvantaged students could be served by an

additional $100 million.

The impact of funding additions to postsecondary programs

are somewhat more complicated. Spending an extra $100 million

in the Basic Grants program would require some legislative or

administrative action which changes the program's award criteria.

The form of that action is critical for minority students. If

the Congress raises the award ceiling by $100, for example, this

action would bring in many new eligibles from primarily middleincome families (incomes between $15,000 and $20,000). But it

would not provide more grants for low-income students attending

community (or other low-cost) colleges. On the other hand, a

reshaping of the Basic Grants contribution schedule could

work to the advantage of low-income (disproportionately minority)

students by, for example, decreasing the proportion of a family's

income expected to pay for educational costs.

Since the distribution of campus-based student assistance

relies on the discretion of financial aid officers, who use the

results of a "needs" test as a guide, the effect of $100 million

more in any of these programs is difficult to pinpoint. Limited

data suggest that currently available funds go first to assist

the neediest students (who are disproportionately black).

Increases in assistance would likely be distributed to students

from families whose incomes average slightly higher (i.e.,

3/ The authorization for this program (as amended by Sec. 202 of

the Education Amendments of 1976) is $35 million in fiscal

year 1978.

50
proportionately fewer from minority groups) than those of the

current group of recipients. However, substantial increases in

funding for campus-based programs may aid in the recruitment of

additional low-income students.

Federal expenditures in the Guaranteed Student Loan program

depend upon the actions of lending institutions. If banks were

to make available about $1.2 billion in new loans to students,

the federal commitment for subsidy payments would increase about

$100 million. Under recent changes in the loan program's subsidy

provisions, it is likely that most of these new loans, particularly first-time loans, would be made to middle- and uppermiddle-income families (incomes between $19,000 and $31,000).

Of the 600 institutions qualified for assistance under the

Developing Institutions Program, only about 250 receive any

funds. This suggests that adding $100 million (to the fiscal

year 1977 appropriation of $110 million) would almost certainly

double the number of institutions served and would probably allow

increased- funding to many large urban institutions that are now

eligible but unfunded. This should improve the administrative

services and other activities supported by Title III funds at

schools with generally higher shares of black students.

Various estimates for the Trio programs indicate that the

275,000 students now being served constitute only 3 to 10 percent

of the target population. An additional $100 million could fund

about 324,000 new participants at the current cost per student.

Of these about 50 percent would be black students, much the same

as the proportion of present participants.

In total, over $7 billion was appropriated in fiscal year

1977 to major federal education programs that disproportionately

assist black students. While black children constitute about 14

percent of the population 3 to 24 years old, at least 14 percent

and as much as 60 percent of those served by the major efforts

described in this paper are black. Despite the fact that the

neediest students are now being served by these programs, in no

case are all of those eligible or in need served at present

levels of appropriations. Additional funding for any of these

programs would continue to assist blacks and other minority

students disproportionately.

Assessing the degree to which increased expenditures in

these programs can close any one of the educational gaps between

51
blacks and whites is beyond the current state of research.

Increases in funding, modifications in existing programs, and new

initiatives would all surely help, but the link between these

actions and changes in key educational measures is at best

uncertain. The process by which an individual's measured

abilities are enhanced is long and complex. Many variables

outside the educational sector may influence performance to a

greater degree than those within, particularly in the early years

of schooling when parental attitudes towards a child's efforts to

learn may be far more influential than the curriculum or teaching

staff . The current set of federal programs that aid this process

are beginning to have positive effects, but by themselves they

hold little hope of solving the problem.

52
APPENEiIX

TABLE A-l. COLLEGE ENROLLMENTS BY RACE FOR 1965 THROUGH 1975

(NUMBERS IN THOUSANDS)

Fall of

Academic Year

1965-66

1970-71

1971-72

1972-73

1973-74

1974-75

1975-76

SOURCE: U.S.

Total

Enrolled,

All Races

5,675

7,413

8,087

8,313

8,179

8,827

9,697

Bureau of the

•

Black

Percent

4.8

7.0

8.4

8.7

8.4

9.2

9.8

White

Percent

93.7

91.2

89.9

89.7

89.5

88.1

87.8

Census, Current Population

Other

Percent

1.5

1.8

1.7

1.5

2.1

2.6

2.4

Reports,

Series P-20, "School Enrollment."

NOTE: Since these are estimates based on a sample of the population, they are subject to some sampling variability.

The chances are 68 out of 100 that the estimates for

blacks would differ from a complete census by ± 50,000;

for whites by + 140,000; for other races, by + 20,000.

55
TABLE A-2. FIRST TIME, FULL TIME FRESHMEN BY RACE FOR 1970

THROUGH 1975

Fall of

Academic

Year

1970-71

1971-72

1972-73

1973-74

1974-75

1975-76

SOURCE:

Total

First-Time

Full-Time

Enrollments

1,617,300

1,634,150

1,557,500

1,649,000

1,673,100

1,760,500

Percent

White

Enrol lees

91.5

91.4

87.3

88.5

88.6

86.5

Percent

Black

Enrollees

6.2

6.3

8.7

7.8

7.4

9.0

American Council on Education and Cooperative

tional Research Program, The American Freshman:

al Norms (1969-1975)•

Percent

Other

Enrollees

2.2

3.9

6.1

5.2

5.6

6.7 '

InstituNationNOTE: Percentages will sum to more than 100 if students checked

more than one category.

56