NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Statistical Analysis Report March 1999

Postsecondary Education Descriptive Analysis Reports

State Aid

John B. Lee, Ed.D.

Suzanne B. Clery

JBL Associates, Inc.

C. Dennis Carroll, Project Officer

National Center for Education Statistics

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Education Research and Improvement NCES 1999-186
ii

U.S. Department of Education

Richard W. Riley

Secretary

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

Kent McGuire

Assistant Secretary

National Center for Education Statistics

Pascal D. Forgione, Jr.

Commissioner

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

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

congressional mandate to collect, collate, analyze and report full and complete statistics on the condition

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

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

systems; and review and report on education activities in foreign countries.

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

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

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

policymakers, practitioners, data users and the general public.

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

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

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

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

National Center for Education Statistics

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

555 New Jersey Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20208-5574

March 1999

The NCES World Wide Web Home Page address is

http://nces.ed.gov

Suggested Citation

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. State Aid, NCES 99-186, by

John B. Lee and Suzanne B. Clery. Project Officer: C. Dennis Carroll. Washington, DC: 1999

Contact:

Aurora D’Amico

(202)219-1365
iii

FOREWORD

This report examines the differences between undergraduates who attended postsecondary

institutions in states that provide different levels of state student financial aid. Specifically, it

describes how students combine their aid types and sources, their price of attendance, personal

characteristics, and examines the relationship between these variables and the undergraduates’

probability of attending institutions in either a high or low state aid group.

The report uses data from the 1995-96 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:96). NPSAS:96 is the fourth in a series of surveys conducted by the U.S. Department of

Education. NPSAS:96 represents students of all ages and backgrounds at all types of

postsecondary institutions (from less-than-2-year institutions that provide short-term vocational

training to 4-year colleges and universities) who were enrolled during the 1995-96 academic year.

The NPSAS surveys provide information about the price of postsecondary education and how

students pay that price.

The percentages and means presented in this report were produced using the NPSAS:96

Data Analysis System (DAS). The DAS is a microcomputer application that allows users to

specify and generate their own tables from the NPSAS data. It produces the design-adjusted

standard errors that are necessary for testing the statistical significance of differences shown in the

tables. For more information about the DAS and directions for obtaining access through the

Internet, see appendix B.
iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Writing these reports is very much a team effort. Our thanks go to all that helped during

the various phases of developing this report. Robert Harmon, Saharla Jama, Barry Christopher,

and Mary Lee of JBL Associates produced and formatted tables, checked statistical statements

and edited text. Laura Horn of MPR Associates, as always, had good ideas that helped shape the

issues, and provided diligent technical support. Dennis Carroll of NCES provided the guidance

and recommendations that come from many years of experience. Special thanks go to Ellen

Bradburn from the Education Statistics Services Institute who provided technical review. Final

reviews were provided by Alan Baldinger of the Office of the Undersecretary of

Education/Budget Service, David Bergeron of the Office of Postsecondary Education, Jacqueline

King of the American Council on Education, and Ralph Lee, Marilyn McMillen, Frank Morgan

and Kristin Perry of NCES.
v

HIGHLIGHTS

A major percentage of postsecondary education funding is contributed by states. States

provide most of this support to institutions, but some is in the form of financial aid to students.

Most (93 percent) of state student aid is in the form of grants. State funds may be awarded

directly to students or used to reduce tuition in public institutions. The amount of student aid

provided varies among states.

Even though similarities may exist among states, each represents a unique set of

circumstances. State politics, demographics and historical traditions result in various higher

education policies. This report divides states into two groups based on level of aid provided, and

compares the high state aid group, states that provided $400 or more in financial aid per

undergraduate, to the low state aid group, those that provided $100 or less in financial aid per

undergraduate. The following states were included in the high state aid group: Georgia, Illinois,

Indiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Virginia.

The following states were included in the low state aid group: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona,

Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire,

North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Wyoming.

The results suggest that students attending institutions located in the high state aid group

were charged a higher average tuition than those in the low state aid group. Undergraduates

attending any one of the three major institutional sectors (public 4-year, private, not-for-profit, 4-

year and public less-than-4-year) in the high state aid group also paid higher tuition than did those

in the low state aid group. This comparison provides a chance to evaluate what other student

characteristics might be associated with attending institutions in the high state aid group or the

low state aid group.

• Undergraduates in the high state aid group were more likely to attend private, not-for-profit,

4-year institutions than were those in the low state aid group. They also were less likely to

attend public less-than-4-year institutions than were those in the low state aid group.

• Undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group were younger and more

likely to be dependent than those in the low state aid group. Undergraduates in the high state

aid group were also less likely to be married and have dependents compared with those

attending institutions in the low state aid group.
HIGHLIGHTS

vi

• In two instances, undergraduates attending institutions in the two state aid groups did not

differ from one another statistically. The percentage of enrolled dependent undergraduates

with incomes of $20,000 or less is a good measure of the presence of low-income students in

postsecondary education. There was no significant difference in the percentage of lowincome undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group compared with those

in the low state aid group. The percentage of low-income undergraduates who were white,

non-Hispanic also did not differ significantly between the two state aid groups. In both cases,

73 percent of the undergraduates were white, non-Hispanic. The proportion of enrollment

supplied by low-income students and the percent of the enrollment represented by minority

students both provide indicators of student access. The information from the high and low

state aid groups suggests that state student aid along with the associated institutional

characteristics did not have a direct effect on the enrollment of low-income students or

minority students.

• Undergraduates in the high state aid group were more likely to have received student aid than

were those in the low state aid group. Aid recipients in the high state aid group received

$5,810 and those in the low state aid group received $3,869. Those attending institutions in

the high state aid group were more likely to have received loans, grants, and work-study

awards. Undergraduates in the high state aid group were also more likely to have received

federal aid than were those in the low state aid group. Those in the high state aid group who

received federal aid also received larger awards on average than those in the low state aid

group.

• Subtracting grant aid from tuition and fees results in net tuition. Undergraduates attending

institutions in the high state aid group were charged an average tuition of $4,334 compared

with $2,099 paid by those in the low state aid group. When all grant aid was subtracted,

undergraduates in the high state aid group paid a mean net tuition of $2,947 compared with

$1,553 paid by those in the low state aid group.

• The mean net tuition paid by undergraduates attending public less-than-4-year institutions in

the high state aid group was $639 compared with $316 paid by those in the low state aid

group. However, undergraduates in the high state aid group did not pay a significantly higher

net tuition in private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions or public 4-year institutions.

• Dependent undergraduates in every income category paid a higher net tuition if they attended

institutions in the high state aid group than if they attended in the low state aid group. On

average, dependent undergraduates with incomes of less than $20,000 paid a mean net tuition
HIGHLIGHTS

vii

of $2,648 compared with $1,616 paid by those in the low state aid group. The only

institutional sector in which undergraduates with incomes of less than $20,000 paid a

significantly higher net tuition in the high state aid group compared with those in the low state

aid group was public less-than-4-year institutions, $644 compared with $261.
viii

CONTENTS

FOREWORD .......................................................................................................................... iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................................................................iv

HIGHLIGHTS..........................................................................................................................v

LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................................ix

INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................1

Background.....................................................................................................................6

The State Student Incentive Grant program..........................................................8

Defining state student financial aid........................................................................9

Data issues...........................................................................................................9

NATIONAL OVERVIEW: UNDERGRADUATES RECEIVING STATE AID .................15

Who Received State Aid? ..............................................................................................15

Average State Student Financial Aid Award...................................................................17

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS ...................21

Undergraduates Attending Public 4-Year Institutions.....................................................32

Undergraduates Attending Private, Not-for-Profit, 4-Year Institutions...........................40

Undergraduates Attending Public Less-than-4-Year Institutions.....................................49

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................57

APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY ..................................................................................................61

APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL NOTES ..................................................................................69

The 1995-96 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96)...........................69

Data Analysis System.....................................................................................................69

Statistical Procedures.....................................................................................................72
ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Mean grant aid as reported by NASSGAP and state aid as reported in NPSAS

per full-time undergraduate, according to state aid group, by state: 1995-96 ................. 2

2 Number of institutions and full-time equivalent students according to

institutional type and state aid group, by state: 1996 ................................................... 11

3 Percentage distribution of undergraduates according to state aid group, by

attendance intensity: 1996........................................................................................... 13

4 Percentage of undergraduates who received state aid and average state aid

amount awarded, by selected characteristics: 1996...................................................... 18

5 Percentage of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups who

received state aid, and average state aid award to state aid recipients and to all

undergraduates, by state aid group: 1996 .................................................................... 22

6 Average tuition and fees charged for undergraduates in the low and high state

aid groups, by institutional type: 1996......................................................................... 22

7 Average tuition and fees charged for undergraduates in the low and high state

aid groups, by state aid group and income level: 1996................................................. 23

8 Percentage distribution of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

according to type and source of aid, by state aid group: 1996...................................... 24

9 Average total, state, institutional, employer, federal and other aid source

amounts awarded to undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by

state aid group: 1996 .................................................................................................. 25

10 Average total aid, grant aid, work-study, loan and other aid type amounts

awarded to undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by state aid

group: 1996................................................................................................................ 26
LIST OF TABLES

x

11 Average price of attendance for undergraduates in the low and high state aid

groups, by state aid group: 1996................................................................................. 26

12 Average net tuition for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by

institutional type: 1996 ............................................................................................... 27

13 Average net tuition for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

according to state aid group, by income level: 1996 .................................................... 28

14 Percentage distribution of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

according to institutional type, by state aid group: 1996.............................................. 29

15 Percentage distribution of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

according to selected student characteristics, by state aid group: 1996 ........................ 31

16 Average tuition and fees charged for undergraduates in the low and high state

aid groups attending public 4-year institutions, by state aid group and income

level: 1996.................................................................................................................. 33

17 Percentage distribution of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public 4-year institutions according to selected student

characteristics, by state aid group: 1996...................................................................... 35

18 Percentage distribution of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public 4-year institutions according to type and source of aid, by

state aid group: 1996 .................................................................................................. 37

19 Average total, state, institutional, employer, federal and other aid source

amounts awarded to undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public 4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996....................................... 38

20 Average total aid, grant aid, work-study, loan and other aid type amounts

awarded to undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending

public 4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996...................................................... 38

21 Average price of attendance for undergraduates in the low and high state aid

groups attending public 4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996 ........................... 39

22 Average net tuition for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public 4-year institutions, by state aid group and income level: 1996 ............ 40
LIST OF TABLES

xi

23 Percentage distribution of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions according to attendance

intensity, by state aid group: 1996............................................................................... 41

24 Average tuition and fees charged for full-time undergraduates in the low and

high state aid groups attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, by

state aid group and income level: 1996........................................................................ 42

25 Percentage distribution of full-time undergraduates in the low and high state

aid groups attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions according to

selected student characteristics, by state aid group: 1996 ............................................ 43

26 Percentage distribution of full-time undergraduates in the low and high state

aid groups attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions according to

type and source of aid, by state aid group: 1996.......................................................... 45

27 Average total, state, institutional, employer, federal and other aid source

amounts awarded to full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid

groups attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, by state aid group:

1996........................................................................................................................... 47

28 Average total aid, grant aid, work-study, loan and other aid type amounts

awarded to full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996.............. 47

29 Average price of attendance for full-time undergraduates in the low and high

state aid groups attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, by state

aid group: 1996 .......................................................................................................... 48

30 Average net tuition fees for full-time undergraduates in the low and high state

aid groups attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, by state aid

group and income level: 1996 ..................................................................................... 49
LIST OF TABLES

xii

31 Average tuition and fees charged for undergraduates in the low and high state

aid groups attending public less-than-4-year institutions, by state aid group and

income level: 1996...................................................................................................... 50

32 Percentage distribution of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public less-than-4-year institutions according to selected student

characteristics, by state aid group: 1996...................................................................... 51

33 Percentage distribution of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public less-than-4-year institutions according to type and source of

aid, by state aid group: 1996....................................................................................... 53

34 Average total, state, institutional, employer, federal and other aid source

amounts awarded to undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public less-than-4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996........................ 54

35 Average total aid, grant aid, work-study, loan and other aid type amounts

awarded to undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending

public less-than-4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996 ....................................... 55

36 Average price of attendance for undergraduates in the low and high state aid

groups attending public less-than-4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996 ............ 55

37 Average net tuition for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public less-than-4-year institutions, by state aid group and income

level: 1996.................................................................................................................. 56

B.1 Standard errors for table 4: Percentage of undergraduates who received state

aid and average state aid amount awarded, by selected characteristics: 1996 ............... 70
1

INTRODUCTION

States provide a major percentage of funding for postsecondary education. Most state

money is allocated directly to public institutions in the state, but some of it is awarded to students

in the form of financial aid. State appropriations for postsecondary education may also be made

to operate state boards, coordinating activities and other state-level activities, but these funds are

not included in this report. This report reviews the award of state financial aid to undergraduates.

States are at the center of higher education policy in the United States, yet it is hard to

generalize about state policies because of the differences among states. Each state is unique, but

they have some attributes in common. This report examines the states in two groups, the high

state aid group and the low state aid group. The 50 states and the District of Columbia were

divided into three groups, depending on their award of student financial aid per undergraduate.

The middle state aid group, however, is not examined in this report. The results suggest that the

group of states that provides the most financial aid and the group of states that provides the least

financial aid differ in several ways that may affect the type and price of education available to

students. Each state, regardless of where it falls in the use of state aid, represents a unique

configuration of economics, policies, demographics and history.

Table 1 lists the 16 states that comprise the low state aid group, the 10 states that make up

the high state aid group, and the 25 states in the middle state aid group that was not included in

the analysis. The assignment of states to the three groups was done using National Association of

State Student Grant and Aid Programs (NASSGAP) data. The average grant aid as reported in

NPSAS: 96 and the estimates generated using the NASSGAP data are rounded. The NPSAS

sample is not representative at the state level. The NASSGAP rankings of states on this measure

change from year to year, but a general continuity exists over time in the degree to which states

use state student financial aid.
INTRODUCTION

2

Table 1—Mean grant aid as reported by NASSGAP and state aid as reported in NPSAS per full-time

undergraduate, according to state aid group, by state: 1995-96 1,2

Grant aid as Mean state aid

reported by as reported in

NASSGAP NPSAS3

 Total $275 $299 

 High state aid group 

State

 Georgia 968 558 

 New York 847 700 

 New Jersey 733 728 

 Pennsylvania 706 666 

 Minnesota 685 834 

 Vermont 570 192 

 New Mexico 506 180 

 Virginia 461 374 

 Indiana 420 471 

 Illinois 417 627 

 Middle state aid group 

State

 Washington 387 237 

 Florida 380 180 

 Iowa 372 139 

 Maryland 351 195 

 Colorado 343 170 

 Michigan 340 273 

 California 316 259 

 Connecticut 315 207 

 Ohio 308 399 

 Wisconsin 299 236 

 Massachusetts 265 203 

 Kentucky 248 197 

 Maine 240 194 

 Oklahoma 219 118 

 South Carolina 201 161 

 Arkansas 187 212

 North Carolina 184 166 

 Missouri 169 193 

 Oregon 166 171 

 West Virginia 159 60 

 Mississippi 155 165 

 Tennessee 141 243 

 Rhode Island 135 84 

 Louisiana 125 107 

 Kansas 113 76 
INTRODUCTION

3

Table 1—Mean grant aid as reported by NASSGAP and state aid as reported in NPSAS per full-time

undergraduate, according to state aid group, by state: 1995-96 1,2--Continued

Grant aid as Mean state aid

reported by as reported in

NASSGAP NPSAS3

 Low state aid group

State

 Texas 91 111 

 Delaware 62 43 

 Alabama 61 78 

 Nevada 57 -- 

 Nebraska 41 33 

 Alaska 37 -- 

 District of Columbia 32 37 

 Idaho 29 4 

 South Dakota 23 78 

 Arizona 20 55 

 Hawaii 17 140 

 Montana 14 50 

 Utah 14 21 

 Wyoming 14 137 

 North Dakota 6 53 

 New Hampshire 4 109 

--Sample size too small for a reliable estimate.

1Groups based on the estimated state grant dollars per full-time undergraduate enrollment.

2

States are sorted in descending order of grant aid as reported by NASSGAP.

3Care should be taken in using the state aid means reported by state, as the NPSAS samples undergraduates

enrolled nationally and does not provide a representative sample of undergraduates in individual states.

SOURCE: Modified and edited version of National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs. 27th

Annual Survey Report, 1995-96 Academic Year. (Albany, NY: New York Higher Education Services Corporation,

1997); U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National Postsecondary

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

The amount of student financial aid awarded to students varies among states.1 Georgia

provided $968 in state aid per student, which puts them at the top of the rank order. New

Hampshire and North Dakota fall at the bottom of the distribution and award less than $10 per

student. These extremes suggest that the award of state aid to students differs among states.

This report examines attributes associated with the way undergraduates finance their

postsecondary education in states that can be classified as high state aid compared with those

attending institutions in the low state aid states.

 

1National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs. 27th Annual Survey Report, 1995-96 Academic Year. (Albany, NY: New York

Higher Education Services Corporation, 1997).
INTRODUCTION

4

One of the differences between high and low state aid states is the average tuition.

Average tuition in a state may reflect the combined tuition in each type of institution or different

enrollment distributions among institutions with high or low tuition. As will be shown later,

undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group were charged higher average

tuition than those attending institutions in the low state aid group This comparison among

undergraduates attending postsecondary institutions in states with different levels of state student

financial aid provides a natural experiment to evaluate the differences between groups of states

with high aid and low aid approaches to financing postsecondary education.

Johnstone lists the pressures that move states toward high tuition/high aid.2 First, he

believes that state treasuries will continue to feel pressure to reduce spending on health and

human services. Higher education institutions can raise tuition to replace declining state support.

Many other state services cannot shift their prices to the consumer. Second, many employers are

highly mobile, which may force states and localities to provide tax breaks to keep them from

moving. Low taxes generally mean less money for higher education. Third, educational access

and equal opportunity may not mobilize the same political support as they once did. Current

policy debates tend to revolve around outcomes, accountability, and assessment.

Johnstone also suggests a countervailing reason that the trend toward high tuition/high aid

will slow. He argues that affordable public higher education has broad political appeal.

Continuing increases in tuition may result in stronger complaints from students and their families.

Increases in tuition have been slowing recently, which may indicate the cessation of a trend that

marked the 1980s and early 1990s.

Some analysts argue that the high tuition/high aid approach to financing public

postsecondary education is more equitable and provides a better basis for public support than low

tuition.3 From this perspective, low tuition provides a subsidy for all students, regardless of their

ability to pay. High tuition combined with high student financial aid aimed at low-income

students provides a more equitable distribution of public subsidies. Supporters of this perspective

argue that this policy improves college affordability for low-income students without increasing

public subsidies. They further suggest that high public tuition also improves the competitive

position of private colleges and universities in the state.

Low tuition proponents argue that a published tuition provides a clear message about the

price of attendance while the amount of student financial aid a student might receive is not as

 

2

Johnstone, Bruce. “Patterns of Finance,” The Review of Higher Education. (Spring 1998), pp. 243-255.

3Wallace, Thomas, P. “Public Higher Education Finance,” Change. (July/August 1993), pp. 56-63.
INTRODUCTION

5

evident until the student makes some effort to determine his or her award. Low-income students

might assume the price of attendance is too high because of the posted tuition without ever

finding out about the available student aid.4

Low-income students are more sensitive to the tuition charged by postsecondary

institutions than are higher income students.5 In most of the studies reported by McPherson and

Schapiro, students from families with annual income below $20,000 are identified as low-income.

Their research suggests that a $150 increase in the price charged by the institution reduces the

enrollment of low-income students by 1.6 percent. The authors conclude that affluent students do

not change their enrollment behavior when tuition changes. The price of attendance makes more

difference to low-income students than it does to their more affluent peers.

The high tuition/high aid approach to financing postsecondary education also raises a

question about which taxpayer pays the public share. High tuition increases the chances that a

student will receive federal student financial aid. Increasing tuition in public institutions may

replace state tax support to institutions with federal student financial aid going to students.

Increasing tuition in a state will, all other things being equal, increase the number of students with

need. This suggests that higher average tuition may result in more federal need-based financial aid

being awarded to students in the state. This analytic logic does not suggest that state legislators

necessarily have a conscious plan to use state policies to leverage federal dollars. The tables in

this report will help decide if there is any evidence of students in high aid states receiving more

federal aid than those in low aid states.

The decisions state legislators make about public tuition and state aid may influence

student access and choice of institutions. A few states, including Washington and Minnesota,6

link student financial aid to tuition in public colleges and universities in the state. In most states,

however, there is little evidence that policy makers consider tuition and student financial aid

policy together.7 An implicit relationship may exist between the two, reflecting the political and

financing history of postsecondary education in the state. Legislators in states with a large

percentage of undergraduates enrolled in private, not-for-profit institutions may face political

pressure to use student aid and increase public tuition to equalize the price of attendance.8 The

information provided in this report will help determine if states awarding higher amounts of

 

4Heller, Donald E. “Student Price Response in Higher Education,” Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 68, No. 6 (Nov/Dec 1997), pp. 624-659.

5McPherson, Michael and Schapiro, Morton. The Student Aid Game. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1998).

6Griswold, Carolyn P. and Marine, Ginger M. "Political Influences on State Policy: Higher-Tuition, Higher-Aid, and the Real World," The Review of

Higher Education. Vol. 19, No. 4 (Summer 1996), pp. 361-389.

7

Ibid.

8

Ibid.
INTRODUCTION

6

student financial aid also have more undergraduates enrolled in private, not-for-profit institutions

than is the case in the low aid states. It will also help to describe the relationship between aid and

tuition.

Regardless of their local issues, states provide examples that can help federal policy

makers evaluate potential student financial aid programs before implementing them nationally.

Several states, including New York, developed a guaranteed student loan program before the

federal program was launched.9 In addition, the Georgia Hope Scholarship program provided a

model that the Clinton Administration used to develop a national tuition tax credit program.

BACKGROUND

Next to families, states have contributed the largest portion of support for postsecondary

education. In 1995-96, states spent $44.4 billion on higher education.10 Most states allocate

financial support directly to institutions. NASSGAP reports a 1995-96 state student financial aid

total of $2.914 billion that went to two million students.11 Seven percent of states' financial

support for postsecondary education is in the form of student financial aid.

By one measure, state student financial aid is more than keeping up with tuition increases.

According to The College Board, state student financial aid increased 55 percent, from $2.035

billion in 1987-88 to $3.149 billion in 1996-97, in constant 1996 dollars. During the same period,

tuition and fees in public 4-year colleges and universities increased from $2,011 to $2,936 per

student in constant dollars.12 That translates into a 46 percent increase. The rate of increase in

appropriations for state student financial aid exceeded increases in tuition in public 4-year

institutions.

Although state student financial aid represents a small percentage of state support for

postsecondary education, it is a meaningful share of grant aid awarded to postsecondary students.

According to The College Board, 14 percent of all the grant assistance awarded in 1996-97 came

from states. By comparison, the federal government provided 38 percent of grant aid and

institutions provided 48 percent. 13 This accounting does not consider other incidental aid.

 

9Morse, John in Lois Rice, Ed. Student Loans: Problems and Policy Alternatives (New York, NY: College Entrance Examination Board, 1977),

p.16.

10Hines, Edward R., and Higham, J. Russell III. State Higher Education Appropriations 1995-96. (Denver, CO: State Higher Education Executive

Officers, 1996).

11National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs. 27th Annual Survey Report,1995-96 Academic Year. (Albany, NY: New York

Higher Education Services Corporation, 1997).

12The College Board. Trends in Student Financial Aid: 1987 to 1997. (Washington, D.C.: 1997).

13Ibid.
INTRODUCTION

7

Most state aid is in the form of grants, but about 7 percent of the state awards take other

forms.14 Examples taken from the NASSGAP Survey include forgivable loans for potential

teachers, state funded work-study programs, community service vouchers, and loans for special

populations.

Although most state programs award aid with consideration of financial need, NASSGAP

estimates that 15 percent of state aid awards do not include need as a factor.15 These non-needbased awards are increasing as a percentage of the total. NPSAS:96 data, which provide the basis

for this report, do not identify the reasons given for making an award, so these distinctions are not

made in this report.

Most states limit awards from their major programs to students attending institutions in

the state. Exceptions include Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Indiana,

Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont,

and West Virginia. Overall, states awarded $17 million in state aid, less than 1 percent of the

total, to students attending institutions located out-of-state.16

According to NASSGAP, some states specify that some student financial aid is limited to

students who enroll in private institutions.17 Several states provided differential aid to students in

private institutions. States with tuition equalization grants include Florida, Iowa, Kansas,

Kentucky, Michigan, North Carolina, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin.

Other states do not have a special program for students attending private institutions, but award a

major portion of their aid to students in private institutions. Examples include California, Illinois,

Indiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Ohio,

Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia. Only Nevada and Wyoming make no awards

to students in private institutions. This is due, in part, to the fact that few private institutions are

located in these states. Twenty-six states, however, include students in private, for-profit

institutions in their financial aid programs.18 In most cases, student participation in these private,

for-profit programs is very limited. Due to the small sample size, these students are not examined

in the report.

 

14National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs. 27th Annual Survey Report,1995-96 Academic Year. (Albany, NY: New York

Higher Education Services Corporation, 1997).

15Ibid.

16Ibid.

17Ibid.

18Harmon, Robert T., Student Financial Aid Study of the States, forthcoming paper. (Washington, D.C.: Career College Association, 1998).
INTRODUCTION

8

Many states sponsor several student financial aid programs with different purposes.19

Often these programs limit their awards to particular groups such as minority students, potential

teachers or nurses, or dependents of slain policemen. In some programs, the use of multiple

award criteria makes it very difficult to untangle the reasons for making the awards. Texas

provides an example of how complicated the array of state student financial aid programs can

become. The following list of student financial aid programs in Texas hints at the diverse

purposes of state student financial aid programs. In 1996, Texas provided at least 12 student

financial aid programs. They included a student loan program, a loan repayment plan for

graduates who become physicians, a tuition equalization grant program, a grant program for

students in public institutions, special scholarship programs such as the early high school

graduation scholarship, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Texas Tuition Assistance

Program, State Scholarship Program for Ethnic Recruitment, Nursing Scholarship Programs,

Fifth-Year Accounting Scholarship Program, Robert C. Byrd Scholarship Program, and the Texas

College Work-Study Program.20 Not all states provide as many programs as Texas, but most

provide several different awards.

The State Student Incentive Grant program

The federal government established a state student financial aid-matching program in 1972

called the State Student Incentive Grant (SSIG) program. In 1995-96, the U.S. Congress

appropriated $64 million for the program.21 The program provides an incentive for states to make

grants to students who demonstrate substantial financial need. Within these broad limits, the

states have latitude in choosing which students receive these state-matched awards. Each state

receives SSIG matching funds generated by a formula based on the states' postsecondary

enrollment and their willingness to match the federal amount. Nationally, states provided a 97

percent dollar match, well above the required minimum of 50 percent. The following states made

a minimal match (50 to 60 percent of the total) in 1995-96:22

Alabama

Arizona

District of Columbia

Hawaii

Mississippi

Montana

 

19Ibid.

20Texas State Coordinating Board. Statistical Report. (Austin, TX: 1997).

21The College Board. Trends in Student Financial Aid: 1987 to 1997. (Washington, D.C.: 1997).

22The College Board. Trends in Student Financial Aid: 1987 to 1997. (Washington, D.C.: 1997).
INTRODUCTION

9

Wyoming

The legislation gives the states the option to support work-study assistance with SSIG

matching funds. Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico,

Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington all funded state work-study programs

with SSIG funds.

Defining state student financial aid

State financing of students goes well beyond student financial aid. Many states allow

public institutions to waive tuition for some students. Technically, this lost income could be

included as state aid. In some states, tuition waivers represent lost income to the institution, and

in others, the state appropriates funds to the institution to replace the income lost to approved

waivers. Most estimates of state aid exclude institutional aid or tuition waivers provided by

public institutions. This report follows that convention.

Other state student financing mechanisms fall outside our definition of state aid. These

alternatives include state sponsored savings programs that guarantee free tuition when the student

enrolls in a public institution in the state. This report also does not include any information on

targeted state tax savings that might result from enrolling in college. Cooperative enrollment

programs among some states allow students to attend public institutions in other states at resident

tuition rates. None of these programs are included in this report because the NPSAS data do not

include any information that describes them. Although these state programs help finance

students’ education, they do not qualify as student aid.

Data issues

This report uses the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study data collected in 1995-96

(NPSAS:96). The data were drawn from a nationally representative sample of students enrolled

in accredited postsecondary institutions. The sample does not provide representative data at the

state level. The tables and results apply only to undergraduates. The data set includes details on

institutional characteristics, description of students, prices of education, and student financial aid

received by students. Several new NPSAS variables were developed for this report. See

appendix A for a definition of all variables.

It is not possible to report state specific data because the NPSAS samples undergraduates

enrolled nationally and does not provide a representative sample of undergraduates in individual

states. It is possible, however, to divide states into groups based on their use of student financial
INTRODUCTION

10

aid and use them to identify commonalties and differences in how undergraduates pursue their

undergraduate education and how they finance the price of attendance.

The following tables show three state categories defined by how much financial aid was

provided by the state in which the institution was located. (see table 1)23 This clustering of states

makes it possible to identify important variations between students in groups of states that award

different amounts of student financial aid. Using data from the 1995-96 NASSGAP report, the 50

states and the District of Columbia were assigned to one of three groups, of which the study only

deals with two, based on the state aid dollars awarded per enrolled undergraduate. The high

group includes ten states that awarded state aid grants of $400 or more per undergraduate, and

the low group includes 16 states that awarded $100 or less per undergraduate. The remaining

group of states, the middle state aid group, includes the 25 states with state aid amounts that

place them between the top and bottom groups. The majority of state aid is awarded to students

who attend school in that state, but some state aid may be awarded by states other than the one in

which the institution is located.

Table 2 lists the number of institutions and the number of full-time equivalent students by

institutional type and control in each state. This table shows the variation in the number of

institutions and students among the states.

 

23The state in which the institution is located defines high and low state aid groups. However, while the majority of state aid is awarded to students

attending schools in that state, some of the state aid amounts for students in the high and low state aid groups may not be from the state in which they

are attending school.
INTRODUCTION

11

Table 2—Number of institutions and full-time equivalent students according to institutional type and state

aid group, by state: 19961

Private, not-for-profit,

Public, less-than 4-year Public 4-year 4-year

Full-time Full-time Full-time

equivalent equivalent equivalent

Institutions students Institutions students Institutions students

 Total 1,542 3,136,258 614 4,675,367 1,526 2,284,119

 High state aid group

State

 Georgia 56 57,723 20 131,096 35 52,396

 New York 81 172,255 43 259,548 168 326,476

 New Jersey 29 79,973 14 101,589 20 43,345

 Pennsylvania 61 61,241 45 198,120 106 178,518

 Minnesota 48 65,251 12 86,253 35 47,678

 Vermont (2) (

2

) 5 13,395 14 11,762

 New Mexico 21 27,787 6 37,237 8 2,235

 Virginia 32 65,104 15 138,366 33 41,772

 Indiana 19 22,819 14 143,614 39 52,777

 Illinois 55 184,471 12 157,253 82 129,514

 Middle state aid group 

State

 Washington 34 115,329 9 77,999 24 30,768

 Florida 66 206,820 10 159,091 46 71,907

 Iowa 17 41,245 3 57,797 37 39,897

 Maryland 20 55,660 15 91,079 20 29,538

 Colorado 20 45,117 14 106,473 11 15,487

 Michigan 30 101,996 16 203,177 57 60,128

 California 125 594,311 33 428,588 138 169,492

 Connecticut 26 20,344 6 41,681 19 43,693

 Ohio 87 93,957 27 216,598 63 93,106

 Wisconsin 20 57,732 13 121,480 30 40,600

 Massachusetts 27 43,624 15 76,501 76 186,227

 Kentucky 50 34,160 8 84,335 27 20,878

 Maine 7 4,545 8 21,774 13 12,020

 Oklahoma 62 45,527 13 74,656 14 17,920

 South Carolina 22 37,568 12 71,405 21 21,784

 Arkansas 31 23,513 10 51,553 10 10,103

 North Carolina 59 92,038 16 130,686 43 61,448

 Missouri 57 43,859 14 92,501 54 69,678

 Oregon 17 42,657 8 53,345 21 19,544

 West Virginia 19 5,986 12 53,900 12 8,854

 Mississippi 22 42,888 9 52,251 12 8,467

 Tennessee 40 53,564 10 94,526 41 44,485

 Rhode Island 1 8,323 2 16,710 8 29,666

 Louisiana 52 27,666 14 123,652 12 22,214

 Kansas 30 41,513 11 70,335 21 13,305
INTRODUCTION

12

Table 2—Number of institutions and full-time equivalent students, according to institutional type and state

aid group, by state: 19961--Continued

Private, not-for-profit,

Public, less-than 4-year Public 4-year 4-year

Full-time Full-time Full-time

equivalent equivalent equivalent

Institutions students Institutions students Institutions students

 Low state aid group 

State

 Texas 70 241,292 43 330,123 51 84,320

 Delaware 3 6,957 2 20,447 4 5,005

 Alabama 32 75,019 18 99,954 17 19,378

 Nevada 4 17,458 2 21,609 1 424

 Nebraska 9 22,586 7 46,153 16 16,588

 Alaska 2 320 3 16,411 3 543

 District of Columbia (2) (2) 2 4,473 15 51,818

 Idaho 3 5,999 4 31,520 4 2,015

 South Dakota 6 3,736 8 23,365 6 4,051

 Arizona 21 78,956 5 82,505 10 6,200

 Hawaii 7 15,824 3 17,360 5 10,156

 Montana 12 4,704 6 27,576 5 3,537

 Utah 10 22,940 5 59,946 2 30,768

 Wyoming 7 11,658 1 9,508 (2) (

2

)

 North Dakota 9 7,046 6 24,522 4 3,233

 New Hampshire 4 5,197 5 21,331 13 18,401

1

States are sorted in descending order of grant aid as reported by NASSGAP.

2Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Data

Analysis System Institutional Characteristics datafile, 1996-97 and Enrollment datafile, 1996.

Fifty-seven percent of the undergraduates were enrolled in institutions located in the

middle state aid group (table 3). The middle group of states is not included in the comparisons

after table 4. Leaving them out helps sharpen differences that might exist between the high and

low state aid groups. Table 3 shows that, on average, the states in the high state aid group

enrolled a greater percentage of the undergraduates than did the states in the low state aid group.
INTRODUCTION

13

Table 3—Percentage distribution of undergraduates according to state aid group, by attendance intensity:

1996

High state Middle state Low state

aid group aid group aid group

 Total 25.3 57.2 17.5

Attendance intensity

 Full-time 27.6 55.2 17.2

 Part-time 22.9 59.1 18.1

NOTE: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

This comparison between the high and low state aid groups allows us to determine what,

if any, differences exist in the tuition charged and student financial aid received by undergraduates

in the high and low state aid groups. These differences help to explain the relationships between

tuition and state aid. The results provide information to answer several questions. Do

undergraduates who attended institutions in states with high aid pay higher institutional tuition

than do those who attended in the low state aid group? Do undergraduates who attended

institutions in states with high aid receive more aid from other sources than do those who

attended institutions in the low state aid group? Were undergraduates in the high state aid group

more likely to attend private, not-for-profit institutions than those who attended institutions in the

low state aid states? Subsequent sections of this report address these questions.

So few graduate and first-professional students received state aid that it is difficult to

report statistically meaningful results, so they are not included in this report. According to

NPSAS:96, 2 percent of all graduate and first-professional students received state aid. The

average state award received by graduate and first-professional students was $1,567.24

 

24U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96),

Undergraduate Data Analysis System.
INTRODUCTION

14

The next section provides a national overview of who received state aid, regardless of the

state in which they attended. This is followed by a section that describes the differences between

students attending institutions in the high and low state aid states. Details are provided for

students attending public 4-year institutions, private not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, and public

less than-4-year institutions.
15

NATIONAL OVERVIEW: UNDERGRADUATES RECEIVING STATE AID

Table 4 presents national information describing the award of state aid to undergraduates.

Later sections will provide comparisons between undergraduates attending postsecondary

institutions in high and low state aid groups.

WHO RECEIVED STATE AID?

Table 4 shows that undergraduates attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions

were more likely to have received state aid than were those attending public institutions. Twentytwo percent of the undergraduates who attended private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions

received state aid compared with 14 percent of those who attended public 4-year institutions and

6 percent who attended public less-than-4-year institutions. Undergraduates attending public lessthan-4-year institutions were also less likely to have received state aid than were those attending

public 4-year institutions. This result is consistent with the proposition that states may use

student financial aid to help equalize tuition between public and private, not-for-profit institutions.

Three percent of the undergraduates who were charged tuition less than $1,000 received

state aid. This was a smaller percentage than found for undergraduates with higher tuition. The

percentage of undergraduates who received state aid was 14 percent for undergraduates who

were charged tuition between $1,000 and $2,499 and 25 percent for those with a charged tuition

of $10,000 and above. Tuition below $1,000 may reflect attendance at a low tuition institution,

part-time enrollment, or both.

Undergraduates who attended school full-time were more likely to receive state aid than

were those who attended part-time. Seventeen percent of full-time undergraduates received state

aid compared with 6 percent of those attending part-time.

Family income was related to the probability of receiving state aid for both dependent and

independent undergraduates. Twenty-three percent of the dependent undergraduates from

families with incomes less than $20,000 received state aid. They were more likely to have

received state aid than were those from higher income families with the exception of the 19

percent of undergraduates from families with incomes between $20,000 and $39,999 (12, 7, and 4

percent received state aid in the remaining family income categories). Five percent of the

independent undergraduates with incomes of $20,000 or more received state aid. This made them
NATIONAL OVERVIEW: UNDERGRADUATES RECEIVING STATE AID

16

less likely to receive state aid than independent undergraduates with incomes between $10,000

and $19,999 (10 percent), $5,000 to $9,999 (16 percent) or less than $5,000 (19 percent). These

results are consistent with the NASSGAP report, which indicated that most state student financial

aid was awarded with consideration for financial need.

Family income for dependent undergraduates is a useful analytic measure because it

indicates an ability to pay and implies a socio-economic status, since it is often the income of the

family of origin. Need is calculated by subtracting the amount a family is expected to pay from

the price of attendance.

Family income has a different meaning when applied to independent undergraduates.

Single independent students may have a low-income because they gave up their jobs to attend

school. Independent student income does not necessarily imply a socio-economic status

background.

Undergraduates who were the first in their family to attend college were more likely to

receive state aid than those who were not first-generation college undergraduates. Seventeen

percent of the first-generation college undergraduates received state aid compared with 11

percent of those undergraduates who had at least one parent who was a college graduate.

Fifteen percent of the black, non-Hispanic undergraduates received state aid compared

with 11 percent of the white, non-Hispanic undergraduates. Neither Hispanic (11 percent) nor

American Indian/Alaskan Native (14 percent) undergraduates differed significantly from white,

non-Hispanic undergraduates in their chances of receiving state aid.

Age and marital status were related to the receipt of state student financial aid. Twelve

percent of the undergraduates who were not married received state aid compared with 7 percent

of those who were married. Fourteen percent of the undergraduates 23 or younger received state

aid compared with 10 percent of those undergraduates in the 24 to 30 and 31 to 39 age

categories.

Undergraduates who attended an institution in their state of legal residence were more

likely to receive state aid than were those who attended out of their home state. Thirteen percent

of those attending an institution in their home state received state student financial aid compared

with 3 percent of those who attended out of state. Again, this finding is consistent with the

NASSGAP report.
NATIONAL OVERVIEW: UNDERGRADUATES RECEIVING STATE AID

17

AVERAGE STATE STUDENT FINANCIAL AID AWARD

Table 4 also provides detailed information about the average amount of state aid awarded

to undergraduate state aid recipients. On average, state financial aid award beneficiaries received

$1,647 in 1995-96. State aid recipients who attended public less-than-4-year institutions received

an average award of $873. This was less aid than recipients in other types of public and private

institutions received. Undergraduates in public 4-year institutions received an average state aid

award of $1,685 and undergraduates in private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions received $2,079.

Undergraduates in private, not-for-profit, 2-year or less institutions received $2,490. Those in

private, for profit, 2-year or more institutions received $2,178. Those students in private, for

profit, less-than-2-year institutions received $3,214.

Dependency, number of dependents, and marital status were also related to the average

award received. Dependent undergraduates received an average state aid award of $1,793. That

was larger than the $1,454 received by independent undergraduates. Independent undergraduates

with no dependents received an average state aid award of $1,763, which was larger than the

$1,315 received by those with one or more dependents. Undergraduates who were not married

received an average state aid award of $1,702. This was larger than the $1,463 received by

married undergraduates or the $1,064 received by those who were separated from their spouse.

Smaller awards may reflect any combination of events such as attending a lower tuition

institution, attending part-time or having more resources available to pay the price of attending a

postsecondary institution.

Dependent undergraduates with family incomes less than $20,000 received larger average

state aid awards than dependent undergraduates with family incomes between $40,000 and

$59,999 and $60,000 and $79,999. The average state student financial aid award received by

dependent undergraduates from families with incomes below $20,000 was $1,907. Dependent

undergraduates from families with incomes between $40,000 and $59,999 received an average

state award of $1,564 and those from families with incomes between $60,000 and $79,999

received $1,516.

Asian/Pacific Islander state financial aid recipients received an average state award of

$2,423. This was more than the average received by white, non-Hispanic, black, non-Hispanic, or

Hispanic state aid recipients. This was the only significant difference in average aid by race or

ethnicity.

This overview does not identify the diversity in purpose or amount of state student

financial aid among states. National averages provide some clues about who was likely to receive
NATIONAL OVERVIEW: UNDERGRADUATES RECEIVING STATE AID

18

state student financial aid and if they received it, what their average award was likely to be. The

results are consistent with the premise that undergraduates in private, not-for-profit, 4-year

institutions were more likely to have received state financial aid than were those in public

institutions. State aid helps reduce tuition paid by undergraduates attending private, not-for-profit

institutions in the state. The fact that lower income undergraduates were more likely to receive

state student financial aid is consistent with the premise that states award student financial aid

with consideration for need.

Table 4—Percentage of undergraduates who received state aid and average state aid amount awarded, by

selected characteristics: 1996

Average

Received state aid

state aid award

 Total 11.5 $1,647

State aid group

 High state aid group 21.7 1,933

 Middle state aid group 9.1 1,451

 Low state aid group 3.8 1,320

Institution type

 Public 4-year 14.2 1,685

 Public less-than-4-year 6.3 873

 Private, not-for-profit, 4-year 22.2 2,079

 Private, not-for-profit, 2-year or less 14.5 2,490

 Private, for-profit, 2-year or more 13.5 2,178

 Private, for-profit, less-than-2-year 7.7 3,214

Tuition and fees for terms attended

 Less than $1,000 3.3 631

 $1,000-$2,499 14.4 1,125

 $2,500-$4,999 21.2 1,903

 $5,000-$9,999 19.6 2,233

 $10,000 or more 25.0 2,414

Gender

 Male 10.0 1,726

 Female 12.5 1,599

Dependency status

 Dependent 13.3 1,793

 Independent 9.7 1,454
NATIONAL OVERVIEW: UNDERGRADUATES RECEIVING STATE AID

19

Table 4—Percentage of undergraduates who received state aid and average state aid amount awarded, by

selected characteristics: 1996--Continued

Average

Received state aid

state aid award

Marital status

 Not married 12.4 1,702

 Married 7.1 1,463

 Separated 22.0 1,064

Age

 23 or younger 13.7 1,740

 24-30 9.7 1,375

 31-39 9.7 1,456

 40 or older 6.3 1,742

Number of dependents, independent student

 Student had one or more dependents 12.1 1,315

 Student did not have dependents 11.3 1,763

Race/ethnicity of student

 White, non-Hispanic 10.9 1,616

 Black, non-Hispanic 15.2 1,458

 Hispanic 11.2 1,621

 Asian/Pacific Islander 11.6 2,423

 American Indian/Alaskan Native 13.6 2,030

 Other 6.6 2,637

Income, dependent student

 Less than $20,000 23.0 1,907

 $20,000-$39,999 19.3 1,897

 $40,000-$59,999 12.1 1,564

 $60,000-$79,999 6.6 1,516

 $80,000 or more 3.5 1,758

Income, independent student

 Less than $5,000 19.2 1,476

 $5,000-$9,999 16.4 1,476

 $10,000-$19,999 10.3 1,313

 $20,000 or more 4.5 1,553

Undergraduate level

 First year/freshman 10.3 1,706

 Second year/sophomore 11.6 1,558

 Third year/junior 16.0 1,902

 Fourth year or more/senior 14.5 1,819

Student attended institution in state of legal residence

 Student attended institution in state of legal residence 12.6 1,640

 Student did not attend institution in state of legal residence 3.4 1,848
NATIONAL OVERVIEW: UNDERGRADUATES RECEIVING STATE AID

20

Table 4—Percentage of undergraduates who received state aid and average state aid amount awarded, by

selected characteristics: 1996--Continued

Average

Received state aid

state aid award

First-generation student

 Student was first-generation 17.4 1,628

 Student was not first-generation 10.6 1,761

Attendance intensity

 Full-time 16.8 1,785

 Part-time 5.8 1,193

Grade point average

 Less than 2.00 9.0 1,333

 2.00-3.49 13.4 1,640

 3.50 or higher 10.7 1,748

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.
21

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

Reporting national averages conceals the differences among states. Variations exist

among states in the amount of student financial aid they award and the rules they use to distribute

it. According to NASSGAP, California, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania

awarded over $1.5 billion in 1995, which represented 60 percent of the nation's state aid dollars.

The seven smallest programs combined awarded $5.5 million.25 A few states can have a

considerable effect on the national average. As noted earlier, states vary from almost $1,000 in

state aid per undergraduate to less than $4.

The amount of aid awarded and the goals of state student financial aid programs are only

two types of policy differences among states. States also vary in the tuition charged in public

institutions, percentage of undergraduates enrolled in private, not-for-profit institutions, and the

percentage enrolled in public community colleges. Student financial aid is one aspect of a

complicated set of relationships that defines the educational options available to undergraduates in

a state.

Twenty-two percent of the undergraduates in the high state aid group received state

student financial aid (table 5). That was a higher probability of receiving state aid than the 4

percent reported by undergraduates attending postsecondary institutions in the low state aid

group. Undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group who received a state

award, received an average of $1,933 that was larger than the $1,320 received by those in the low

state aid group. These results confirm that the state groupings based on the NASSGAP data

represent states with high and low use of state student financial aid.

Comparing the mean state financial aid award amount across all undergraduates in table 5

(last column) demonstrates the differences in the award amount of state aid between the two state

groups. Mean state aid was calculated by dividing the total aid awarded by all the

undergraduates, regardless of whether they received aid or not. More state aid dollars were

awarded per undergraduate attending institutions in the high state aid group than for those in the

low state aid group. This resulted from a combination of a larger percentage of undergraduates

 

25National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs. 27th Annual Survey Report,1995-96 Academic Year. (Albany, NY: New York

Higher Education Services Corporation, 1997).
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

22

receiving state student financial aid and a larger average award in the high state aid group

compared with those attending in the low state aid group.

Table 5—Percentage of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups who received state aid, and

average state aid award to state aid recipients and to all undergraduates, by state aid group: 1996

Percentage Average state aid Mean state aid

receiving award, state aid award, all

state aid recipients undergraduates

 Total 11.5 $1,647 $269

State aid group

 High state aid group 21.7 1,933 420

 Low state aid group 3.8 1,320 50

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group were charged a higher

average tuition than were those in the low state aid group (table 6). Undergraduates attending

institutions in the high state aid group were charged average tuition and fees of $4,334 compared

with $2,099 for those in the low state aid group. This suggests that the high state aid group was

also a high average tuition group. On average, undergraduates attending public 4-year, public

less-than-4-year, and private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions were charged a higher tuition if

they attended an institution in the high state aid group compared with the low state aid group.

These figures were, for public 4-year institutions, $3,415 compared with $2,622; for public lessthan-4-year institutions, $921 compared with $498; and for private, not-for-profit, 4-year

institutions, $10,199 compared with $5,830.

Table 6—Average tuition and fees charged for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by

institutional type: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $2,099 $4,334

Institution type

 Public 4-year 2,622 3,415

 Public less-than-4-year 498 921

 Private, not-for-profit, 4-year 5,830 10,199

 Private, not-for-profit, 2-year or less 2,308 4,032

 Private, for-profit, 2-year or more 5,041 5,345

 Private, for profit, less-than-2-year 5,599 6,804

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

23

Dependent undergraduates at each income level were charged a higher average tuition in

the high state aid group than were those in the low state aid group (table 7). Dependent

undergraduates with family incomes less than $20,000 were charged $2,840 if they attended

institutions in the low state aid group compared with $5,712 charged those who attended in the

high state aid group. The difference in tuition charged was significant for undergraduates in all of

the remaining dependent income groups. Dependent undergraduates from low-state aid states

with family income of $20,000-$39,999 were charged $2,283, compared with $5,545 for

dependent undergraduates in the high state aid states. For dependent undergraduates with family

income of $40,000-$59,999, those in the low state aid group were charged $2,547 compared with

$5,369. Dependent undergraduates with family income of $60,000-79,999 were charged $3,055

in the low state aid states, compared with $5,492 in the high state aid group, and those with

family income of $80,000 or more were charged $3,972 in the low state aid states, compared with

$7,357.

Table 7—Average tuition and fees charged for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by state

aid group and income level: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $2,099 $4,334

Dependent student

Income

 Less than $20,000 2,840 5,712

 $20,000-$39,999 2,283 5,545

 $40,000-$59,999 2,547 5,369

 $60,000-$79,999 3,055 5,492

 $80,000 or more 3,972 7,357

Independent student

Income

 Less than $5,000 2,250 3,490

 $5,000-$9,999 1,707 3,043

 $10,000-$19,999 1,450 2,614

 $20,000 or more 1,122 1,865

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

24

Compared with undergraduates in the low state aid group, table 8 shows that those in the

high state aid group were more likely to receive financial aid (48 percent compared with 57

percent). The difference in the chance of receiving aid extends to those who received federal aid

(32 percent compared with 42 percent), grant aid (38 percent compared with 45 percent), loans

(22 percent compared with 33 percent), and work-study (3 percent compared with 7 percent).

Table 8—Percentage distribution1 of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups according to type

and source of aid, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Total aid

 Did receive aid 47.5 57.2

 Did not receive aid 52.5 42.8

State aid

 Did receive state aid 3.8 21.7

 Did not receive state aid 96.2 78.3

Federal aid (except VA/DOD)

2

 Did receive federal aid 32.1 42.1

 Did not receive federal aid 67.9 57.9

Institutional aid

 Did receive institutional aid 13.9 17.4

 Did not receive institutional aid 86.1 82.6

Employer aid

 Did receive employer aid 6.5 6.5

 Did not receive employer aid 93.5 93.5

Other source (including VA/DOD)

2

 Did receive other source 13.3 13.1

 Did not receive other source 86.7 86.9

Grant aid

 Did receive grant aid 37.5 45.1

 Did not receive grant aid 62.5 54.9

Loan (except PLUS)

 Did receive loan 22.0 32.8

 Did not receive loan 78.0 67.2
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

25

Table 8—Percentage distribution1 of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups according to type

and source of aid, by state aid group: 1996--Continued

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Work-study

 Did receive work-study 2.7 7.1

 Did not receive work-study 97.3 92.9

Other type of aid (including assistantships & PLUS)

 Did receive other type of aid 6.3 8.5

 Did not receive other type of aid 93.7 91.5

1The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

2Veterans Administration/Department of Defense.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Table 9 shows that the average award amount for every source of aid was larger for

recipients attending institutions in the high state aid group compared with those in the low state

aid group. The average financial aid award was $5,810 for those in the high state aid group

compared with $3,869 in the low state aid group. Undergraduates in the high state aid group

received larger average awards from state sources, institutional sources, employers, and the

federal government.

Table 9—Average total, state, institutional, employer, federal and other aid source amounts awarded to

undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by state aid group: 1996

Total State Institutional Employer Federal Other source

aid aid aid aid aid of aid

 Total $4,926 $1,647 $2,928 $1,276 $4,430 $1,640

State aid group

 High state aid group 5,810 1,933 4,004 1,595 4,713 1,710

 Low state aid group 3,869 1,320 1,752 1,019 4,167 1,541

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Table 10 shows that undergraduates in the high state aid group received an average grant

of $3,383 compared with $1,856 received by those in the low state aid group. The average loan

or work-study award amount did not differ significantly between the low and high state aid

groups.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

26

Table 10—Average total aid, grant aid, work-study, loan and other aid type amounts awarded to

undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by state aid group: 1996

Total Grant Work- Other type

aid aid study Loan of aid

 Total $4,926 $2,716 $1,397 $4,074 $3,692

State aid group

 High state aid group 5,810 3,383 1,346 4,060 4,370

 Low state aid group 3,869 1,856 1,497 4,075 3,261

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

The net tuition paid by undergraduates in the high state aid group was higher than that

paid by those in the low state aid group (table 11). Net tuition was defined as the average tuition

paid after all grants have been subtracted. The net tuition paid by undergraduates in the high state

aid group was $2,947 compared with $1,553 paid by those in the low state aid group.

Table 11—Average price of attendance for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by state aid

group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Price of attendance

 Tuition and fees $2,099 $4,334

 Tuition and fees minus state aid* 2,052 3,918

 Tuition and fees minus state aid minus institutional aid 1,831 3,232

 Tuition and fees minus all grants, regardless of source* 1,553 2,947

*Some state aid received may not be in the form of a grant.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

The net tuition paid by undergraduates in the high state aid group was significantly larger

for three of the six institutional types (table 12). Undergraduates attending public less-than-4-year

institutions paid tuition of $639 in the high state aid group compared with $316 in the low state

aid group. Those attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group

paid tuition of $6,552 compared with $4,171 in the low state aid group. Undergraduates in

private, not-for-profit, 2-year or less institutions paid $2,269 in the high state aid group and

$1,170 in the low state aid group. Net tuition was not significantly different for those attending

public 4-year institutions in the high and low state aid groups ($2,470 and $1,989), private, forprofit, 2-year-or-more ($4,167 and $4,154), and private, for-profit, less-than-2-year institutions

($5,281 and $4,518).
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

27

Table 12—Average net tuition for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by institutional type:

1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $1,553 $2,947

Institution type

 Public 4-year 1,989 2,470

 Public less-than-4-year 316 639

 Private, not-for-profit, 4-year 4,171 6,552

 Private, not-for-profit, 2-year or less 1,170 2,269

 Private, for-profit, 2-year or more 4,154 4,167

 Private, for profit, less-than-2-year 4,518 5,281

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

The average net tuition paid by dependent undergraduates attending institutions in the

high state aid group was higher than that paid by those attending in the low state aid group at

each income level (table 13). The net tuition paid by those with incomes below $20,000 was

$2,648 in the high state aid group and $1,616 in the low state aid group. For those with incomes

between $20,000 and $39,999, the net tuition was $2,929 in the high state aid group and $1,498

in the low state aid group. Dependent undergraduates with incomes between $40,000 and

$59,999 paid a net tuition of $3,709 in the high state aid group and $2,016 in the low state aid

group. The net tuition paid by those with incomes between $60,000 and $79,999 was $4,414 for

those in the high state aid group and $2,617 in the low state aid group. Finally, dependent

undergraduates with incomes of $80,000 or more paid $6,558 in the high state aid group and

$3,656 in the low state aid group.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

28

Table 13—Average net tuition for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups, by state aid group

and income level: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $1,553 $2,947

Dependent student

Income

 Less than $20,000 1,616 2,648

 $20,000-$39,999 1,498 2,929

 $40,000-$59,999 2,016 3,709

 $60,000-$79,999 2,617 4,414

 $80,000 or more 3,656 6,558

Independent student

Income

 Less than $5,000 1,281 1,716

 $5,000-$9,999 1,148 1,705

 $10,000-$19,999 966 1,746

 $20,000 or more 877 1,402

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Nine percent of the undergraduates in the low state aid group enrolled in private, not-forprofit, 4-year institutions compared with 23 percent of those in the high state aid group (table 14).

Thirty-five percent of the undergraduates in the high state aid group attended public less-than-4-

year institutions compared with 47 percent of those in the low state aid group. Undergraduates in

the high state aid group were also more likely to attend private, for-profit, 2-year or more

institutions than were those in the low state aid group. They represented 6 percent of the

undergraduates in the high state aid group and 3 percent in the low state aid group. No

significant difference existed in the chances of attending a public 4-year institution.

Variation in the net tuition paid by undergraduates attending institutions in the high and

low state aid groups may be explained in part by the difference in enrollment by institutional type

and control. On average, the tuition paid by undergraduates in private, not-for-profit, 4-year

institutions was higher than that paid by undergraduates in either public 4-year or public less-than4-year institutions.26 The categories of institutional control that might account for the difference

 

26U.S. Department of Education, NCES, IPEDS “Fall Enrollment and Institutional Characteristics Survey” (table prepared October 1997), generated

on the website at http://NCES.ed.gov.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

29

in tuition paid by undergraduates attending institutions in the two groups of states were the

private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions and public less-than-4-year institutions.

Table 14—Percentage distribution* of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups according to

institutional type, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Institution type

 Public 4-year 36.9 33.2

 Public less-than-4-year 46.9 34.6

 Private, not-for-profit, 4-year 9.3 22.8

 Private, not-for-profit, 2-year or less 0.9 1.5

 Private, for-profit, 2-year or more 2.6 5.6

 Private, for-profit, less-than-2-year 3.5 2.4

*The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

On average, undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group were

younger and more likely to be dependent than were those attending institutions in the low state

aid group (table 15). Sixty percent of the undergraduates attending institutions in the high state

aid group were 23 years old or younger compared with 54 percent of those in the low state aid

group. At the other end of the age spectrum, 10 percent of the undergraduates enrolled in the

high state aid group were at least 40 years of age compared with 13 percent of those in the low

state aid group. Fifty-five percent of the undergraduates enrolled in the high state aid group were

dependent compared with 47 percent of those in the low state aid group.

Undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group were more likely to be

single and have no dependents compared with those attending institutions in the low state aid

group. Eighty-two percent of the undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group

were not married compared with 74 percent of those in the low state aid group. Twenty-one

percent of the undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group had dependents

compared with 27 percent of those in the low state aid group.

These differences in age, dependency status and marital status of enrolled undergraduates

are consistent with the fact that a larger percentage of undergraduates in the high state aid group

enrolled in private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions and a smaller percentage in public less-than-
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

30

4-year institutions compared with the low state aid group.27 These enrollment differences may

also account for the fact that 57 percent of the undergraduates in the high state aid group

attended full-time compared with 51 percent in the low state aid group.

The distribution of undergraduates by other characteristics did not suggest a consistent

difference between state aid groups. The percentage of dependent undergraduates with incomes

below $20,000 was not significantly different in the high or low state aid group (17 percent and

18 percent). The percentage of the enrolled undergraduates that were first-generation college

undergraduates was greater in the high state aid group (54 percent) than in the low state aid

group (48 percent). Finally, there was no significant difference in the number of white, nonHispanic undergraduates in the high and low state aid group (73 percent in both state aid groups).

Minority enrollment did not differ between the two state aid groups, although the composition of

the minority population may reflect regional differences.

 

27Berkner, Lutz. Student Financing of Undergraduate Education: 1995-96. NCES 98-076. (U.S. Department of Education, Washington D.C.,

1998).
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

31

Table 15—Percentage distribution* of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups according to

selected student characteristics, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Gender

 Male 43.5 43.1

 Female 56.5 56.9

Dependency level

 Dependent 47.4 55.0

 Independent 52.6 45.0

Marital status

 Not married 73.8 81.5

 Married 24.4 16.6

 Separated 1.8 1.9

Age

 23 or younger 53.8 60.0

 24-30 19.9 17.4

 31-39 13.1 13.1

 40 or older 13.2 9.5

Race/ethnicity of student

 White, non-Hispanic 73.0 73.0

 Black, non-Hispanic 9.9 14.4

 Hispanic 10.8 6.5

 Asian/Pacific Islander 4.0 5.0

 American Indian/Alaskan Native 2.0 0.5

 Other 0.3 0.6

Number of dependents, independent student

 Student had one or more dependents 27.1 21.4

 Student did not have dependents 72.9 78.6

Income, dependent student

 Less than $20,000 17.6 16.6

 $20,000-$39,999 26.3 21.6

 $40,000-$59,999 23.7 23.1

 $60,000-$79,999 15.1 18.1

 $80,000 or more 17.3 20.6

Income, independent student

 Less than $5,000 13.5 16.0

 $5,000-$9,999 14.2 14.0

 $10,000-$19,999 23.4 20.8

 $20,000 or more 48.9 49.2
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

32

Table 15—Percentage distribution* of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups according to

selected student characteristics, by state aid group: 1996--Continued

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Undergraduate level

 First year/freshman 54.3 48.2

 Second year/sophomore 21.4 23.3

 Third year/junior 11.0 13.6

 Fourth year or more/senior 13.3 14.9

Student attended institution in state of legal residence

 Student attended institution in state of legal residence 86.2 86.0

 Student did not attend institution in state of legal residence 13.8 14.0

First-generation student

 Student was first-generation 47.6 53.8

 Student was not first-generation 52.4 46.2

Attendance intensity

 Full-time 51.0 56.9

 Part-time 49.0 43.1

Grade point average

 Less than 2.00 16.5 16.8

 2.00-3.49 60.2 61.6

 3.50 or higher 23.3 21.6

*The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Variation in the share of undergraduates attending each institutional type in the high and

low state aid groups may also account for differences in the award of student financial aid.

Information about undergraduates in each of the three major types of institutions is reported

separately in later sections of this report. These comparisons help identify whether the results

noted in the previous section continue to exist when enrollment is reported by institutional type

and control.

UNDERGRADUATES ATTENDING PUBLIC 4-YEAR INSTITUTIONS

Undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the low state aid group were

charged lower tuition on average than were those in the high state aid group (table 16).

Undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the low state aid group were charged

$2,622 average tuition and fees compared with $3,415 for those in the high state aid group.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

33

Table 16—Average tuition and fees charged for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public 4-year institutions, by state aid group and income level: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $2,622 $3,415

Dependent student

Income

 Less than $20,000 2,988 3,865

 $20,000-$39,999 2,899 3,938

 $40,000-$59,999 2,977 3,722

 $60,000-$79,999 3,398 3,982

 $80,000 or more 4,422 4,740

Independent student

Income

 Less than $5,000 2,230 2,764

 $5,000-$9,999 2,267 2,773

 $10,000-$19,999 1,496 2,196

 $20,000 or more 1,312 1,634

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the low state aid group were more

likely to be independent, married or have dependents compared with those attending institutions

in the high state aid group. Forty-two percent of the undergraduates attending public 4-year

institutions in the low state aid group were independent compared with 34 percent in the high

state aid group (table 17). Those in the low state aid group were also more likely to be married,

18 percent compared with 13 percent. Those attending public 4-year institutions in the low state

aid group were also more likely to have a dependent of their own, 17 percent compared with 13

percent in the high state aid group. Undergraduates in the high state aid group were more likely

to be younger. Seventy percent of those in the high state aid group were less than 24 years old

compared with 63 percent in the low state aid group.

Twenty percent of the independent undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in

the high state aid group had incomes less than $5,000 compared with 14 percent of those in the

low state aid group. Twenty percent of the independent undergraduates in the high state aid

group had incomes between $10,000 and $19,999 compared with 25 percent of those in the low

state aid group. No significant difference existed in the percentage of dependent undergraduates
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

34

with incomes of less than $20,000 in the high and low state aid groups. (16 percent and 17

percent respectively).

Undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the high state aid group were more

likely to be first-generation college undergraduates than were those attending in the low state aid

group. Fifty percent of the undergraduates in the high state aid group were first-generation

college undergraduates compared with 40 percent of those in the low state aid group. It is not

possible to determine if this difference reflects the effect of state student financial aid or

population differences within the two groups of states. Several possible factors may explain this

outcome. First, regional differences may exist in the population served. Second, some public 4-

year institutions in the high state aid group may provide open door admission to compensate for

the lack of public less-than-4-year institutions in the state. Third, state student aid policy may

target these undergraduates in some of the high aid states.

Undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the high state aid group were more

likely to receive student financial aid than those in the low state aid group, 59 percent compared

with 52 percent (table 18). One quarter of the undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions

in the high state aid group received state aid compared with 4 percent in the low state aid group.

They were also more likely to receive federal aid. Forty-seven percent of the undergraduates

attending public 4-year institutions in the high state aid group received federal aid compared with

38 percent in the low state aid group.

Sixteen percent of the public 4-year undergraduates in the low state aid group received

institutional aid compared with 11 percent in the high state aid group. This suggests that some

states in the low state aid group may support tuition remission programs in public institutions

instead of funding state student financial aid programs.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

35

Table 17—Percentage distribution* of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public

4-year institutions according to selected student characteristics, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Gender

 Male 46.9 44.1

 Female 53.1 55.9

Dependency level

 Dependent 58.0 66.4

 Independent 42.0 33.6

Marital status

 Not married 80.9 86.4

 Married 18.3 12.7

 Separated 0.7 0.9

Age

 23 or younger 63.0 70.2

 24-30 20.1 15.7

 31-39 9.4 7.8

 40 or older 7.6 6.3

Race/ethnicity of student

 White, non-Hispanic 78.5 76.2

 Black, non-Hispanic 6.8 10.9

 Hispanic 8.3 5.5

 Asian/Pacific Islander 4.7 6.2

 American Indian/Alaskan Native 1.4 0.5

 Other 0.4 0.7

Number of dependents, independent student

 Student had one or more dependents 16.5 12.7

 Student did not have dependents 83.5 87.3

Income, dependent student

 Less than $20,000 16.7 15.6

 $20,000-$39,999 21.6 21.1

 $40,000-$59,999 23.9 22.7

 $60,000-$79,999 16.6 19.2

 $80,000 or more 21.3 21.4

Income, independent student

 Less than $5,000 13.9 20.2

 $5,000-$9,999 15.2 15.8

 $10,000-$19,999 24.8 19.6

 $20,000 or more 46.1 44.5
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

36

Table 17—Percentage distribution* of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public

4-year institutions according to selected student characteristics, by state aid group: 1996--

Continued

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Undergraduate level

 First year/freshman 30.5 29.7

 Second year/sophomore 17.0 20.3

 Third year/junior 23.5 23.9

 Fourth year or more/senior 29.0 26.1

Student attended institution in state of legal residence

 Student attended institution in state of legal residence 86.0 90.2

 Student did not attend institution in state of legal residence 14.0 9.8

First-generation student

 Student was first-generation 39.8 50.4

 Student was not first-generation 60.2 49.6

Attendance intensity

 Full-time 60.7 65.4

 Part-time 39.3 34.6

Grade point average

 Less than 2.00 13.2 15.4

 2.00-3.49 68.4 66.6

 3.50 or higher 18.4 18.0

*The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Undergraduates in public 4-year institutions in the high state aid group were more likely to

have received a loan than were those in the low state aid group. The difference was 39 percent

compared with 33 percent. Undergraduates in the high state aid group were also more likely to

receive a grant than were those in the low state aid group. Forty-three percent of undergraduates

in public 4-year institutions in the high state aid group received a grant compared with 38 percent

in the low state aid group.

These results suggest that undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the high

state aid group paid a higher average tuition and received more aid than those in the low state aid

group. One important result was that they were more likely to have received federal financial aid

than those in the low state aid group.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

37

Table 18—Percentage distribution1 of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public

4-year institutions according to type and source of aid, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Total aid

 Did receive aid 52.3 59.2

 Did not receive aid 47.7 40.8

State aid

 Did receive state aid 4.3 24.8

 Did not receive state aid 95.7 75.2

Federal aid (except VA/DOD)

2

 Did receive federal aid 38.4 47.4

 Did not receive federal aid 61.6 52.6

Institutional aid

 Did receive institutional aid 16.0 11.0

 Did not receive institutional aid 84.0 89.0

Employer aid

 Did receive employer aid 5.2 4.2

 Did not receive employer aid 94.8 95.8

Other source (including VA/DOD)

2

 Did receive other source 14.0 11.7

 Did not receive other source 86.0 88.3

Grant aid

 Did receive grant aid 38.2 43.2

 Did not receive grant aid 61.8 56.8

Loan (except PLUS)

 Did receive loan 32.9 39.0

 Did not receive loan 67.1 61.0

Work-study

 Did receive work-study 4.1 6.2

 Did not receive work-study 95.9 93.8

Other type of aid (including assistantships & PLUS)

 Did receive other type of aid 7.1 8.8

 Did not receive other type of aid 92.9 91.2

1The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

2Veterans Administration/Department of Defense.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

38

Undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the high state aid group received

$1,888 in state aid compared with $1,233 received by those in the low state aid group (table 19).

Those in the high state aid group also received larger grant awards than those in the low state aid

group, $2,644 compared with $2,046 (table 20). However, undergraduates in public 4-year

institutions in the low state aid group received larger average loans, $4,254 compared with

$3,913 received by those in the high state aid group. The total aid amount received by

undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions was not significantly different between the

high and low state aid groups.

Table 19—Average total, state, institutional, employer, federal and other aid source amounts awarded to

undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public 4-year institutions, by state

aid group: 1996

Total State Institutional Employer Federal Other source

aid aid aid aid aid of aid

 Total $5,071 $1,812 $2,137 $1,181 $4,750 $1,678

State aid group

 High state aid group 5,259 1,888 2,334 1,308 4,600 1,779

 Low state aid group 4,793 1,233 1,960 1,046 4,992 1,567

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Table 20—Average total aid, grant aid, work-study, loan and other aid type amounts awarded to

undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public 4-year institutions, by state

aid group: 1996

Total Grant Work- Other type

aid aid study Loan of aid

 Total $5,071 $2,401 $1,381 $4,047 $3,990

State aid group

 High state aid group 5,259 2,644 1,287 3,913 4,187

 Low state aid group 4,793 2,046 1,567 4,254 3,671

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Table 21 shows that undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the high state

aid group were charged an average tuition of $3,415, which was higher than the $2,622 charged

to those attending institutions in the low state aid group. This difference in tuition cannot be

attributed to the percentage of undergraduates attending part-time; there was no significant

difference between the percentages of undergraduates in the high and low state aid groups who

attended part-time (table 3).
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

39

After subtracting state aid from the tuition, the remaining difference in tuition, $2,574 in

the low aid states and $2,952 in the high aid states, was no longer significant. The tuition

differences between those attending public 4-year institutions in the high and low state aid groups,

$2,292 and $2,740, were not significant after further subtracting institutional aid from tuition.

Subtracting all grant assistance from tuition resulted in an average net tuition of $1,989 for those

attending public 4-year institutions in the low state aid group and $2,470 for those in the high

state aid group. This difference was also not statistically significant. Student grant assistance

helped equalize tuition between undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in high and

low state aid groups.

Table 21—Average price of attendance for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending

public 4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Price of attendance

 Tuition and fees $2,622 $3,415

 Tuition and fees minus state aid* 2,574 2,952

 Tuition and fees minus state aid minus institutional aid 2,292 2,740

 Tuition and fees minus all grants, regardless of source* 1,989 2,470

*Some state aid received may not be in the form of a grant.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the high state aid group paid an

average net tuition that was not significantly different from that paid by those in the low state aid

group in all except one of the income categories (table 22). The only significant difference was

between dependent undergraduates with family incomes between $40,000 and $59,999 who

attended public 4-year institutions in the high and low state aid groups. Those in the high state

aid group paid net tuition of $3,072 compared with $2,422 in the low state aid group.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

40

Table 22—Average net tuition for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public 4-

year institutions, by state aid group and income level: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $1,989 $2,470

Dependent student

Income

 Less than $20,000 1,723 1,409

 $20,000-$39,999 1,864 2,326

 $40,000-$59,999 2,422 3,072

 $60,000-$79,999 2,989 3,539

 $80,000 or more 4,111 4,440

Independent student

Income

 Less than $5,000 989 1,079

 $5,000-$9,999 1,484 1,587

 $10,000-$19,999 956 1,329

 $20,000 or more 1,052 1,325

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

UNDERGRADUATES ATTENDING PRIVATE, NOT-FOR-PROFIT, 4-YEAR INSTITUTIONS

In both public 4-year and public less-than-4-year institutions, no significant difference

existed in the share of undergraduates enrolled part-time between the high and low state aid

groups. That was not the case in private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions. Undergraduates

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the low state aid group were more likely to

attend full time than were those in the high state aid group. In the low state aid group, 42 percent

of the undergraduates attended part-time compared with 26 percent in the high state aid group

(table 23). For this reason, only full-time undergraduates were included in tables 24 to 29.28

 

28As a result, the tables in this section are not directly comparable to tables for public 4-year and public less-than-4-year institutions, since those tables

include both full-time and part-time undergraduates.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

41

Table 23—Percentage distribution* of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending

private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions according to attendance intensity, by state aid group:

1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Attendance intensity

 Full-time 57.9 73.7

 Part-time 42.1 26.3

*The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Full-time undergraduates enrolled in private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high

state aid group were charged higher tuition than were those in the low state aid group (table 24).

Full-time undergraduates attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the low state aid

group were charged average tuition and fees of $8,403 compared with $12,417 for those in the

high state aid group.

Dependent undergraduates in each income category were charged a higher average tuition

if they attended an institution in the high state aid group compared with those in the low state aid

group. Dependent undergraduates with a family income less than $20,000 were charged a tuition

of $9,048 in the low state aid group and $13,116 in the high state aid group. The difference was

also significant for the tuition charged dependent undergraduates with income between $20,000

and $39,999, which was $8,851 in the low state aid group and $12,317 in the high state aid

group. The tuition difference was significant for each of the remaining income categories. Those

attending in the high state aid group paid a higher tuition than those in the low state aid group.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

42

Table 24—Average tuition and fees charged for full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid

groups attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, by state aid group and income level:

1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $8,403 $12,417

Dependent student

Income

 Less than $20,000 9,048 13,116

 $20,000-$39,999 8,851 12,317

 $40,000-$59,999 7,805 13,029

 $60,000-$79,999 9,573 13,307

 $80,000 or more 10,310 14,290

Independent student

Income

 Less than $5,000 8,041 9,312

 $5,000-$9,999 -- 9,719

 $10,000-$19,999 4,252 8,733

 $20,000 or more 7,510 7,462

--Sample size too small for a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Full-time undergraduates attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high

state aid group differed from those in the low state aid group in at least one way. Those in the

low state aid group were more likely to be married than those in the high state aid group.

Thirteen percent of those in the low state aid group were married compared with 6 percent in the

high state aid group (table 25).

The portion of full-time dependent undergraduates with incomes less than $20,000

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group did not differ

significantly from that in the low state aid group. Nor did the percent of dependent

undergraduates attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group

with incomes of $80,000 or more differ significantly from the portion of those in the low state aid

group. In addition, there was no significant difference between the low and high state aid groups

for the other dependent income levels. State aid group did not have a significant relationship with

the enrollment of full-time dependent undergraduates from each of the different income groups

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

43

Table 25—Percentage distribution* of full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions according to selected student characteristics,

by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Gender

 Male 38.8 42.5

 Female 61.2 57.5

Dependency level

 Dependent 75.5 81.8

 Independent 24.5 18.2

Marital status

 Not married 87.0 93.5

 Married 12.5 5.9

 Separated 0.5 0.7

Age

 23 or younger 81.5 84.7

 24-30 10.9 8.4

 31-39 4.2 4.6

 40 or older 3.4 2.3

Race/ethnicity of student

 White, non-Hispanic 67.8 74.7

 Black, non-Hispanic 14.5 12.1

 Hispanic 9.5 4.6

 Asian/Pacific Islander 6.9 7.5

 American Indian/Alaskan Native 0.5 0.4

 Other 0.8 0.8

Number of dependents, independent student

 Student had one or more dependents 9.6 7.7

 Student did not have dependents 90.4 92.3

Income, dependent student

 Less than $20,000 17.2 15.1

 $20,000-$39,999 20.6 21.4

 $40,000-$59,999 24.8 21.1

 $60,000-$79,999 14.8 16.2

 $80,000 or more 22.6 26.3
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

44

Table 25—Percentage distribution* of full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions according to selected student characteristics,

by state aid group: 1996--Continued

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Income, independent student

 Less than $5,000 24.7 23.6

 $5,000-$9,999 14.7 16.5

 $10,000-$19,999 25.5 24.8

 $20,000 or more 35.1 35.2

Undergraduate level

 First year/freshman 45.5 38.6

 Second year/sophomore 17.4 23.5

 Third year/junior 22.5 28.1

 Fourth year or more/senior 14.6 9.9

Student attended institution in state of legal residence

 Student attended institution in state of legal residence 52.5 61.5

 Student did not attend institution in state of legal residence 47.5 38.5

First-generation student

 Student was first-generation 32.8 40.9

 Student was not first-generation 67.2 59.1

Grade point average

 Less than 2.00 5.0 8.1

 2.00-3.49 70.2 69.1

 3.50 or higher 24.8 22.8

*The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Table 26 shows the receipt of different sources and types of aid. Overall, full-time

undergraduates in private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group were not

significantly more likely to have received financial aid than those in the low state aid group.

However, full-time undergraduates attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high

state aid group were more likely to have received state and institutional aid than those attending

institutions in the low state aid group. Thirty-two percent of the undergraduates attending

private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group received state aid compared

with 18 percent of those in the low state aid group. Sixty-two percent of undergraduates in

private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group received institutional aid
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

45

compared with 41 percent of those in the low state aid group. There was no significant difference

in the receipt of federal aid for this group.

Full-time undergraduates in the high state aid group who attended private, not-for-profit,

4-year institutions were more likely to have received grants, loans, or work-study awards than

those in the low state aid group. Seventy-three percent of the full-time undergraduates attending

private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group received a grant compared

with 61 percent of those attending in the low state aid group. Fifty-eight percent of those in the

high state aid group received a loan compared with 45 percent of those in the low state aid group.

Finally, one-quarter of the full-time undergraduates attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year

institutions in the high state aid group received work-study compared with 13 percent of those in

the low state aid group.

Table 26—Percentage distribution1 of full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions according to type and source of aid, by state

aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Total aid

 Did receive aid 72.9 81.1

 Did not receive aid 27.1 18.9

State aid

 Did receive state aid 18.0 31.6

 Did not receive state aid 82.0 68.4

Federal aid (except VA/DOD)

2

 Did receive federal aid 52.2 62.8

 Did not receive federal aid 47.8 37.2

Institutional aid

 Did receive institutional aid 41.4 62.2

 Did not receive institutional aid 58.6 37.8

Employer aid

 Did receive employer aid 4.3 4.7

 Did not receive employer aid 95.7 95.3

Other source (except VA/DOD)

2

 Did receive other source 22.0 17.5

 Did not receive other source 78.0 82.5

Grant aid

 Did receive grant aid 60.9 73.0

 Did not receive grant aid 39.1 27.0
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

46

Table 26—Percentage distribution1 of full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions according to type and source of aid, by state

aid group: 1996--Continued

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Loan (except PLUS)

 Did receive loan 44.5 58.2

 Did not receive loan 55.5 41.8

Work-study

 Did receive work-study 13.2 25.3

 Did not receive work-study 86.8 74.7

Other type of aid (including assistantships & PLUS)

 Did receive other type of aid 11.0 13.4

 Did not receive other type of aid 89.0 86.6

1The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

2Veterans Administration/Department of Defense.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Full-time undergraduate aid recipients attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions

in the high state aid group received larger aid packages than those attending institutions in the low

state aid group. The average financial aid award was $10,564 in the high state aid group

compared with $8,136 in the low state aid group (table 27).

Full-time undergraduate aid recipients attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions

in the high state aid group received an average institutional aid award of $5,299 compared with

$3,721 by those in the low state aid group. They also received larger state aid awards, $2,667

compared with $1,790 by those attending in the low state aid group.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

47

Table 27—Average total, state, institutional, employer, federal and other aid source amounts awarded to

full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending private, not-for-profit, 4-

year institutions, by state aid group: 1996

Total State Institutional Employer Federal Other source

aid aid aid aid aid of aid

 Total $10,173 $2,572 $5,103 $3,902 $6,392 $2,563

State aid group

 High state aid group 10,564 2,667 5,299 3,852 6,401 2,326

 Low state aid group 8,136 1,790 3,721 -- 6,336 3,443

--Sample size too small for a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Full-time undergraduate aid recipients attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions

in the high state aid group received larger grants than did those in the low state aid group. The

average grant amount received by those in the high state aid group was $6,420 compared with

$4,366 by those in the low state aid group (table 28). In contrast, full-time undergraduates

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the low state aid group received larger

average loans than did those in the high state aid group. The average loan was $5,215 for those

in the low state aid group and $4,516 in the high state aid group.

Table 28—Average total aid, grant aid, work-study, loan and other aid type amounts awarded to full-time

undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year

institutions, by state aid group: 1996

Total Grant Work- Other type

aid aid study Loan of aid

 Total $10,173 $6,111 $1,392 $4,615 $6,756

State aid group

 High state aid group 10,564 6,420 1,359 4,516 6,782

 Low state aid group 8,136 4,366 1,684 5,215 6,603

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

As noted earlier, full-time undergraduates attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year

institutions in the high state aid group were charged a higher average tuition than those in the low

state aid group (table 24). Subtracting state aid from tuition still results in full-time

undergraduates in private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group paying a

higher mean net tuition than did those in the low state aid group. Undergraduates in the high
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

48

state aid group paid $11,573 tuition, after state aid was subtracted, compared with $8,086 paid by

those in the low state aid group (table 29). After subtracting the combination of state aid and

institutional aid, undergraduates in the high state aid group paid $8,303, compared to $6,647 in

the low state aid group; this difference was not significant. After subtracting all grant aid from the

tuition, the mean net tuition of $5,962 paid by those in the low state aid group was no longer

significantly different than the $7,841 paid by those in the high state aid group.

Table 29—Average price of attendance for full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Price of attendance

 Tuition and fees $8,403 $12,417

 Tuition and fees minus state aid* 8,086 11,573

 Tuition and fees minus state aid minus institutional aid 6,647 8,303

 Tuition and fees minus all grants, regardless of source* 5,962 7,841

*Some state aid received may not be in the form of a grant.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Full-time dependent undergraduates with family incomes of $80,000 or more attending

private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group paid net tuition of $12,300

compared with $9,348 paid by those in the low state aid group (table 30). Dependent students

from families with incomes less than $20,000 attending institutions in the high state aid group paid

a net tuition of $6,105, which was not significantly different than the $5,055 net tuition paid by

those in the low state aid group. As noted in table 24, low-income dependent undergraduates

with income less than $20,000 who attended institutions in the high state aid group were charged

a tuition of $13,116 compared with $9,048 for those in the low state aid group. The fact that the

difference was not significant after grant aid was subtracted from the tuition suggests that student

grants helped equalize the tuition paid by low-income undergraduates in the high state aid group

compared with those in the low state aid group.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

49

Table 30—Average net tuition for full-time undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending

private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, by state aid group and income level: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $5,962 $7,841

Dependent student

Income

 Less than $20,000 5,055 6,105

 $20,000-$39,999 5,247 5,368

 $40,000-$59,999 5,548 7,321

 $60,000-$79,999 7,716 9,606

 $80,000 or more 9,348 12,300

Independent student

Income

 Less than $5,000 4,310 5,170

 $5,000-$9,999 5,234 --

 $10,000-$19,999 6,005 2,228

 $20,000 or more 5,534 5,462

--Sample size too small for a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

UNDERGRADUATES ATTENDING PUBLIC LESS-THAN-4-YEAR INSTITUTIONS

Undergraduates attending public less-than-4-year institutions in the high state aid group

were charged higher tuition than were those in the low state aid group (table 31).

Undergraduates attending public less-than-4-year institutions in the high state aid group were

charged an average tuition and fees of $921 compared with those in the low state aid group

whose tuition was $498. The average tuition charged to dependent undergraduates in each

income category was larger in the high state aid group than for the low state aid group.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

50

Table 31—Average tuition and fees charged for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups

attending public less-than-4-year institutions, by state aid group and income level: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $498 $921

Dependent student

Income

 Less than $20,000 748 1,382

 $20,000-$39,999 655 1,242

 $40,000-$59,999 638 1,286

 $60,000-$79,999 603 1,125

 $80,000 or more 474 1,132

Independent student

Income

 Less than $5,000 555 910

 $5,000-$9,999 372 948

 $10,000-$19,999 511 824

 $20,000 or more 338 584

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Table 32 shows that undergraduates attending public less-than-4-year institutions in the

high or low state aid group did not differ significantly from one another on any of the variables

listed, with one exception. Dependent undergraduates attending public less-than-4-year

institutions in the low state aid group were more likely to have incomes between $20,000 and

$39,999 than those in the high state aid group, 33 compared with 23 percent. The percentages in

the other income categories did not differ significantly across the two groups. This includes those

dependent students with income of less than $20,000, 17 percent in both the high and the low

state aid groups.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

51

Table 32—Percentage distribution* of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public

less-than-4-year institutions according to selected student characteristics, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Gender

 Male 42.0 43.1

 Female 58.0 56.9

Dependency level

 Dependent 41.0 40.6

 Independent 59.0 59.4

Marital status

 Not married 69.9 74.9

 Married 28.0 22.2

 Separated 2.2 3.0

Age

 23 or younger 47.2 46.5

 24-30 19.6 20.7

 31-39 15.4 19.6

 40 or older 17.9 13.2

Race/ethnicity of student

 White, non-Hispanic 71.2 72.6

 Black, non-Hispanic 11.2 15.2

 Hispanic 11.5 7.9

 Asian/Pacific Islander 3.6 3.3

 American Indian/Alaskan Native 2.3 0.7

 Other 0.3 0.4

Number of dependents, independent student

 Student had one or more dependents 33.0 30.5

 Student did not have dependents 67.0 69.5

Income, dependent student

 Less than $20,000 17.0 17.3

 $20,000-$39,999 33.3 22.7

 $40,000-$59,999 23.9 26.1

 $60,000-$79,999 13.7 19.1

 $80,000 or more 12.2 14.9

Income, independent student

 Less than $5,000 11.6 10.9

 $5,000-$9,999 13.7 12.9

 $10,000-$19,999 22.5 21.1

 $20,000 or more 52.3 55.1
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

52

Table 32—Percentage distribution* of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public

less-than-4-year institutions according to selected student characteristics, by state aid group: 1996

--Continued

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Undergraduate level

 First year/freshman 72.3 68.7

 Second year/sophomore 27.4 30.6

 Third year/junior 0.4 0.6

 Fourth year or more/senior 0.0 0.1

Student attended institution in state of legal residence

 Student attended institution in state of legal residence 96.0 97.7

 Student did not attend institution in state of legal residence 4.0 2.3

First-generation student

 Student was first-generation 52.3 58.1

 Student was not first-generation 47.7 41.9

Attendance intensity

 Full-time 36.6 33.2

 Part-time 63.4 66.8

Grade point average

 Less than 2.00 21.1 22.6

 2.00-3.49 53.9 56.1

 3.50 or higher 25.0 21.3

*The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Undergraduates attending public less-than-4-year institutions in the high state aid group

were more likely to have received student aid from state and institutional sources. Fifteen percent

of the undergraduates in public less-than-4-year institutions received state aid in the high state aid

group (table 33). That compares with 2 percent of the undergraduates in the low state aid group.

Undergraduates in the low state aid group were more likely to receive institutional aid than were

those in the high state aid states. Ten percent of the undergraduates in the low state aid group

received institutional aid compared with 2 percent of those in the high state aid group.

A larger percentage of undergraduates attending public less-than-4-year institutions in the

high state aid group received a loan compared with those in the low state aid group, 10 percent

compared with 6 percent. However, the percentages receiving grants or work-study did not differ
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

53

significantly. Thirty-one percent of the undergraduates received a grant in the low state aid

group, as did 32 percent in the high state aid group. One percent of the undergraduates in the low

state aid group received work-study, and 2 percent in the high state aid group did so. The

proportion receiving any aid did not differ significantly across the two groups (35 and 39

percent).

Table 33—Percentage distribution1 of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public

less-than-4-year institutions according to type and source of aid, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total 100.0 100.0

Total aid

 Did receive aid 35.4 39.3

 Did not receive aid 64.6 60.7

State aid

 Did receive state aid 1.9 15.0

 Did not receive state aid 98.1 85.0

Federal aid (except VA/DOD)

2

 Did receive federal aid 19.9 23.1

 Did not receive federal aid 80.1 76.9

Institutional aid

 Did receive institutional aid 9.5 2.4

 Did not receive institutional aid 90.5 97.6

Employer aid

 Did receive employer aid 7.0 8.4

 Did not receive employer aid 93.0 91.6

Other source (including VA/DOD)

2

 Did receive other source 10.8 12.8

 Did not receive other source 89.2 87.2

Grant aid

 Did receive grant aid 31.0 31.5

 Did not receive grant aid 69.0 68.5

Loan (except PLUS)

 Did receive loan 5.6 9.9

 Did not receive loan 94.4 90.1
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

54

Table 33—Percentage distribution1 of undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public

less-than-4-year institutions according to type and source of aid, by state aid group: 1996

--Continued

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Work-study

 Did receive work-study 1.0 1.6

 Did not receive work-study 99.0 98.4

Other type of aid (including assistantships & PLUS)

 Did receive other type of aid 3.8 4.6

 Did not receive other type of aid 96.2 95.4

1The columns sum to 100 vertically for each selected characteristic.

2Veterans Administration/Department of Defense.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

Undergraduate aid recipients in public less-than-4-year institutions received $2,140 on

average compared with $1,622 received by those in the low state aid group (table 35). Those

attending in the high state aid group received a larger grant, $1,449 compared with $1,102

received by those in the low state aid group (table 34). Undergraduates in the high state aid

group received $577 in employer aid compared with $298 received by those in the low state aid

group (table 34).

Table 34—Average total, state, institutional, employer, federal and other aid source amounts awarded to

undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public less-than-4-year

institutions, by state aid group: 1996

Total State Institutional Employer Federal Other source

aid aid aid aid aid of aid

 Total $1,903 $929 $590 $455 $2,331 $795

State aid group

 High state aid group 2,140 952 701 577 2,508 800

 Low state aid group 1,622 738 560 298 2,112 788

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

55

Table 35—Average total aid, grant aid, work-study, loan and other aid type amounts awarded to

undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public less-than-4-year

institutions, by state aid group: 1996

Total Grant Work- Other type

aid aid study Loan of aid

 Total $1,903 $1,282 $1,360 $2,831 $1,694

State aid group

 High state aid group 2,140 1,449 -- 2,808 1,755

 Low state aid group 1,622 1,102 -- 2,875 1,616

--Sample size too small for a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

As shown in table 31, tuition charged to undergraduates in public less-than-4-year

institutions was higher for those in the high state aid group compared with those attending in the

low state aid group. Undergraduates in the high state aid group were charged $921 and those in

the low state aid group, $498 (table 36). Those attending institutions in the high state aid group

also faced a higher tuition after subtracting state aid from the tuition, $793 compared with $485.

The differences in tuition persisted after adding institutional aid to the aid total. Finally, when all

grant aid was subtracted from the tuition, the net tuition paid by those in the high state aid group

was $639 compared with $316 paid by those in the low state aid group.

Table 36—Average price of attendance for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending

public less-than-4-year institutions, by state aid group: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

Price of attendance

 Tuition and fees $498 $921

 Tuition and fees minus state aid* 485 793

 Tuition and fees minus state aid minus institutional aid 439 781

 Tuition and fees minus all grants, regardless of source* 316 439

*Some state aid received may not be in the form of a grant.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.

The difference in average tuition paid between students in the two state aid groups was

evident in every dependent student income category. For example, those students with family

income less than $20,000 paid a net tuition of $644 in the high state aid group compared with

$261 in the low state aid group (table 37). Those with income between $20,000 and $39,999
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HIGH AND LOW STATE AID GROUPS

56

paid a net tuition of $942 in the high state aid group and $477 in the low state aid group. The

difference in net tuition between the two state groups continued for dependent undergraduates in

all the remaining income groups.

This discrepancy in tuition paid by undergraduates attending institutions in the two groups

cannot be attributed to differences in part-time enrollment. As shown earlier, no significant

difference existed between the portion of undergraduates in the high and low state aid groups who

attended part-time (table 32).

Table 37—Average net tuition for undergraduates in the low and high state aid groups attending public lessthan-4-year institutions, by state aid group and income level: 1996

Low state High state

aid group aid group

 Total $316 $639

Dependent student

Income

 Less than $20,000 261 644

 $20,000-$39,999 477 942

 $40,000-$59,999 506 1,234

 $60,000-$79,999 444 1,117

 $80,000 or more 388 1,118

Independent student

Income

 Less than $5,000 133 210

 $5,000-$9,999 197 392

 $10,000-$19,999 275 471

 $20,000 or more 255 389

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.
57

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The analysis presented in this report suggests that undergraduates attending institutions in

states that awarded higher levels of student financial aid paid higher tuition and received more

student aid than those attending institutions in states that provided less student financial aid. This

difference presents a natural comparison that helps inform the debate between proponents of high

tuition/high aid and low tuition-low aid. It may be that some of the differences reported for

undergraduates attending institutions in the high and low state aid groups represent variation in

the population living (or attending school) in the states that make up the two groups.

Institutions in the 16 low state aid states enrolled a smaller percentage of the nation’s

undergraduates than did those in the ten high state aid states. Most undergraduates attended

institutions in the state in which they live. Table 15 shows that 86 percent of the undergraduates

in both the high and low state aid groups attended an institution in the state in which they lived.

Undergraduates in the low state aid group may have different, and perhaps more limited,

institutional choices than those in the high state aid group. These state differences are beyond the

reach of the NPSAS:96 data, but should be considered in future research on the role states play in

the provision of postsecondary education.

States with a large number of undergraduates in private, not-for-profit institutions might

develop a state student financial aid program and charge higher tuition in public institutions than

states with fewer undergraduates enrolled in private, not-for-profit institutions29. The results are

consistent with this proposition. More than twice as many undergraduates enrolled in private,

not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group compared with the low state aid

group.

The fact that more undergraduates attended private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in

the high state aid group than in the low state aid group provides part of the explanation for the

higher average tuition paid by undergraduates in the latter group. The difference in average

tuition may also be related to the lower chance of enrolling in a public less-than-4-year institution

 

29Johnstone, Bruce. “Patterns of Finance,” The Review of Higher Education. (Spring 1998), pp. 243-255.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

58

in the high state aid group compared with the low state aid group. Enrollment in public 4-year

institutions did not differ significantly between the two groups.

Enrollment percentage differences among the three institutional sectors did not account

for all of the variation in average tuition charged to undergraduates attending institutions in the

high and low state aid groups. Undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the high

state aid group were charged higher tuition than were those in the low state aid group.

Subtracting state aid from the tuition suggests that compared with those in the low state aid

group, undergraduates attending public 4-year institutions in the high state aid group did not face

significantly higher net tuition. However, students attending public less-than-4-year institutions in

the high state aid group paid a higher average tuition, even after state aid was subtracted, than did

those in the low state aid group.

The results suggest that undergraduates attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year

institutions in the high state aid group were more likely to be dependent undergraduates attending

full-time than were those attending private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the low state aid

group. One possible explanation for this difference is that the private, not-for-profit, 4-year

institutions in the low state aid group faced a different competitive market for students. They had

less aid to offer undergraduates and public institutions in these states charged lower tuition than

was the case in the high state aid group. Private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the low state

aid group may adapt to this environment by enrolling more part-time undergraduates than private,

not-for-profit, 4-year institutions in the high state aid group. Another contributing factor may be

the fact that the low aid states have fewer citizens, on average, than the high aid states. The

lower density of population may result in a smaller base of potential students. By including more

part-time students, these institutions may compensate for the smaller enrollment base.

The net tuition paid by dependent undergraduates in public less-than-4-year institutions

was higher in every income group for those in the high state aid group compared with those in the

low state aid group. These institutions may provide access for low-income undergraduates.

However, even with state aid and all other grants subtracted from tuition, undergraduates with

incomes below $20,000 paid a higher tuition if they attended a public less-than-4-year institution

in the high state aid group rather than in the low state aid group. Further, the lack of any

significant enrollment percentage difference for undergraduates in the different income categories

in the high and low state aid groups suggests that the higher net tuition did not have a negative

effect on enrollment of low-income undergraduates.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

59

The combination of federal, state and private grant aid does not equalize the price of

attendance for undergraduates attending public less-than-4-year institutions in the high state aid

group compared with those attending in the low state aid group. A family will pay several

hundred dollars more, on average, to attend a public less-than-4-year institution in the high state

aid group than in the low state aid group.

Student characteristics of interest for issues of access did not differ systematically across

the low and high state aid groups. The percentage of the enrolled undergraduates that were firstgeneration college undergraduates was greater in the high state aid group than in the low. In

addition, there was no significant difference in the percentage of white, non-Hispanic

undergraduates, with 73 percent in both the high and low state aid groups. Minority enrollment

did not differ between the two state aid groups although the composition of the minority

population may reflect regional differences.

One of the basic concerns about moving to a high tuition/high aid approach is that lowincome undergraduates might be dissuaded from applying because of the high, published tuition.

It is not possible to determine which undergraduates did not apply for college using NPSAS:96

data. However, using NPSAS data permits comparison of the percentage of enrollment

represented by undergraduates from different income groups.

The results show that undergraduates not only faced a higher advertised tuition, but they

paid a higher average net tuition in the high state aid group than the low state aid group. It is

reasonable to believe that fewer low-income undergraduates would enroll in postsecondary

education in the high state aid group than the low state aid group because of the higher average

tuition both before and after grant aid was awarded. This was not the case. Low-income

undergraduate enrollment is measured here as the percentage of the enrolled undergraduates who

are dependents and have incomes less than $20,000. By this measure, no significant difference

existed in the percentage of undergraduate enrollment represented by those with family incomes

under $20,000. No statistical difference existed for the percentage of dependent undergraduates

with incomes below $20,000 enrolled in any one of the three major institutional sectors in the high

and low state aid groups. 30

Low-income undergraduates may make choices about where they attend college based on

other factors than price of attendance. It may also be that the state defines a set of institutional

 

30For private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions, this proportion was compared for full-time undergraduates only.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

60

choices for students who cannot afford to travel out of state. Finally, the tuition differences may

be small enough so they do not restrict enrollment.

These tables suggest that differences among states may be relevant for federal student

financial aid policy. Undergraduates attending institutions in the high state aid group were more

likely to receive federal student financial aid than were those in the low state aid group. States

where undergraduates pay a higher average tuition attract more federal student financial aid than

states where undergraduates pay a lower tuition. In part, this is due to the larger percentage of

enrollment in private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions and in part to higher tuition in the public

institutions. State tuition and student aid policy does affect the probability that undergraduates in

the state will receive federal student financial aid.
61

APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

This glossary describes the variables used in this report. The variables were taken directly

from the NCES NPSAS:96 Undergraduate Data Analysis System (DAS). This is an NCES

software application that generates tables from the NPSAS:96 data. A description of the DAS

software is in appendix B. The variable names in the right margin correspond to the names of the

variables in the DAS. The variables are arranged in alphabetical order by variable label.

Age as of 12/31/95 AGE

23 or younger

24-30

31-39

40 or older

Attendance intensity ATTEND2

Student's attendance status in September 1995 as defined by the institution.

Full-time

Part-time

Dependency status DEPEND

Student’s dependency status.

Dependent Students were financially dependent if they did not meet any of the criteria for

independence (see below).

Independent A student was considered independent by meeting one of the following criteria:

ß was 24 or older as of 12/31/95.

ß was a veteran.

ß was an orphan or ward of the court.

ß had legal dependents, other than spouse.

ß was married, and not claimed by parents on 1995 tax returns.

ß was a graduate student and not claimed as a dependent by parents on

1995 tax return.
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

62

Employer aid, total EMPLYAMT

Total amount of employer aid received by the student. Employer aid is aid received from the

business, corporation, institution, or individual by whom the student is employed. This variable

includes tuition waivers for employees of postsecondary institutions and their dependents. The

percentage of students with employer aid is the percentage with positive amounts recorded for

this variable. The average amount received is the average of all students who received employer

aid.

Federal aid, total TFEDAID

Total amount of federal financial aid, including loans, grants, work-study, and all other federal aid

the student received, excluding Veterans Administration/Department of Defense aid. The

percentage of students who received any federal aid is the percentage with positive amounts

recorded for this variable. The average amount received is the average of all students who

received federal aid.

Gender of student GENDER

Male

Female

Grade point average GPA2

Student’s grade point average during 1995. The grade point average format used by each

institution was identified and converted to the 0.0-4.0 scale.

Less than 2.00

2.00-3.49

3.50 or higher

Grant aid, total TOTGRT

Total amount of all grants and scholarships, federal, institutional and other aid received by the

student. Grants are a type of student financial aid that does not require repayment or

employment. Grants include scholarships and fellowships. Tuition waivers and employer aid are

considered grant aid. The percentage of students with grants is the percentage with positive

amounts recorded for this variable. The average amount received is the average of all students

who received grants.
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

63

Highest education completed by either parent 1995-96 PAREDUC

Highest level of education completed by the undergraduate’s parents. This was used to determine

whether the student was a first-generation student.

Student was first-generation: Parent with highest education had less than a high school

education, or a high school diploma

Student was not first-generation: Parent with highest education had any one of the following

as highest degree:

ß less than one-year occupational\trade\technical school

ß at least one year, but less than two years of

occupational\trade\technical school

ß two or more years of occupational\trade\technical

school

ß less than two years of college

ß two or more years of college including AA

ß bachelor’s degree (4-5 years)

ß master’s degree or equivalent

ß first-professional degree

ß doctorate (Ph.D., Ed.D.)

Income and dependency level INCOME

Income level and dependency status for the student. Parents’ or guardians’ income is the income

source for dependent students; the source of independent students' income combines their own

earnings and those of their spouse, if married.

Dependent student:

Less than $20,000 Income of less than $20,000 in 1994

$20,000 to 39,999 Income between $20,000 and $39,999 in 1994

$40,000 to 59,999 Income between $40,000 and $59,999 in 1994

$60,000 to 79,999 Income between $60,000 and $79,999 in 1994

$80,000 or more Income of $80,000 or higher in 1994

Independent student:

Less than $5,000 Income of less than $5,000 in 1994

$5,000 to 9,999 Income between $5,000 and $9,999 in 1994

$10,000 to 19,999 Income between $10,000 and $19,999 in 1994

$20,000 or more Income of $20,000 or higher in 1994
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

64

Income percentile rank PCTALL2

Income percentiles for all students. It is equal to the proportion of the sample who had an income

lower than that recorded for the student. It was calculated separately for dependent and

independent students. Thus, each ranking compares the student only to other students of the

same dependency status. It uses parents’ income if student is dependent and student’s own

income when student is independent.

Institutional aid, total INSTAMT

Indicates the total amount of institutional aid the student received. Institutional aid includes

grants and loans from the institution attended, institution-sponsored work-study, and all other

institutional aid, including research and teaching assistantships. Institutional aid also includes

assistantships funded by federal research grants. The percentage of students with institutional aid

is the percentage with positive amounts recorded for this variable. The average amount received

is the average of all students who received institutional aid.

Institution in state of legal residence SAMESTAT

Indicates whether the student attended school in the same state (in-state) as his/her state of legal

residence.

Institutional type and control SECTOR

Institutional type as defined by institutional level and control. Institutional type refers to the

institution's highest offering (less-than-2-year, 2-year and 4-year), and control is the source of

revenue and control of operations (public, private not-for-profit, and private for-profit).

Public, 4-year

Public less-than-4-year

Private, not-for-profit, 4-year

Private, not-for-profit, 2-year or less

Private, for-profit, 2-year or more

Private, for-profit, less-than-2-year
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

65

Loan, total TOTLOAN

Indicates the total amount of loans the student received, regardless of the source. Loans are a

type of student financial aid that advance funds and are evidenced by a promissory note requiring

the recipient to repay the specified amounts under prescribed conditions. The percentage of

students with loans is the percentage with positive amounts recorded for this variable. The

average amount received is the average of all students who received loans. This does not include

PLUS.

Marital status SMARITAL

Student’s marital status on the date the student applied for financial aid, based on the Free

Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), or if the student did not apply for financial aid,

marital status as reported by the institution.

Not married Student was not married.

Married Student was married.

Separated Student was separated.

Number of dependents NDEPEND

For independent students, the number of the student’s non-spouse dependents. Refers to

student's own family, rather than parents’ family, regardless of whether the student is dependent

or independent. Does not include spouse or student.

Student had one or more dependents.

Student did not have dependents.

Other source, total OTHERSCR

For students who received aid, total aid from sources that could not be classified as federal, state,

or institutional. Includes employer aid, veteran’s benefits, vocational rehabilitation, and Job

Training Partnership Act (JTPA) program funds. The percentage of students with other aid is the

percentage with positive amounts recorded for this variable. The average amount received is the

average of all students who received aid from these sources.
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

66

Other type of aid, total TOTOTHR

Indicates the total amount of aid received that was not classified as grants, loans, or work-study.

It also includes teaching and research assistantships. This is the sum of other federal amounts,

other state amounts and other institutional amounts. The percentage of students with other type

of aid is the percentage with positive amounts recorded for this variable. The average amount

received is the average of all students who received aid from these sources.

Race/ethnicity of student RACE

American Indian/ Alaskan Native A person having origins in any of the original peoples of

North America and who maintains cultural identification

through tribal affiliation or community recognition.

Asian/Pacific Islander A person having origins in any of the Asian or Pacific

Islander original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia,

the Indian Subcontinent, or Pacific Islands. This includes

people from China, Japan, Korea, the Philippine Islands,

Samoa, India and Vietnam.

Black, non-Hispanic A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of

Africa, and not of Hispanic origin.

Hispanic A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or

South American, or other Spanish culture or origin,

regardless of race.

White, non-Hispanic A person having origins in any of the original peoples of

Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East (except those of

Hispanic origin).

Other A person not in one of the above categories.

State aid, total STATEAMT

Indicates the total amount of state aid received. State aid includes state grants, loans, statesponsored work-study, and all other state financial aid. The percentage of students who received

state aid is the percentage with positive amounts recorded for this variable. The average amount

received is the average of all students who received state aid.
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

67

State aid group INSSTATE

Indicates the state where the NPSAS institution is located. The state aid groups are based on data

from the National Association of State Student Grant Aid Programs (NASSGAP). The figure

used is the estimated state grant dollars per full-time equivalent undergraduate enrollment.

National estimated state grant dollars per full-time equivalent undergraduate enrollment in 1995-

96 was $275.

Low state aid group: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii,

Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota,

South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Wyoming (estimated state grant dollars

per full-time equivalent undergraduate enrollment of $100 or less)

Middle state aid group: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Kansas,

Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,

Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon,

Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Washington, West Virginia,

Wisconsin.

High state aid group: Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New

York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia (estimated state grant dollars

per full-time equivalent undergraduate enrollment of $400 or more)

Total aid TOTAID

Total amount of financial aid received from all sources in 1995-96, including federal, state,

institution, and other sources received by the student. The percentage of students who received

any financial aid is the percentage with positive amounts recorded for this variable. The average

amount received is the average of all students who received any financial aid.

Tuition and fees-amount for terms attended TUITION

Actual amount of tuition charged the student for the terms attended, as reported by the institution.

Student report was used if institutional data were not available or if the student attended more

than one institution during the academic year. The average amount is the average of all students,

including those who did not have any tuition or fees.

Less than $1,000 Tuition less than $1,000 in 1996

$1,000-$2,499 Tuition between $1,000 and $2,499 in 1996

$2,500-$4,999 Tuition between $2,500 and $4,999 in 1996

$5,000-$9,999 Tuition between $5,000 and $9,999 in 1996

$10,000 or more Tuition of $10,000 or higher in 1996
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

68

Tuition minus state aid NETTUIT1

Tuition and fees less state aid amount. If state aid amount is zero, this variable is equal to tuition

and fees. If tuition and fees minus the state aid is less than zero, this variable is recorded as zero.

Tuition and fees are for all terms attended. For those attending only one institution during 1995-

96, it is actual amount of tuition charged. State aid is the total amount of state aid received by the

student.

Tuition minus sum of state and institutional aid NETTUIT2

Tuition and fees less the sum of the state and institutional aid amounts. If state and institutional

aid amounts are zero, then this variable is equal to the tuition and fees. If the calculation result is

less than zero, this variable is recorded as zero. State aid is the total amount of state aid received

by the student. Institutional aid is the total institutional aid amount received during the year. This

variable was calculated for only those students who attended one institution during 1995-96.

Tuition minus all grants NETCST9

Indicates tuition and fees minus grants. Negative values were recorded as zero. Grant aid is the

total amount of all grants and scholarships (federal, state, institutional and other) received by the

student.

Undergraduate level UGLEVEL1

Student's year in college or university:

1st year-freshman

2nd year-sophomore

3rd year-junior

4th year or more-senior

Work-study, total TOTWKST

Indicates the total amount of all work study awards received. It is the sum of federal work-study

amount, state work-study amount, institutional work-study amount and other unclassified workstudy amount. Total work-study is one component of total amount of all aid, along with total

grant amount, total loan amount, and total other amount. The percentage of students with workstudy aid is the percentage with positive amounts recorded for this variable. The average amount

received is the average of all students who received work-study aid.
69

APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL NOTES

THE 1995-96 NATIONAL POSTSECONDARY STUDENT AID STUDY (NPSAS:96)

The 1995-96 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96) is a comprehensive

nationwide study conducted by the Department of Education’s National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES) to determine how students and their families pay for postsecondary education.

It also describes demographic and other characteristics of students enrolled. The study is based

on a nationally representative sample of all students in postsecondary education institutions,

including undergraduate, graduate, and first-professional students. Students attending all types

and levels of institutions are represented in the sample, including public and private institutions

and less-than-2-year institutions, 2-year institutions, and 4-year colleges and universities. The

study is designed to address the policy questions resulting from the rapid growth of financial aid

programs, and the succession of changes in financial aid program policies since 1986. The first

NPSAS study was conducted in 1986-87, then again in 1989-90, and 1992-93.31

DATA ANALYSIS SYSTEM

The estimates presented in this report were produced using the NPSAS:96 Data Analysis

Systems (DAS). The DAS software makes it possible for users to specify and generate their own

tables from the NPSAS:96 data. With the DAS, users can replicate or expand upon the tables

presented in this report. In addition to the table estimates, the DAS calculates proper standard

errors32 and weighted sample sizes for these estimates. For example, table B.1 contains standard

errors that correspond to table 4, and was generated by the DAS. If the number of valid cases is

too small to produce a reliable estimate (less than 30 cases), the DAS prints the message “low-N”

instead of the estimate.

 

31For more information on the NPSAS survey, consult U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study, 1995-96 (NPSAS:96) Methodology Report, NCES 98-073 by John A. Riccobono, Roy W. Whitmore, Timothy J.

Gabel, Mark A. Traccarella, Daniel J. Pratt and Lutz K. Berkner. Project Officer: Andrew G. Malizio. Washington, D.C.: 1997.

32The NPSAS:96 samples are not simple random samples and, therefore, simple random sample techniques for estimating sampling error cannot be

applied to these data. The DAS takes into account the complexity of the sampling procedures and calculates standard errors appropriate for such

samples. The method for computing sampling errors used by the DAS involves approximating the estimator by the linear terms of a Taylor series

expansion. The procedure is typically referred to as the Taylor series method.
APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL NOTES

70

Table B.1– Standard errors for table 4: Percentage of undergraduates who received state aid and average

state aid amount awarded, by selected characteristics: 1996

Average

Received state aid

state aid award

 Total 0.4 47.7

State aid group

 High state aid group 1.2 80.8

 Middle state aid group 0.5 62.0

 Low state aid group 0.5 99.9

Institution type

 Public 4-year 0.6 62.9

 Public less-than-4-year 0.6 64.4

 Private, not-for-profit, 4-year 1.3 95.8

 Private, not-for-profit, 2-year or less 3.0 237.4

 Private, for-profit, 2-year or more 2.5 179.3

 Private, for-profit, less-than-2-year 2.7 441.8

Tuition and fees for the terms attended

 Less than $1,000 0.5 40.2

 $1,000-$2,499 0.8 42.3

 $2,500-$4,999 1.1 90.4

 $5,000-$9,999 1.4 91.6

 $10,000 or more 1.6 135.9

Gender

 Male 0.5 60.8

 Female 0.5 51.1

Dependency status

 Dependent 0.5 56.3

 Independent 0.5 68.6

Marital status

 Not married 0.5 49.9

 Married 0.5 84.7

 Separated 3.2 115.6

Age

 23 or younger 0.5 51.8

 24-30 0.6 71.0

 31-39 0.7 95.2

 40 or older 0.7 180.2

Number of dependents, independent student

 Student had one or more dependents 0.8 70.3

 Student did not have dependents 0.4 50.7
APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL NOTES

71

Table B.1– Standard errors for table 4: Percentage of undergraduates who received state aid and average

state aid amount awarded, by selected characteristics: 1996--Continued

Average

Received state aid

state aid award

Race/ethnicity of student

 White, non-Hispanic 0.4 48.0

 Black, non-Hispanic 1.2 79.0

 Hispanic 1.0 131.2

 Asian/Pacific Islander 1.0 154.1

 American Indian/Alaskan Native 3.2 246.3

 Other 1.9 447.7

Income, dependent student

 Less than $20,000 1.1 88.1

 $20,000-$39,999 0.9 65.2

 $40,000-$59,999 0.8 76.2

 $60,000-$79,999 0.7 101.6

 $80,000 or more 0.4 146.7

Income, independent student

 Less than $5,000 1.2 69.9

 $5,000-$9,999 1.2 110.5

 $10,000-$19,999 0.8 75.4

 $20,000 or more 0.4 133.9

Undergraduate level

 First year/freshman 0.8 63.8

 Second year/sophomore 0.7 74.4

 Third year/junior 0.8 68.2

 Fourth year or more/senior 0.7 81.9

Student attended institution in state of legal residence

 Student attended institution in state of legal residence 0.5 47.5

 Student did not attend institution in state of legal residence 0.4 152.1

First-generation student

 Student was first-generation 0.8 54.5

 Student was not first-generation 0.5 59.3

Attendance intensity

 Full-time 0.7 55.8

 Part-time 0.3 47.9

Grade point average

 Less than 2.00 0.6 58.8

 2.00-3.49 0.5 49.1

 3.50 or higher 0.7 88.2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995-96 National

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96), Undergraduate Data Analysis System.
APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL NOTES

72

In addition to tables, the DAS will also produce a correlation matrix of selected variables

to be used for linear regression models. Included in the output with the correlation matrix are the

design effects (DEFTs) for each variable in the matrix. Since statistical procedures generally

compute regression coefficients based on simple random sample assumptions, the standard errors

must be adjusted with the design effects to take into account the NPSAS:96 stratified sampling

method. (See discussion under “Statistical Procedures” below for the adjustment procedure.)

For more information about the NPSAS:96 Data Analysis Systems, consult the NCES

DAS Website (WWW.PEDAR-DAS.org) or contact:

Aurora D’Amico

NCES Data Development and Longitudinal Studies Group

555 New Jersey Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20208-5652

(202) 219-1365

Internet address: Aurora_D’Amico@ed.gov

STATISTICAL PROCEDURES

The descriptive comparisons were tested in this report using Student’s t statistic.

Differences between estimates are tested against the probability of a Type I error, or significance

level. The significance levels were determined by calculating the Student’s t values for the

differences between each pair of means or proportions and comparing these with published tables

of significance levels for two-tailed hypothesis testing.

Student’s t values may be computed to test the difference between estimates with the

following formula:

E1 – E2

t = (1)

se1

2

 + se2

2

where E1 and E2 are the estimates to be compared and se1 and se2 are their corresponding

standard errors. This formula is valid only for independent estimates. When estimates are not

independent a covariance term must be added to the formula. If the comparison is between the

mean of a subgroup and the mean of the total group, the following formula is used:

Esub – Etot

(2)

se

2

sub + se2tot - 2p se

2

sub
APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL NOTES

73

Where p is the proportion of the total group contained in the subgroup.33

When comparing two percentages from a distribution that adds to 100 percent, the

following formula is used:

E1 – E2

(3)

se1

2 + se22

– 2(r)se1

2 

se2

2

where r is the correlation between the two estimates.34 The estimates, standard errors, and

correlations can all be obtained from the DAS.

There are hazards in reporting statistical tests for each comparison. First, comparisons

based on large t statistics may appear to merit special attention. This can be misleading, since the

magnitude of the t statistic is related not only to the observed differences in means or percentages

but also to the number of students in the specific categories used for comparison. Hence, a small

difference compared across a large number of students would produce a large t statistic.

A second hazard in reporting statistical tests for each comparison occurs when making

multiple comparisons among categories of an independent variable. For example, when making

paired comparisons among different levels of income, the probability of a Type I error for these

comparisons taken as a group is larger than the probability for a single comparison. When more

than one difference between groups of related characteristics or “families” is tested for statistical

significance, one must apply a standard that assures a level of significance for all of those

comparisons taken together.

 

33U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. A Note from the Chief Statistician, No. 2. 1993.

34Ibid.
APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL NOTES

74

Comparisons were made in this report only when p<=.05/k for a particular pairwise

comparison, where that comparison was one of k tests within a family. This guarantees both that

the individual comparison would have p<=.05 and that for k comparisons within a family of

possible comparisons, the significance level for all the comparisons will sum to p<=.05.35

For example, in a comparison of the percentages of males and females who enrolled in

postsecondary education only one comparison is possible (males versus females). In this family,

k=1, and the comparison can be evaluated without adjusting the significance level. When students

are divided into five racial-ethnic groups and all possible comparisons are made, then k=10 and

the significance level of the each test must be p<=.05/10 or p<=.005. The formula for calculating

family size (k) is as follows:

k = [ j * ( j – 1 ) ] / 2 (4)

Where j is the number of categories for the variable being tested. In the case of raceethnicity, there are five racial-ethnic groups (American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian/Pacific

Islander, black, non-Hispanic, Hispanic, and white, non-Hispanic), so substituting 5 for j in

equation 4:

k = [ ( 5 ) ( 5 – 1 ) ] / 2 = 10 (5)

 

35The standard that p<=.05/k for each comparison is more stringent than the criterion that the significance level of the comparisons should sum to

p<=.05. For tables showing the t statistics required to ensure that p<=.05/k for a particular family size and degrees of freedom, see Olive Jean Dunn,

“Multiple Comparisons Among Means,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 56 (1961), pp. 52-64.