IES PRACTICE GUIDE WHAT WORKS CLEARINGHOUSE

NCEE 2009-4066

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Helping Students Navigate the Path 

to College: What High Schools Can Do

Helping Students Navigate the Path 

to College: What High Schools Can Do
The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) publishes practice guides in education

to bring the best available evidence and expertise to bear on the types of challenges 

that cannot currently be addressed by single interventions or programs. Authors of 

practice guides seldom conduct the types of systematic literature searches that are 

the backbone of a meta-analysis, although they take advantage of such work when 

it is already published. Instead, authors use their expertise to identify the most important research with respect to their recommendations and conduct a search of 

recent publications to ensure that the research supporting the recommendations 

is up-to-date. 

Unique to IES-sponsored practice guides is that they are subjected to rigorous external peer review through the same office that is responsible for independent review 

of other IES publications. A critical task for peer reviewers of a practice guide is to 

determine whether the evidence cited in support of particular recommendations is 

up-to-date and that studies of similar or better quality that point in a different direction have not been ignored. Because practice guides depend on the expertise of 

their authors and their group decisionmaking, the content of a practice guide is not 

and should not be viewed as a set of recommendations that in every case depends 

on and flows inevitably from scientific research.

The goal of this practice guide is to formulate specific and coherent evidence-based 

recommendations for use by educators addressing the challenge of increasing access 

to higher education. The guide provides practical, clear information on critical topics related to what schools can do to help students navigate the path to college and 

is based on the best available evidence as judged by the panel. Recommendations 

presented in this guide should not be construed to imply that no further research 

is warranted on the effectiveness of particular strategies for increasing access to 

postsecondary education.
Helping Students Navigate the 

Path to College: What High Schools 

Can Do

September 2009

Panel

William G. Tierney (Chair)

University of Southern California

Thomas Bailey

Columbia University

Jill Constantine

Mathematica Policy Research

Neal Finkelstein

WestEd

Nicole Farmer Hurd

National College Advising Corps

Staff

Jeffrey Max

Christina Clark Tuttle

Mathematica Policy Research

NCEE 2009-4066

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

IES PRACTICE GUIDE
This report was prepared for the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences under Contract ED-07-CO-0062 by 

the What Works Clearinghouse, a project of Mathematica Policy Research. 

Disclaimer 

The opinions and positions expressed in this practice guide are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinions and positions of the Institute of 

Education Sciences or the U.S. Department of Education. This practice guide should 

be reviewed and applied according to the specific needs of the educators and education agencies using it, and with full realization that it represents the judgments 

of the review panel regarding what constitutes sensible practice, based on the research that was available at the time of publication. This practice guide should be 

used as a tool to assist in decisionmaking rather than as a “cookbook.” Any references within the document to specific education products are illustrative and do 

not imply endorsement of these products to the exclusion of other products that 

are not referenced. 

U.S. Department of Education 

Arne Duncan 

Secretary 

Institute of Education Sciences 

John Q. Easton

Director 

National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance 

John Q. Easton

Acting Commissioner 

September 2009

This report is in the public domain. Although permission to reprint this publication 

is not necessary, the citation should be: 

Tierney, W. G., Bailey, T., Constantine, J., Finkelstein, N., & Hurd, N. F. (2009). 

Helping students navigate the path to college: What high schools can do: A practice guide (NCEE #2009-4066). Washington, DC: National Center for Education 

Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/

practiceguides/.

What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide citations begin with the panel chair, followed 

by the names of the panelists listed in alphabetical order.

This report is available on the IES website at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee and http://ies.

ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides/.

Alternative Formats 

On request, this publication can be made available in alternate formats, such as 

Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette. For more information, call the 

Alternative Format Center at (202) 205-8113.
( iii )

Helping Students Navigate the Path 

to College: What High Schools Can Do

Contents

Introduction 1

The What Works Clearinghouse standards and their relevance to this guide 4

Overview 5

Scope of the practice guide 7

Status of the research 8

Summary of the recommendations 9

Checklist for carrying out the recommendations 11

Recommendation 1. Offer courses and curricula that prepare students 

for college-level work, and ensure that students understand what 

constitutes a college-ready curriculum by 9th grade 12

Recommendation 2. Utilize assessment measures throughout high school 

so that students are aware of how prepared they are for college, 

and assist them in overcoming deficiencies as they are identified 20

Recommendation 3. Surround students with adults and peers who 

build and support their college-going aspirations 26

Recommendation 4. Engage and assist students in completing critical 

steps for college entry 31

Recommendation 5. Increase families’ financial awareness, and help 

students apply for financial aid 38

Appendix A. Postscript from the Institute of Education Sciences 43

Appendix B. About the authors 46

Appendix C. Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest 48

Appendix D. Technical information on the studies 49

References 73
( iv )

Helping Students Navigate the Path to College: What High Schools Can Do

List of tables 

Table 1. Institute of Education Sciences levels of evidence for practice guides 2

Table 2. Recommendations and corresponding levels of evidence 6

Table 3. Examples of college preparatory course requirements 14

Table D1. Studies of college access programs that met WWC standards 

with or without reservations 54

Table D2. Studies of college access programs that potentially 

met WWC standards 56

List of exhibits

Exhibit 1. Example of course requirement mailing 16

Exhibit 2. Example of a personalized learning plan 17

Exhibit 3. Example of a college entrance exam schedule 33

Exhibit 4. Example of a college visit schedule 34

Exhibit 5. Example of a college admissions timeline 36
( 1 )

Introduction

Access to higher education remains a challenge for many students who face barriers 

to college entry. Low-income students and 

students who are potentially the first in 

their family to attend college have lower 

college enrollment rates than other students.1 Although academic preparation accounts for some of these differences, the 

disparities in college-going rates persist 

for these groups of students even when 

controlling for academic preparation.2

College access outcomes have important 

economic and social consequences: college graduates earn more than those with 

a high school degree and are more active 

in their communities.3

This guide is intended to help schools and 

districts develop practices to increase access to higher education. It can be useful for individuals who work in schools 

and districts in planning and executing 

strategies to improve preparation for, and 

access to, higher education. A panel of 

experts in college access programs and 

strategies and in research methods developed the recommendations in this guide. 

The guide contains specific steps on how 

to implement the recommendations that 

are targeted at school- and district-level 

administrators, teachers, counselors, and 

related education staff. The guide also 

indicates the level of research evidence 

demonstrating that each recommended 

practice is effective. 

As with all What Works Clearinghouse 

(WWC) practice guide panels, this panel 

developed recommendations by consulting research evidence. The evidence that 

the panel considered in developing this 

1. Choy (2002); National Center for Education 

Statistics (2008).

2. Ellwood and Kane (2000); Smith et al. (1997).

3. Baum and Ma (2007); Kane and Rouse (1995); 

National Conference on Citizenship (2006); U.S. 

Census Bureau (2002).

document ranges from experimental evaluations of college access programs to expert analyses of college access practices. 

In looking for effective practices, the panel 

paid particular attention to high-quality experimental and quasi-experimental 

studies, such as those meeting the criteria 

of the WWC,4 and to patterns of practices 

that are replicated across programs.

The research base for this guide was identified through a comprehensive search for 

studies evaluating college access interventions and practices. An initial search 

for this type of research conducted in the 

United States in the past 20 years (1988–

2008) yielded more than 500 studies. Of 

these, 99 studies examined college access 

programs or related practices for high 

school students and were eligible for further review because the study design included a comparison group. These studies 

were reviewed by the WWC to determine 

whether they were consistent with WWC 

standards. Of the 99 studies, 16 studies 

met WWC standards with or without reservations. These 16 studies of 10 different college access programs represent the 

strongest evidence of the effectiveness of 

college access programs.

To indicate the strength of evidence supporting each recommendation, the panel 

relied on the WWC standards for determining levels of evidence, described below and 

in Table 1. It is important for the reader to 

remember that the level of evidence rating 

is not a judgment by the panel on how effective each of these recommended practices will be when implemented, nor are 

they a judgment of what prior research 

has to say about their effectiveness. The 

level of evidence ratings reflect the panel’s 

judgment of the quality of the existing 

literature to support a causal claim that 

when these practices have been implemented in the past, positive effects on student academic outcomes were observed. 

4. http://www.whatworks.ed.gov/
Introduction

( 2 )

Table 1. Institute of Education Sciences levels of evidence for practice guides

Strong

In general, characterization of the evidence for a recommendation as strong requires both 

studies with high internal validity (i.e., studies whose designs can support causal conclusions) 

and studies with high external validity (i.e., studies that in total include enough of the range 

of participants and settings on which the recommendation is focused to support the conclusion that the results can be generalized to those participants and settings). Strong evidence 

for this practice guide is operationalized as:

•	 A systematic review of research that generally meets WWC standards (see http://ies.

ed.gov/ncee/wwc/) and supports the effectiveness of a program, practice, or approach 

with no contradictory evidence of similar quality; OR

•	 Several well-designed, randomized controlled trials or well-designed quasi-experiments that generally meet WWC standards and support the effectiveness of a program, 

practice, or approach, with no contradictory evidence of similar quality; OR

•	 One large, well-designed, randomized controlled, multisite trial that meets WWC standards and supports the effectiveness of a program, practice, or approach, with no 

contradictory evidence of similar quality; OR

•	 For assessments, evidence of reliability and validity that meets the Standards for 

Educational and Psychological Testing.a

Moderate

In general, characterization of the evidence for a recommendation as moderate requires 

studies with high internal validity but moderate external validity or studies with high 

external validity but moderate internal validity. In other words, moderate evidence is 

derived from studies that support strong causal conclusions but generalization is uncertain or studies that support the generality of a relationship but the causality is uncertain. 

Moderate evidence for this practice guide is operationalized as:

•	 Experiments or quasi-experiments generally meeting WWC standards and supporting 

the effectiveness of a program, practice, or approach with small sample sizes and/

or other conditions of implementation or analysis that limit generalizability and no 

contrary evidence; OR

•	 Comparison group studies that do not demonstrate equivalence of groups at pretest 

and, therefore, do not meet WWC standards but that (1) consistently show enhanced 

outcomes for participants experiencing a particular program, practice, or approach 

and (2) have no major flaws related to internal validity other than lack of demonstrated 

equivalence at pretest (e.g., only one teacher or one class per condition, unequal 

amounts of instructional time, or highly biased outcome measures); OR

•	 Correlational research with strong statistical controls for selection bias and for discerning influence of endogenous factors and no contrary evidence; OR

•	 For assessments, evidence of reliability that meets the Standards for Educational and 

Psychological Testingb but with evidence of validity from samples not adequately representative of the population on which the recommendation is focused.

Low

In general, characterization of the evidence for a recommendation as low means that the 

recommendation is based on expert opinion derived from strong findings or theories in 

related areas and/or expert opinion buttressed by direct evidence that does not rise to 

the moderate or strong level. Low evidence is operationalized as evidence not meeting 

the standards for the moderate or strong level.

a. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on 

Measurement in Education (1999). 

b. Ibid.
Introduction

( 3 )

They do not reflect judgments of the relative strength of these positive effects or 

the relative importance of the individual 

recommendations. 

A strong rating refers to consistent and 

generalizable evidence that an intervention strategy or program improves 

outcomes.5

A moderate rating refers either to evidence 

from studies that allow strong causal conclusions but cannot be generalized with 

assurance to the population on which a 

recommendation is focused (perhaps because the findings have not been widely 

replicated) or to evidence from studies that 

are generalizable but have more causal 

ambiguity than that offered by experimental designs (e.g., statistical models of 

correlational data or group comparison designs for which equivalence of the groups 

at pretest is uncertain). 

A low rating refers to evidence from studies that do not meet the standards for 

moderate or strong evidence and/or expert 

opinion based on reasonable extrapolations from research and theory. 

A low level of evidence rating does not 

indicate that the recommendation is any 

less important than other recommendations with a strong or moderate rating. 

Rather, it suggests that the panel cannot 

point to a body of research that demonstrates its effect on student achievement. 

In some cases, this simply means that the 

5. Following WWC guidelines, improved outcomes are indicated by either a positive, statistically significant effect or a positive, substantively 

important effect size (i.e., greater than 0.25). See 

the WWC guidelines at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/

wwc/pdf/wwc_version1_standards.pdf. 

recommended practices would be difficult 

to study in a rigorous, experimental fashion; in other cases, it means that researchers have not yet studied this practice, or 

that there is weak or conflicting evidence 

of effectiveness.6

Three of the five recommendations made 

by the panel received a low evidence rating. For example, recommendation 2, 

which describes the use of assessments 

to measure college readiness, was determined to have a low level of evidence (see 

Table 2). This means that there are few existing studies designed to test, in a discrete 

and valid manner, the causal relation between the utilization of assessment measures and college going. Nevertheless, the 

authors of this practice guide, based on 

expert judgment and knowledge of practice, consider the use of assessment to be a 

critical component of a well-implemented 

strategic plan for increasing access to college. Hence, although the level of evidence 

rating is low, the panel has included assessment as one of the five recommended 

practices.

Citations in the text refer to studies of 

programs that have implemented various practices. Not all of these programs 

contribute to the level of evidence rating: 

although some of these programs have 

had rigorous evaluations of their impacts, 

others have not. Furthermore, some of the 

programs that have been rigorously evaluated have found positive effects on college 

access outcomes; others have not.

6. For more information, see the WWC Frequently 

Asked Questions page for practice guides, http://

ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/

doc.aspx?docid=15&tocid=3. 
Introduction

( 4 )

The What Works Clearinghouse 

standards and their relevance to 

this guide

In terms of the levels of evidence indicated in Table 1, the panel relied on WWC 

evidence standards to assess the quality 

of evidence supporting educational programs and practices. The WWC addresses 

evidence for the causal validity of instructional programs and practices according to 

WWC standards. Information about these 

standards is available at http://ies.ed.gov/

ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.

aspx?docid=19&tocid=1.7 The technical 

quality of each study is rated and placed 

into one of four categories:

•	 Meets Evidence Standards for randomized controlled trials and regression 

discontinuity studies that provide the 

strongest evidence of causal validity.

•	 Meets Evidence Standards with Reservations for all quasi-experimental 

studies with no design flaws and randomized controlled trials that have 

problems with randomization, attrition, or disruption.

•	 Does Not Meet Evidence Standards for 

studies that do not provide strong evidence of causal validity.

7. Reviews of studies for this practice guide 

applied version 1.0 WWC standards. Interested 

readers can access these standards at http://ies.

ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/iDocViewer/Doc.

aspx?docId=20&tocId=1.

•	 Potentially Meets Standards for studies 

that require additional information to 

determine whether they meet evidence 

standards; typically refers to quasi-experimental studies that do not provide 

sufficient information to assess baseline equivalence.

Following the recommendations and suggestions for carrying out the recommendations, Appendix D presents more information on the research evidence that 

supports each recommendation.

We appreciate the efforts of Jeffrey Max, 

Christina Clark Tuttle, Kristin Hallgren, 

Moira McCullough, and Sarah Wissel, Mathematica Policy Research staff members 

who participated in the panel meetings, 

characterized the research findings, and 

drafted the guide. We also appreciate the 

help of the many WWC reviewers who 

contributed their time and expertise to 

the review process. We also thank Scott 

Cody, Shannon Monahan, and Neil Seftor 

for helpful feedback and reviews of earlier 

versions of this guide.

William G. Tierney

Thomas Bailey

Jill Constantine

Neal Finkelstein

Nicole Farmer Hurd
( 5 )

Helping Students 

Navigate the Path 

to College: What 

High Schools Can Do

Overview

A well-educated workforce is critical for maintaining the economic competitiveness of the 

United States. The strength of our economy 

hinges on the ability of our education system to meet the demand for highly educated 

workers. As a result, there are persistent calls 

to improve access to higher education and to 

encourage students and adults to continue 

their education beyond high school.8 However, reaching college remains a challenge for 

many low-income and potentially first-generation students who (a) are not academically 

prepared or (b) lack knowledge about how to 

apply to, and pay for, college.9 College enrollment rates for these students continue to lag 

behind those of their peers despite overall 

improvements in college attendance. 

The challenge of improving the college-going rate can be traced to two key difficulties. 

First, students must be academically prepared for college by 12th grade. The opportunities to academically prepare for college 

narrow as students progress through high 

school. If students do not start taking college 

preparation courses in the 9th grade, they 

will be less likely to enroll in college. In addition, students who are not reading or doing 

math at grade level will not be prepared for 

college-level work.10 The problem is made 

more difficult if students and their families 

are unaware that their performance is inadequate. Schools need to ensure that students 

are on the path to college beginning in 9th 

8. Pathways to College Network (2004).

9. Avery and Kane (2004); Ikenberry and Hartle 

(1998); National Center for Education Statistics 

(2005); Roderick et al. (2008); U.S. General Accounting Office (1990). 

10. Adelman (1999); Cabrera and La Nasa (2001); 

Wimberly and Noeth (2005). 

grade, or earlier, and that they stay on that 

path throughout high school.

Second, many students do not take the necessary steps during high school to prepare 

for and enter college because they are not 

aware of these steps or because they lack 

the guidance or support needed to complete them.11 In addition to the academic 

obstacles discussed earlier, students need 

to complete a number of discrete steps in 

high school to enroll in college, such as taking college entrance exams, searching for 

colleges, applying for financial aid, submitting college applications, and selecting a 

college. In their senior year, students have 

to decide where to go; how to apply; and, 

most important, how to pay for college. 

These issues should be considered, optimally, in the earlier years of high school, 

but in the senior year students must make 

decisions. Students may lack adequate advice, particularly if no one in their immediate families has completed a two- or fouryear degree. Students and their families 

need advice from knowledgeable school 

staff if they are to successfully navigate the 

college application processes. 

As a result, a large part of the obligation for 

enabling students to gain the academic, social, and cultural skills to gain entrance to 

college falls upon our teachers, counselors, 

and school administrators. High schools 

play a critical role in preparing students 

academically for college and assisting students through the steps to college entry. 

They also can take steps to influence students’ access to college-going peer groups 

and to encourage high academic expectations of students. The college-going culture 

of a high school, or lack thereof, becomes 

important in college-going decisions. When 

students, teachers, and administrators 

openly talk about preparing for and going 

to college, the climate in the school can 

move toward college access. 

11. Ikenberry and Hartle (1998); U.S. General Accounting Office (1990).
Overview

( 6 )

Table 2. Recommendations and corresponding levels of evidence

Recommendation Level of evidence

Academic preparation

1. Offer courses and curricula that prepare students for college-level work, 

and ensure that students understand what constitutes a college-ready 

curriculum by 9th grade

Low

2. Utilize assessment measures throughout high school so that students 

are aware of how prepared they are for college, and assist them in 

overcoming deficiencies as they are identified

Low

College aspirations and expectations

3. Surround students with adults and peers who build and support their 

college-going aspirations Low

Steps for college entry

4. Engage and assist students in completing critical steps for college entry Moderate

5. Increase families’ financial awareness, and help students apply for 

financial aid Moderate

Source: Authors’ compilation based on analysis described in text.
( 7 )

Scope of the 

practice guide

The purpose of this guide is to recommend 

steps that educators, administrators, and 

policymakers can take, beginning in the 

9th grade, to increase access to higher education. The guide targets high schools and 

school districts and focuses on effective 

practices that prepare students academically for college, assist them in completing 

the steps to college entry, and improve their 

likelihood of enrolling in college. The recommendations address the discrete steps 

that students need to take throughout high 

school and describe how high schools can 

use mentors and peers to support students’ 

college aspirations. The panel recognizes 

that simply providing students with information is insufficient, and, throughout, the 

guide recommends that high schools offer 

hands-on assistance and guidance in preparing students for college.

The recommended steps derive from the 

characteristics of college access programs, 

school reforms, and policy interventions 

that have shown promise in increasing 

access to college, particularly for low-income and first-generation students. The 

panel focused on programs and practices 

with evidence of their impact on academic 

preparation for college (e.g., high school 

completion and course taking), completion 

of the steps for college entry (e.g., submitting college and financial aid applications), 

or college enrollment and attendance. Although the panel recognizes the importance of college persistence for low-income 

and first-generation students who are less 

likely than other students to complete a 

degree,12 the focus of the guide and the 

recommended practices is on how high 

schools and districts can improve access 

to higher education. However, evidence 

on whether the recommended practices 

12. National Center for Education Statistics 

(2004); Nunez and Cuccaro-Alamin (1998).

impact college persistence is described 

when relevant.

The panel believes that every student 

should leave high school with the skills 

required to attend a two- or four-year institution. To that end, high schools must 

provide students with information to consider postsecondary training and to assess 

their readiness. Also, all high school curricula should, at a minimum, prepare students to begin taking college-level courses 

at a two-year institution without the need 

for remediation in any subject area upon 

entering that institution. For students 

who wish to enroll in a four-year institution, their high school curriculum should 

include options that prepare students for 

the more rigorous academic requirements 

of four-year institutions. However, we do 

not believe that all students should be 

required to complete a high school curriculum that prepares students for a four 

year college. Principal and district administrators should work to ensure that at all 

high schools, curricula alternatives exist 

appropriate for students who aspire to any 

level of postsecondary training.

We believe every high school should have 

a college access strategy for students that 

incorporates our recommendations. Such a 

strategy would address four areas: curriculum, assessment, aspirations, and handson assistance with college entry activities. 

Some recommendations will include best 

practices for all students; for example, 

recommendation 2 talks about identifying 

assessments of college readiness and making students aware of their proficiency on 

these assessments, and recommendation 

3 discusses building college aspirations. 

These recommendations are useful for students still exploring their interest in attending college as well as providing feedback 

to students who have already determined 

that they are interested in attending college. 

Other recommendations will be targeted at 

students who have decided they want to 

attend a two- or four-year institution after 
scope of the practice guide

( 8 )

high school. For example, recommendation 

4 focus on assisting students in their search 

for identifying specific colleges, taking college entrance exams, and completing college applications. The recommendations 

reinforce that high schools need to be prepared to inform and support students to 

obtain their highest aspirations.

Although this guide does not directly address steps that college and universities can 

take to promote access, it does highlight the 

important role these institutions should 

play and may be of benefit to higher education administrators. Much of the evidence 

in the practice guide is based on programs 

that were implemented by or in partnership 

with postsecondary institutions. That said, 

the panel notes that other entities influence 

access to college and may benefit from the 

recommendations in this guide as well. For 

example, parents and families have an essential role to play in helping their children 

prepare for college. Elementary and middle 

schools also can help set students on the 

path to college. In addition, community 

organizations often play a critical role in 

providing the academic or social supports 

to assist students in preparing for college. 

Finally, states and the federal government 

impact college access through financial aid 

policies. Although the guide does not target these stakeholders, they may find the 

recommendations relevant.

Although the guide addresses ways to improve students’ and parents’ knowledge 

of financial aid (see recommendation 5), 

it does not include recommendations on 

how to provide financial assistance to students. The panel focused on steps that 

high schools and districts could take to 

improve college access, and federal and 

state financial aid policy is beyond the 

scope of the guide.

Throughout the guide, the panel uses the 

term college to refer broadly to all types 

of two- and four-year institutions. When 

necessary, the terms two-year college and 

four-year college are used to distinguish 

between these two types of institutions. 

Status of the research 

Overall, the panel believes that the existing research on college access services and 

programs is not at a level to provide conclusive evidence of best practices. Studies 

of promoting college access generally look 

at specific programs that provide a bundle 

of services, and not at individual services, 

making it difficult to isolate a specific service’s contribution to college readiness 

and enrollment. In addition, the panel encountered varying impacts across college 

access programs with ostensibly similar 

services. The reasons for the varying impacts are difficult to determine. In some 

cases, the programs are serving different populations of students. For example, 

some may target students who already 

have some interest in attending college, 

whereas others may focus on students 

who are unlikely to attend college due to 

difficulty with achievement, attendance, or 

behavior in high school. In addition, college access programs have been studied 

and tested in the real world, where a range 

of college access services is provided. 

Thus, research on college access programs 

is generally designed to ask whether a particular college access program is more effective than other services being provided. 

It is not designed to ask whether college 

access services are effective compared to 

offering no services at all. 

In offering these recommendations, the 

panel is confident that it is important to 

offer college access services to ensure 

that all students who want to attend college are prepared to do so. The guide includes the set of recommendations that 

we believe are a priority to implement. 

However, the nature of the research is 

such that we do not have a strong evidence base for recommending specific 

practices over others; thus, the recommendations are all supported by low or 
scope of the practice guide

( 9 )

moderate levels of evidence as described 

in the introduction.

Summary of the recommendations

This practice guide includes five recommendations for how high schools and 

school districts can improve access to 

higher education. The first two recommendations focus on preparing students 

academically for college by offering a college preparatory curriculum and assessing 

whether students are building the knowledge and skills needed for college. These 

two recommendations reflect the panel’s 

belief that students are best served when 

schools develop a culture of achievement

and a culture of evidence. The next recommendation describes how high schools 

can build and sustain college aspirations 

by surrounding students with adults and 

peers who support these aspirations. Recommendations 4 and 5 explain how high 

schools can assist students in completing 

the critical steps to college entry, including college entrance exams and college and 

financial aid applications. 

Recommendation 1 advises schools and 

districts to ensure that every student has 

the ability to be ready to take collegelevel courses by beginning preparation in 

the 9th grade. Students and their families 

need to understand what the requirements 

are for college, and what is needed to apply 

to certain postsecondary institutions. In 

particular, the panel recommends that 

students complete Algebra I by the end of 

9th grade, and by graduation, complete 

coursework in core academic and elective 

areas that make them minimally proficient 

to attend community colleges without the 

need for remediation. Such actions can 

strengthen the culture of achievement 

within a school.

If schools and districts are to monitor 

student progress toward being academically prepared for college, then they need 

to have adequate assessment measures in 

place for all students at every grade level. 

Recommendation 2 promotes a culture 

of evidence by encouraging schools and 

districts to use assessments that determine whether students are on track academically for college and points out the 

importance of early warning systems for 

students who are deficient in particular 

courses. The panel emphasizes here that 

assessment without action is virtually 

meaningless. Once deficiencies have been 

found, students and their families need to 

understand them, and they need to be assisted in overcoming them.

Recommendation 3 describes how high 

schools can help students build collegegoing networks by linking students to college-educated mentors, encouraging students to form academically oriented peer 

groups, and allowing students to explore 

a variety of careers. These activities can 

build a college-going identity and support 

students’ aspirations. 

Recommendations 4 and 5 address steps 

schools can take to assist students in completing the discrete tasks for college entry. 

The panel considers it imperative that 

thinking about applying to college and 

how to pay for college need to begin before 

the 12th grade. Financial literacy about 

college affordability is an example of an 

activity that could occur as early as 9th 

grade. At the same time, some activities 

are specific to the senior year. This guide 

offers recommendations for the actions 

that will enhance the ability of students to 

complete the college application process 

successfully.

The panel appreciates that schools and 

districts may face challenges and roadblocks in implementing all of the recommendations. Many of these recommendations could require additional staff or other 

resources that are not easily accessible to 

schools. Implementing these strategies may 

require changing mind-sets and promoting new behaviors, which may not happen 
scope of the practice guide

( 10 )

immediately. Schools also have different 

personnel responsible for different activities, and the panel has avoided specifying 

one individual who must undertake a particular activity and instead has focused on key 

actions that schools need to take to improve 

college access. To address these concerns, 

each recommendation includes a series of 

roadblocks and suggested approaches that 

offer innovative solutions to some issues 

that schools may encounter when implementing the recommendations. 

The panel believes that the greatest success in increasing student access to college 

will be achieved by a coordinated effort 

in implementing these recommendations. 

The suggested practices need to be developed systematically, monitored, evaluated, 

and modified, if necessary. The guide is 

not meant as a resource that school principals can use to implement an individual 

recommendation and be successful. Although an individual recommendation 

may succeed in improving college-going 

rates, the panel discourages schools and 

districts from employing a piecemeal approach. Students will be best served by 

a strategic plan for implementing all five 

recommendations in their schools.
( 11 )

	Facilitate student relationships with 

peers who plan to attend college through 

a structured program of extracurricular 

activities. 

	Provide hands-on opportunities for 

students to explore different careers, and 

assist them in aligning postsecondary 

plans with their career aspirations. 

Recommendation 4. Engage and assist 

students in completing critical steps 

for college entry

	Ensure students prepare for, and 

take, the appropriate college entrance or 

admissions exam early. 

	Assist students in their college search. 

	Coordinate college visits. 

	Assist students in completing college 

applications. 

Recommendation 5. Increase families’ 

financial awareness, and help students 

apply for financial aid

	Organize workshops for parents and 

students to inform them prior to 12th 

grade about college affordability, scholarship and aid sources, and financial aid 

processes. 

	Help students and parents complete 

financial aid forms prior to eligibility 

deadlines. 

Checklist for carrying out the 

recommendations

Recommendation 1. Offer courses and 

curricula that prepare students for 

college-level work, and ensure that 

students understand what constitutes a 

college-ready curriculum by 9th grade

	Implement a curriculum that prepares 

all students for college and includes opportunities for college-level work for advanced students.

	Ensure that students understand what 

constitutes a college-ready curriculum.

	Develop a four-year course trajectory 

with each 9th grader that leads to fulfilling 

a college-ready curriculum. 

Recommendation 2. Utilize 

assessment measures throughout 

high school so that students are aware 

of how prepared they are for college, 

and assist them in overcoming 

deficiencies as they are identified

	Identify existing assessments, standards, and data available to provide an 

estimate of college readiness. 

	Utilize performance data to identify 

and inform students about their academic 

proficiency and college readiness.

	Create an individualized plan for students who are not on track.

Recommendation 3. Surround 

students with adults and peers who 

build and support their college-going 

aspirations

	Provide mentoring for students by recent high school graduates who enrolled in 

college or other college-educated adults. 
( 12 )

Recommendation 1. 

Offer courses and 

curricula that prepare 

students for collegelevel work, and 

ensure that students 

understand what 

constitutes a collegeready curriculum 

by 9th grade

The courses students take in high school 

have important consequences for their 

academic preparation and their ability 

to access college.13 Yet, low-income 

and first-generation students are less 

likely than other students to complete 

a rigorous high school curriculum that 

prepares them for college, either because 

it is not offered by their high school 

or they are not encouraged to enroll 

in it.14 It is critical that high schools 

enable students to enroll in courses 

that will prepare them academically for 

college-level work. This process has two 

steps: offering the relevant courses and 

advising students to take them.

High schools should offer, as a default, 

a college-ready curriculum that includes 

specific courses in key subjects. The 

panel defines a college-ready curriculum 

as one that, when completed, will enable 

students to enroll in college without need 

for remediation. In addition, all schools 

should offer Advanced Placement (AP) 

or other college-level opportunities. By 

9th grade, students need to understand 

the courses that comprise this curricular 

track and their importance for accessing 

13. Adelman (1999, 2006).

14. Adelman (1999); Alexander (2002); Martinez 

and Klopott (2003); Wimberly and Noeth (2005).

college. A four-year course trajectory 

can then help students plan and 

complete the coursework needed 

to prepare for college. 

Level of evidence: Low

The panel judged the level of evidence for 

this recommendation to be low. None of 

the studies examining the impact of offering a college-ready curriculum met WWC 

standards. The lack of evidence partly 

reflects the challenge of rigorously evaluating the impact of high school course 

taking—students who choose to enroll in 

rigorous courses can differ in important 

ways from students who do not. 

The evidence for taking a college-ready 

curriculum consists of six studies that potentially met standards.15 Two of the studies provide mixed evidence on the effect 

of a rigorous high school curriculum,16

and four studies show positive effects of 

AP courses.17 The evidence for academic 

advising is stronger, with six relevant programs that had studies meeting standards, 

but the impact of academic advising could 

not be isolated from other program components.18 Despite the limited evidence for 

this recommendation, the panel believes 

that offering the courses needed to prepare for college and informing students 

about those courses are critical steps for 

improving college access.

15. Allensworth et al. (2008); Attewell and Domina 

(2008); Dougherty, Mellor, and Jian (2006); Hargrove, Godin, and Dodd (2008); Jeong (2009); 

Keng and Dodd (2008).

16. Allensworth et al. (2008); Attewell and 

Domina (2008).

17. Dougherty, Mellor, and Jian (2006); Hargrove, 

Godin, and Dodd (2008); Jeong (2009); Keng and 

Dodd (2008).

18. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Middle College High School—Dynarski et al. (1998); Sponsora-Scholar—Johnson (1998); Upward Bound—Myers 

et al. (2004); Quantum Opportunity Program 

(QOP)—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006).
Recommendation 1. Offer courses and curricula that prepare students for college-level work

( 13 )

Brief summary of evidence to 

support the recommendation

Two studies that potentially meet standards 

examined the effect of high school course 

taking.19 One study found that taking a 

more intense curriculum in high school has 

positive effects on high school performance 

and the likelihood of entering and completing college.20 Curricular intensity is based 

on the number of credits in core subject 

areas, the highest math course taken, the 

number of AP courses completed, and enrollment in remedial math or English. However, a study of a school district that ended 

remedial classes and required college prep 

coursework for all students found no effect 

on high school dropout rates or the likelihood of entering college.21

The panel identified four studies that potentially meet standards that examine the 

effect of AP course taking.22 These studies 

report positive effects of enrolling in an AP 

course or taking the AP course and exam 

on high school completion, college entry, 

and college degree completion.

Five correlational studies provide additional evidence on the relationship between course taking and achievement.23

Two of these studies found a positive correlation between a rigorous high school 

curriculum and completion of a college 

degree,24 and three studies reported a positive effect on high school achievement.25

19. Allensworth et al. (2008); Attewell and 

Domina (2008).

20. Attewell and Domina (2008).

21. Allensworth et al. (2008).

22. Dougherty, Mellor, and Jian (2006); Hargrove, 

Godin, and Dodd (2008); Jeong (2009); Keng and 

Dodd (2008).

23. Adelman (1999, 2006); Gamoran and Hannigan (2000); Lee and Ready (2009); Lee, Croninger, 

and Smith (1997).

24. Adelman (1999, 2006).

25. Gamoran and Hannigan (2000); Lee and 

Ready (2009); Lee, Croninger, and Smith (1997).

However, a positive correlation does not 

mean that the coursework caused higher 

achievement.

Six programs with studies meeting standards provide evidence on academic advising.26 Most of these programs offered individual assistance to students in selecting 

the classes needed to prepare for college. 

Sponsor-a-Scholar also worked with school 

staff to ensure that students enrolled in a 

college preparatory curriculum, and EXCEL 

made completion of a college preparatory 

curriculum a requirement for receiving a 

scholarship. Two of these programs27 had 

a positive impact on college enrollment, 

whereas the other four programs28 had 

no impact. 

How to carry out this 

recommendation

1. Implement a curriculum that prepares all 

students for college and includes opportunities for college-level work for advanced 

students. 

The panel recommends that high schools 

and districts offer the courses and curricula needed to prepare students for college. 

This includes providing courses that are 

required for entry into a two- or four-year 

college and providing rigorous academic 

coursework that prepares students for the 

demands of college. Table 3 presents examples of college preparatory course requirements. Although there are slight differences 

in the requirements, all include four years 

of English, at least three years of mathematics, two to three years of science and social 

studies, and one to two years of a foreign 

26. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Middle College High School—Dynarski et al. (1998); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); Upward 

Bound—Myers et al. (2004); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, 

and McKie (2006).

27. Talent Search and Sponsor-a-Scholar.

28. EXCEL, Middle College High School, QOP, and 

Upward Bound.
Recommendation 1. Offer courses and curricula that prepare students for college-level work

( 14 )

language. These requirements also specify 

that students should take algebra and other 

higher-level mathematics courses during 

high school. The panel recommends that 

at a minimum, all students should pass Algebra I by the end of their 9th-grade year. 

Currently, 21 states and the District of Columbia have implemented a college-ready 

curriculum for all students as a graduation requirement;29 districts in other states 

could consider making a college-ready track 

the default curriculum. 

The panel recommends that schools enhance their college-ready curriculum 

29. Achieve, Inc. (2009).

with opportunities for prepared students 

to take college or college-level courses. 

This includes dual enrollment arrangements that allow students to take college 

courses for high school and college credit; 

AP courses; and the International Baccalaureate (IB) program, which also can prepare students for the academic demands 

of college and facilitate some students’ 

admission to more selective schools.30

A variety of resources are available to 

help schools implement these types of 

programs, including state and federal AP 

incentive programs or e-learning options 

30. Dougherty, Mellor, and Jian (2006); McCauley 

(2007); Perkins et al. (2004).

Table 3. Examples of college preparatory course requirements

Program/ 

Requirements English Mathematics Science Social Studies

Additional 

Courses

High Schools 

That Work

Four years Four years: 

Algebra I, 

geometry, 

Algebra II, and 

a fourth higherlevel mathematics 

course

At least three 

years: biology, chemistry, physics or 

applied physics, or anatomy/

physiology

Three or more 

years

At least one 

computer course

State Scholars 

Initiative (SSI)

Four years Three years: 

Algebra I, Algebra 

II, and geometry

Three years: 

biology, chemistry, and physics

Three and 

a half years: 

U.S. and world 

history, geography, 

economics, and 

government

Two years of a 

language other 

than English

California’s A–G 

Requirements

Four years Three years: 

Elementary and 

advanced algebra 

and geometry

Two years: 

biology, chemistry, physics, or 

physical science

Two years: 

world history, 

cultures, and 

geography; U.S. 

history

Two years of a 

language other 

than English; one 

year of visual and 

performing arts; 

one year of college preparatory 

elective

Indiana “Core 40” 

Curriculum

Four years Three years: 

Algebra I, Algebra 

II, and geometry

Three years: 

biology, chemistry or physics, 

and one additional course

Three years: 

U.S. history, 

U.S. government, economics, 

world history or 

geography

Three years of 

world language, 

fine arts, and/or 

physical education

Academic 

Competitiveness 

Grant Requirements

Four years Three years: 

including Algebra 

I and a higherlevel class

Three years: 

biology, chemistry, and physics

Three years One year of a

language other 

than English

KnowHow2Goa Four years Three or more 

years: including 

Algebra I and a 

higher-level class

Three or more 

years 

Three or more 

years

Possibly foreign 

language, arts, 

computer science

a. Source: www.knowhow2go.org
Recommendation 1. Offer courses and curricula that prepare students for college-level work

( 15 )

and partnerships with postsecondary institutions to offer dual enrollment to qualified students.31

2. Ensure that students understand what 

constitutes a college-ready curriculum. 

There is substantial evidence that students do not understand the curricular 

requirements for college entry and success, even those for community colleges.32

High schools should clearly communicate 

with students and families to ensure that 

they understand the courses needed for 

college (and that students are on track to 

complete them, as discussed further in 

recommendation 2), before they enter high 

school. For example, students should know 

that in many states, they need to take the 

following types of classes beginning in 

9th grade:

•	 Geometry, algebra, trigonometry, 

advanced math

•	 American history, world history, civics

•	 Earth/physical science, biology, 

chemistry, physics

This communication can come in the form 

of a mailing (see Exhibit 1)33 or in general advice provided by school or college 

access program staff by the end of 8th 

grade.34 In later years, students still need 

one-on-one attention—from a counselor, 

a teacher, an administrator, or program 

staff—to facilitate and encourage rigorous course taking.35 A high school might 

31. Hargrove, Godin, and Dodd (2008); Jackson 

(2009); Jeong (2009); Karp et al. (2007); Keng and 

Dodd (2008); Klopfenstein and Thomas (2009); 

Quint, Thompson, and Bald (2008); Siskin and 

Weinstein (2008). 

32. Perna et al. (2008); Plank and Jordan (2001).

33. Dounay (2008).

34. Constantine et al. (2006); Maxfield et al. 

(2003); Quigley (2003).

35. Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); Gandara (2002, 

2004); Gandara et al. (1998); Johnson (1998).

schedule drop-in hours for students to 

receive academic advising and assistance 

with selecting courses from a teacher, 

counselor, or other staff person.36

Schools and districts also should provide continuing professional development or counseling for counselors, registrars, teachers, and other staff on college 

prep course requirements, so that they 

can serve as an informative resource for 

students.37

3. Develop a four-year course trajectory 

with each 9th grader that leads to fulfilling 

a college-ready curriculum.

Beginning in 9th grade, high school counselors should work individually with each 

student to ensure that he or she has a 

plan to complete the courses during high 

school. This could be structured as an individualized education, learning, or graduation plan that guides a student’s curricular choices throughout high school (see 

Exhibit 2).38 Even though several states 

require that schools develop a plan that 

defines the courses a student will take in 

high school,39 high schools should make 

sure that these plans are living documents 

that are referred to by teachers and counselors and provided to parents. 

Providing students with information about 

the courses that are needed to prepare for 

college is only the first step. High schools 

need to ensure that students take the college-ready curriculum throughout high 

school. The panel recommends that high 

schools first develop a general four-year 

36. Calahan et al. (2004).

37. Austin Independent School District, Office of 

Program Evaluation (2002); Perna et al. (2008).

38. Christie and Zinth (2008); Robinson, Stempel, 

and McCree (2005).

39. Education Commission of the States. Additional High School Graduation Requirements and 

Options (http://mb2.ecs.org/reports/Report.

aspx?id=740, accessed June 2, 2009).
RECOmmEnDATIOn 1. OffER COURSES AnD CURRICUlA THAT PREPARE STUDEnTS fOR COllEgE-lEvEl WORk

( 16 )

Source: South Dakota Board of Regents website, www.sdbor.edu.

Exhibit 1. Example of course requirement mailing
RECOmmEnDATIOn 1. OffER COURSES AnD CURRICUlA THAT PREPARE STUDEnTS fOR COllEgE-lEvEl WORk

( 17 )

NAME Student ID # 

Meeting Dates: Grade: 9 10 11 12 

GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS: 220 Credits

English 4 years (40 credits) 

1st Sem Grade 2nd Sem Grade

English I English I

English 2 English 2

English 3 English 3

English 4 English 4

Social Studies 3 Years (30 Credits) 

1st Sem Grade 2nd Sem Grade

WH WH

US Hist US Hist

US Gov’t/

Econ

Econ/US 

Gov’t

Mathematics 2 Years (20 credits) – 

Must include HS Algebra 

1st Sem Grade 2nd Sem Grade

Algebra 

______

Algebra 

______

Math 

________

Math 

________

Science 2 Years (20 Credits) – 

Physical and Life/Biological

1st Sem Grade 2nd Sem Grade

Phy Sci Phy Sci

Life Life

Physical Education 2 Years (20 Credits)

1st Sem Grade 2nd Sem Grade

PE 9/Sport PE 9/Sport

PE/Sport PE/Sport

Fine Arts OR Foreign Language 1 Year (10 Credits)

1st Sem Grade 2nd Sem Grade

FA/FL FA/FL

Health (5 Credits) and 

College & Career Planning (5 Credits)

Health CCP

Electives (75 Credits)

1st

Sem 

Grade

2nd

Sem 

Grade

1st

Sem 

Grade

2nd

Sem 

Grade

Additional Graduation Requirement:

CAHSEE Passed: ELA Math

Remember that High School Graduation Requirements 

are not the same as the College Admission Requirements (A–G). Know the difference! Visit the school 

website for detailed college admissions information.

HIGH SCHOOL CEEB CODE xxxxxx

A–G Requirements (NO “D” grades Accepted) 

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY (CSU) www.csumentor.edu

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA (UC) www.ucop.edu/pathways

Subject Area Years Required

A. Social Science Two years. One year US History or 

1⁄2 year US History and 1⁄2 year of 

US Government, and one year of 

World History.

B. English Four years of college-preparatory 

English composition and literature.

C. Mathematics

Algebra 1

Algebra 2/Trigonometry

Geometry

Advanced Math

Three years required. Four years 

recommended.

D. Laboratory Science Two years required. Three years 

recommended. (Two of the 

following: Biology, Chemistry, 

Physics, or other approved 

college preparatory science.)

E. Language other than English Two years required. Three years 

recommended—at least two 

years of the same language.

F. Visual Performing Arts One year is required.

G. College Preparatory Elective One year in most of the above 

A–F areas, or approved elective.

NCAA (www.ncaaclearinghouse.org)

16 Core Courses beginning with the class of 2008

Career Goal:

Plans after High School:

Student Signature 

Parent Signature 

Exhibit 2: Example of a personalized learning plan

(continued)
RECOmmEnDATIOn 1. OffER COURSES AnD CURRICUlA THAT PREPARE STUDEnTS fOR COllEgE-lEvEl WORk

( 18 )

“Four-Year Plan” Worksheet

Student Name Date

Career Goal (check one) Four–Year University Community College (Transfer Program) 

Trade/Tech/Art School Other

GRADE 9 (Student must take 6 classes—60 credits total for year) GRADE 10 (Student must take 6 classes—60 credits total for year)

Fall Semester Spring Semester Fall Semester Spring Semester

English I English I English II English II

Math Math Math Math

Science Science Science Science

PE PE World History World History

Reading or Elective Health PE PE

Elective Elective Elective Elective

Elective (Optional) Elective (Optional) Elective (Optional) Elective (Optional)

GRADE 11 (Student must take 5 classes—50 credits total for year) GRADE 12 (Student must take 5 classes—50 credits total for year)

Fall Semester Spring Semester Fall Semester Spring Semester

English III English III English IV English IV

U.S. History U.S. History American Gov’t Economics

Elective Elective Elective Elective

Elective Elective Elective Elective

Elective Elective Elective Elective

Elective (optional) Elective (optional) Elective (optional) Elective (optional)

Elective (optional) Elective (optional) Elective (optional) Elective (optional)

Four-Year University Bound Student

(Example) Meeting UC / CSU A–G Course Sequence

Career Goal (check one) Four–Year University Community College (Transfer Program)

GRADE 9 (Student must take 6 classes—60 credits total for year) GRADE 10 (Student must take 6 classes—60 credits total for year)

Fall Semester Spring Semester Fall Semester Spring Semester

English I or English I Acc English I or English I Acc English II or English II Acc English II or English II Acc

Algebra I or higher math Algebra I or higher math Geometry or higher math Geometry or higher math

Biology Biology Chemistry or Conceptual Physics Chemistry or Conceptual Physics

Health College Career Planning World History or AP European World History or AP European

PE Activities 9 or Sport PE Activities 9 or Sport PE or Sport PE or Sport

World Language 1 World Language 1 World Language II World Language II

Elective (Optional) Elective (Optional) Elective (Optional) Elective (Optional)

GRADE 11 (Student must take 5 classes—50 credits total for year) GRADE 12 (Student must take 5 classes—50 credits total for year)

Fall Semester Spring Semester Fall Semester Spring Semester

English III or AP Language English III or AP Language English IV or AP Literature English IV or AP Literature

U.S. History or AP US History U.S. History or AP US History American Gov’t or AP Gov’t Economics or AP Economics

Algebra II/Trig or higher math Algebra II/trig or higher math Advanced college prep math Advanced college prep math

Advanced College Prep Science Advanced College Prep Science Visual Performing Art Visual Performing Art

World Language III World Language III Elective Elective

Elective (optional) Elective (optional) Elective (optional) Elective (optional)

Source: Adapted from materials created by a National College Advising Corps program site.

Exhibit 2: Example of a personalized learning plan (continued)
Recommendation 1. Offer courses and curricula that prepare students for college-level work

( 19 )

course trajectory that defines the potential timing and sequence of college-ready 

classes for students. This may include options for the core courses students should 

take each year in order to prepare for college. This approach offers a curriculum 

path that students can use to inform their 

specific selection of classes each year of 

high school. 

Potential roadblocks and solutions

Roadblock 1.1. Teachers may not be 

trained to teach advanced courses.

Suggested Approach. Not all teachers 

must be trained to teach advanced courses, 

but teachers should have access to professional development opportunities that 

help them sharpen their skills so that the 

curriculum they teach is as rigorous and 

engaging as possible. Helping teachers understand how their classes fit with a college 

preparatory sequence begins with asking 

them to participate in the planning of the 

articulation of the curriculum. Schools 

also can reach out to institutions of higher 

education to implement dual enrollment 

opportunities or have community college 

professors teach courses on campus. 

Roadblock 1.2. Enrolling students who 

are not prepared for the academic rigor in 

college prep or college-level classes is seen 

as counterproductive.

Suggested Approach. It is critical that all 

students have the option to participate in 

these types of classes and are supported 

in their efforts. Developing a culture of 

achievement among the faculty is a key 

strategy to supporting students in their efforts so that the teachers are interested in 

and willing to help students who are challenging themselves. Schools can provide 

academic support for students who take 

the most rigorous course load available 

by setting up peer-tutoring opportunities 

so that stronger students can work with 

those students who may be struggling 

in honors, AP, or IB classes. Teachers can 

be encouraged to set up this sort of peer 

system among students in their individual 

classes.

Roadblock 1.3. Our high school has limited information on entering 9th-grade students to assist them in planning their high 

school coursework.

Suggested Approach. High schools need 

academic information on incoming students to help them plan a four-year course 

trajectory that will prepare students for 

college. High schools can coordinate with 

middle schools to obtain transcripts, academic records, and other resources that 

help high school staff better understand 

the needs of incoming students. This information can be used to assist students in 

selecting appropriate high school courses 

and to help high schools create an appropriate four-year plan with students. High 

schools also can coordinate with middle 

schools to inform students about how 

their middle school performance affects 

the courses they will take in high school 

and their ability to access college.
( 20 )

Recommendation 2. 

Utilize assessment 

measures throughout 

high school so that 

students are aware of 

how prepared they are 

for college, and assist 

them in overcoming 

deficiencies as they 

are identified

Completing the courses needed to 

graduate from high school and meet 

college entry requirements does 

not guarantee that students have 

the knowledge and skills needed to 

succeed in college. Many high schools 

produce students who may pass 

state exit exams and meet graduation 

standards but still are academically 

unprepared for college, as evidenced 

by the nearly 60 percent of students 

who are required to take remedial 

courses as a condition of enrollment.40

High schools must assess student 

progress to identify, notify, and assist 

students who are not adequately 

prepared as early as possible in their 

academic career.

Level of evidence: Low

The panel determined that the level of evidence supporting this recommendation is 

low. In this case, the rating is not necessarily a result of limited or poor research: 

the ability to implement related data and 

assessment systems is a fairly recent development. Advances in both capabilities 

and resources devoted to state longitudinal datasets have been promising, but 

these data do not yet exist for many jurisdictions. As they become more prevalent, 

40. Bailey (2009).

the panel expects that research on their 

use also will expand.

Although four programs with studies meeting standards included practices related to 

data use and additional instruction to assist students, these practices were neither 

isolated in the evaluation nor necessarily a major component of the program.41

Studies of two additional programs42 that 

potentially meet standards suggest that 

the use of data to identify and notify students of their academic progress during 

high school had an impact on college outcomes. There is also suggestive evidence 

that district- or statewide use of assessments associated with college readiness 

(such as PLAN and ACT43) is associated 

with improved college outcomes, but this 

correlation does not mean that requiring 

students to take those tests caused improved access to college.44

Brief summary of evidence to 

support the recommendation

Two programs with studies that potentially 

met standards assess students when they 

are high school juniors to determine their 

readiness for college-level work. California’s 

Early Assessment Program (EAP) uses assessment results to inform students about 

whether they need additional preparation 

to become college ready and includes supplemental programming for students who 

do not meet expectations.45 The College 

41. Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—

Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

42. College Now—Crook (1990); California Early 

Assessment Program (EAP)—Howell, Kurlaender, 

and Grodsky (2009).

43. Although ACT was originally an acronym 

for American College Testing, the official name 

is now ACT. PLAN is the name of an assessment 

administered by ACT.

44. ACT (2008a, 2008b, 2009a, 2009b).

45. California State University (2005); Howell, 

Kurlaender, and Grodsky (2009).
Recommendation 2. Utilize assessment measures throughout high school

( 21 )

Now program in New York City uses assessment data to determine whether students 

are eligible for dual enrollment courses or 

need developmental classes to prepare for 

college-level coursework.46 Studies of both 

programs found that they reduced the need 

for remediation in college, and College Now 

increased the number of college credits that 

students earned.

Two additional programs with studies 

that potentially met standards include 

elements of academic support. Project 

GRAD analyzed data to understand and 

track students’ progress toward meeting 

graduation requirements. GEAR UP sites 

provide individualized academic support 

for students with academic problems and 

those who do not perform well on standardized assessments.47 Studies of both 

programs examined middle school outcomes and did not report high school or 

college outcomes.48

Four college access programs that provided 

academic assistance to improve students’ 

academic proficiency had studies that met 

WWC standards.49 Talent Search, Sponsor-aScholar, and the Quantum Opportunity Program (QOP) offered fairly low-intensity academic assistance through tutoring services 

or homework help after school. Although 

Talent Search and Sponsor-a-Scholar had a 

positive impact on college enrollment, academic services formed a minor component 

of all three. Upward Bound offered additional academic coursework throughout the 

school year and during a six-week summer 

session but did not have an impact on college enrollment or degree attainment.

46. Crook (1990); Karp et al. (2007, 2008).

47. Standing et al. (2008).

48. Opuni (1999); Standing et al. (2008).

49. Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—

Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

Correlational studies that examined ACT’s 

College Readiness System provide suggestive evidence on identifying and notifying 

students who are not college ready.50 The 

College Readiness System includes the EXPLORE and PLAN assessments in 8th and 

10th grades that are precursors to the ACT 

(one of two national college admissions 

tests) and the COMputer-adapted Placement 

Assessment and Support Services (COMPASS), a college placement test administered by ACT.The panel also relied on other 

descriptive and qualitative studies.51

How to carry out this 

recommendation

1. Identify existing assessments, standards, 

and data available to provide an estimate of 

college readiness. 

Assessments can play a key role in alerting students, parents, and teachers about 

whether students are “on track” for college matriculation when they graduate 

from high school. Currently, no single 

college-readiness assessment is commonly 

available or used by schools and districts 

(although there is progress in that direction52). Recognizing the limited time and 

resources schools have to develop a new 

assessment, the panel recommends that 

high schools consider several existing assessments that can provide an early indication of students’ academic preparation 

for college: 

•	 College or community college placement exam. Schools and districts can 

use whole assessments or a subset of 

items from existing college or community college placement exams as a 

diagnostic measure. Although many 

placement exams are school specific, 

50. ACT (2008a, 2008b, 2009a, 2009b).

51. Achieve, Inc. (2009); Austin Independent 

School District, Office of Program Evaluation 

(2002); Quint, Thompson, and Bald (2008). 

52. See, for example, Achieve, Inc. (2009).
Recommendation 2. Utilize assessment measures throughout high school

( 22 )

some common assessments can be adopted by a high school (e.g., COMPASS 

and ACCUPLACER, an assessment developed by the College Board and used 

to help determine course selection for 

students).

•	 College admissions exams. High 

schools can have students take one 

of the college admissions exams designed for students in early high school 

grades (e.g., PSAT, EXPLORE, PLAN).53

These assessments can gauge early academic preparation in math and reading as well as reasoning and critical 

thinking. Later in high school, states 

can have all students take the college 

admission exams (e.g., SAT, ACT) to 

gauge their college readiness.

•	 Statewide college and career readiness assessments. Schools in states 

that already conduct a college or career 

assessment should take advantage of 

these assessments and use them as an 

indicator of college preparedness.54

•	 Local assessments. In districts, 

schools can use existing benchmark 

assessments on a regular basis to measure students’ progress against standards tied to academic proficiency.55

53. Achieve, Inc. (2009); Dounay (2006); Howell, 

Kurlaender, and Grodsky (2009). For example, 

Buffalo, New York, administers the PSAT to firstyear high school students; Chicago, Illinois, uses 

the ACT’s EPAS system, administering EXPLORE 

to its 8th and 9th graders and PLAN to its 10th 

and 11th graders.

54. Ten states administer college and careerreadiness assessments to all students: four are 

state specific, as is the Early Assessment Program, and can replace placement tests; one administers the SAT; and five administer the ACT 

statewide (Achieve, Inc., 2009).

55. Quint, Thompson, and Bald (2008). For example, school districts in Richmond, Virginia, and 

Fresno, California, use benchmark assessments 

every nine weeks to measure students’ progress 

against standards tied to academic proficiency.

In some cases, schools may be able to obtain financial support for implementing 

one of these assessments.56

The information gathered from these assessments should be combined with other 

indicators of academic progress to determine if students are on track for college 

as defined by coursework progression 

and academic proficiency. High schools 

can connect assessments in each of these 

areas into a cohesive set of information 

that can be used in guidance and planning. 

High schools can assess coursework progression against the college preparatory 

tracks described in recommendation 1. 

Academic proficiency information is contained in existing state assessments, and 

postsecondary aspirations can be assessed 

in a brief student survey.

To gauge whether they are successfully 

preparing students for college, high 

schools should gather information on 

postsecondary enrollment for past students. In some states, high schools can 

gather this information from a state database that tracks students from kindergarten through college. In other states, high 

schools and districts can track their graduates through the National Student Clearinghouse (http://www.studentclearinghouse.org), a comprehensive student-level 

repository of data from 3,300 postsecondary institutions attended by 92 percent 

of college students in the United States. 

Alternatively, high schools may be able to 

partner with local and regional postsecondary institutions to gather information 

on the enrollment of their graduates. The 

panel recommends that high schools use 

these data to understand the enrollment 

rate, persistence, and degree attainment 

of graduates in order to better understand 

the impact of current practices.

56. For example, Florida and South Carolina provide funding to districts that want to administer 

the PSAT or PLAN assessment to their students.
Recommendation 2. Utilize assessment measures throughout high school

( 23 )

2. Utilize performance data to identify and 

inform students about their academic proficiency and college readiness. 

The information schools collect on academic performance and college readiness 

(step 1) should be used to identify students 

who are falling behind and to inform all students of their progress in becoming college 

ready. This applies to both the courses students need to be qualified for college entry 

and the skills they acquire in those courses 

to avoid remediation once they matriculate. 

The use of performance data should occur 

as early as 9th grade to ensure that students 

can take the necessary steps to get back 

on track. The panel recommends using the 

data in the following ways:

•	 Identify students with college expectations who are performing below 

grade level and who are not on a college-ready track. Schools should identify students who are not meeting gradelevel standards and who are not on track 

for college but have college aspirations. 

Although state assessments can be used 

to identify students performing below 

grade level, course grades, grade point 

average (GPA), course completion, and 

college-readiness assessments can be 

used to identify students who are not on 

track for college. For example, a school 

can flag students who are performing 

below a certain GPA, or students who 

have not completed courses on the college preparatory track. High schools 

should obtain and use middle school 

transcripts of their incoming students 

to support course placement and flag 

entering 9th graders with academic deficiencies before those students step foot 

on campus.57

•	 Inform all students about their performance and its implications for accessing college. Discussions with students should be held at least annually 

57. Gewertz (2009).

about the progress they are making and 

the hurdles they need to overcome in 

becoming college ready.58 Students and 

families should receive the results of 

the data collected by the school, possibly in the form of a data report or a 

letter.For example, a data report might 

include information on course grades, 

college-readiness assessment results, 

and high school course completion.59

Students identified as below grade level 

or not on track for college should have 

an individual meeting with someone 

at the school to discuss the results 

and their implications for accessing 

college. Students who are not making 

progress toward completing graduation 

or college preparatory requirements 

should be notified of possible interventions that can help them get back on 

track (e.g., summer school, remediation 

programs).60

3. Create an individualized plan for students 

who are not on track.

Students who are not on track to complete a 

typical academic course sequence often have 

trouble catching up and meeting collegereadiness objectives.61 The earlier in high 

school a student can catch up to a standard 

course sequence, the greater the likelihood 

of meeting college entrance requirements at 

the time of high school graduation. 

High schools should work with students 

who are not on track to develop a plan 

that will assist them in “catching up.”62 The 

plan should specify the steps students will 

take to get back on track academically and 

the additional instruction they will receive 

to support their academic proficiency. 

High schools, colleges, and a variety of 

58. Dounay (2006).

59. Gewertz (2009).

60. Christie and Zinth (2008).

61. Wimberly and Noeth (2005).

62. Quint, Thompson, and Bald (2008); Robinson, 

Stempel, and McCree (2005).
Recommendation 2. Utilize assessment measures throughout high school

( 24 )

student academic support programs provide a range of options for students who 

are behind but eager to make progress. 

Teachers, counselors, and college advisors 

can play a pivotal role in helping students 

make the best choices for supplemental 

instruction and in connecting students 

back into more typical instructional programs at the appropriate time. The panel 

encourages high schools to choose these 

programs carefully, paying particular attention to the “fit” between a particular 

student’s demonstrated need and the program’s intent. “Reteaching” a student with 

similar instructional strategies, in similar instructional settings, may not be as 

useful as a more customized approach 

to matching deficiencies with deliberate 

progress objectives. 

Specifically, high schools and districts can 

collaborate with postsecondary institutions or existing college access programs 

to offer additional instruction during outof-class time. One example is tutoring and 

homework assistance by college students, 

program staff, or teachers, and in a variety of formats: both in small groups and 

one-on-one.63 More formally, schools can 

implement “recovery” programs for math 

courses, in which students who fail a unit 

are immediately required to attend afterschool instruction for that unit and as an 

incentive for attendance may be given 

the opportunity to improve their grade 

for that unit.64 Another option is summer 

programs for academic enrichment or remedial skills when necessary.65

An alternate strategy is additional or restructured courses to address academic 

deficiencies during school time. Schools 

63. Austin Independent School District, Office of 

Program Evaluation (2002); Calahan et al. (2004); 

Johnson (1998); Maxfield et al. (2003).

64. Robinson, Stempel, and McCree (2005).

65. Austin Independent School District, Office of 

Program Evaluation (2002); Kallison and Stader 

(2008); Snipes et al. (2006). 

can use double blocking to enable firstyear students needing extra help to take 

“catch-up” classes for two periods each 

day during the first semester and then the 

regular academic or college prep classes 

in the second semester.66

Tutorials should be provided whenever 

possible to accommodate all students—on 

Saturdays, before school, after school, or 

during lunch. One potentially effective approach is to develop and publicize a matrix 

that shows when tutorials are available and 

who will be providing them. In this way, 

students needing additional help need not 

be limited to working with the teacher in 

whose class they are struggling.67

Potential roadblocks and solutions

Roadblock 2.1. Obtaining new data on 

students can be expensive, schools do not 

have the capacity or resources to generate 

student-level reports, and students already 

take enough tests.

Suggested Approach. It is certainly true 

that few schools have the capacity to implement this recommendation at the building level, but it is feasible for many districts. Consider replacing any district-level 

assessment that does not measure college 

readiness with one that does, such as the 

PSAT or equivalent. Alternatively, examine how well the district-level assessment 

already correlates with college going and 

success. The panel recommends taking 

advantage of all of the reports and/or 

data systems that are generated and maintained by the state.

Roadblock 2.2. Some school staff—teachers and/or counselors—do not have the 

time or the training to collect or analyze 

data and may even view the use of data 

as destructive (a mechanism for criticism) 

66. Kemple, Herlihy, and Smith (2005); Quint, 

Thompson, and Bald (2008).

67. Robinson, Stempel, and McCree (2005).
Recommendation 2. Utilize assessment measures throughout high school

( 25 )

rather than as constructive (a strategy for 

school improvement).

Suggested Approach. The panel recommends providing technical assistance to 

staff in interpreting and acting on findings 

from student assessments. Make sure staff 

are aware of the data that are currently 

available, make them available in their 

classrooms or offices when possible, and 

model their effective use. When feasible, 

consider implementing common planning 

time or creating a “school improvement 

data team” so that staff can share knowledge and ideas. 
( 26 )

Recommendation 3. 

Surround students 

with adults and 

peers who build and 

support their collegegoing aspirations

Although 79 percent of students 

express college aspirations early in 

high school,68 college plans can falter 

if students do not take the necessary 

steps to prepare for and enter 

college.69 By 12th grade, low-income 

and first-generation students are less 

likely than other students to expect to 

earn a bachelor’s degree or higher.70

High schools should build and support 

students’ aspirations by developing 

social networks that encourage college 

attendance and assist students in 

preparing for college. College students 

and college-educated adults can serve 

as mentors for students, providing 

guidance and support throughout 

the college preparation process. 

Extracurricular activities and college 

access programs can encourage the 

formation of college-going peer groups 

that share an interest in pursuing 

college. High schools can use career 

exploration activities to develop 

students’ career interests and link those 

interests to postsecondary plans.

Level of evidence: Low

The panel defined the level of evidence 

for this recommendation as low because 

of limited evidence that the recommended 

practices improve college enrollment rates. 

68. National Center for Education Statistics 

(2004).

69. Gandara (2002); Kao and Tienda (1998); Roderick et al. (2008).

70. National Center for Education Statistics 

(2006a); Nunez and Cuccaro-Alamin (1998).

Although the panel identified evidence 

that supports mentoring—the first step of 

this recommendation—there is limited evidence on the other two steps. Six programs 

with studies meeting or potentially meeting standards are aligned with one or more 

steps in this recommendation.71 Three of 

these programs had a positive impact on 

college enrollment,72 and three did not 

impact enrollment.73 However, isolating 

the impact of the recommended practices 

is difficult because these programs included a variety of other strategies. A few 

correlational studies reported a relationship between having friends with college 

plans and college enrollment, but they do 

not provide evidence on the causal effect 

of college-going peers.74 Despite the low 

evidence rating, the panel believes that 

linking students with college-going adults 

and peers is important for building aspirations and supporting college entry.

Brief summary of evidence to 

support the recommendation

The panel separately reviewed studies for 

each of the steps that make up this recommendation. Four programs had studies 

that met or potentially met standards and 

provided mentoring services.75 Studies 

of Sponsor-a-Scholar, Career Beginnings, 

and Puente reported a positive impact 

71. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); Puente—

Gandara (2002); Career Academies—Kemple 

(2004); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); 

Upward Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm 

(2009).

72. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Puente—Gandara (2002); Sponsor-a-Scholar—

Johnson (1998).

73. Career Academies—Kemple (2004); QOP—

Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

74. Horn and Chen (1998); Hossler, Schmit, and 

Vesper (1999); Sokatch (2006).

75. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Puente—Gandara (2002); Sponsor-a-Scholar—

Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie 

(2006).
Recommendation 3. Surround Students with College-Going Adults and Peers

( 27 )

on college enrollment,76 whereas a study 

of QOP found no impact on college enrollment.77 Mentoring in these programs 

consisted of a one-on-one relationship 

between a college-educated adult or case 

manager and a high school student. Mentors were expected to meet regularly with 

students and, in most cases, provided assistance or guidance with the college preparation process. For example, mentors in 

the Sponsor-a-Scholar program monitored 

students’ academic progress and assisted 

them with college applications. The mentoring relationships lasted between two to 

four years depending on the program. 

Three programs with studies that met or 

potentially met standards focused on the 

role of peers. A study of the Puente program showed a positive impact on college enrollment,78 a study of the Career 

Academies program found no impact,79

and a study of the Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) program 

did not measure college enrollment.80 All 

three programs organized students into 

groups that facilitated academically oriented friendships. The Career Academies 

program was structured as small learning 

communities of students who take academy classes together throughout high 

school. The Puente program mixed highand low-achieving Latino students in an 

English class for two years, and students 

in AVID, a program that placed promising 

students in college preparatory coursework, took a year-long course together 

that supported their coursework and emphasized a college-going identity.

The panel identified two programs with 

studies meeting standards that offered 

76. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Puente—Gandara (2002); Sponsor-a-Scholar—

Johnson (1998).

77. QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006).

78. Puente—Gandara (2004).

79. Career Academies—Kemple (2004).

80. AVID—Watt et al. (2006).

career exploration activities, although neither had an impact on college enrollment.81

The Career Academies and Upward Bound 

programs implemented a variety of career 

exploration activities, including speakers 

from the business community, visits to 

employer sites, career planning assistance, 

career fairs, and job shadowing.82 The Career Academies program also organized 

students into learning communities that 

focus on a career theme and provide workbased learning experiences. 

How to carry out this 

recommendation

1. Provide mentoring for students by recent 

high school graduates who enrolled in college or other college-educated adults.

The panel recommends linking students to 

adults who can serve as college-going role 

models and build students’ interest in college. High schools can recruit college-educated professionals to serve as volunteer 

mentors by reaching out to local businesses 

interested in partnering with schools in the 

community.83 High schools also can identify volunteer mentors by recruiting local 

college students—particularly graduates of 

the high school—or partnering with a college that has service-learning opportunities 

for college students willing to work with 

high school students.84 Individuals who 

share the same background as students, 

such as high school alumni or professionals from the local community, may understand the types of challenges students face 

in reaching college.85

81. Career Academies—Kemple (2004); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

82. Career Academies—Kemple, Poglinco, and 

Snipes (1999); Upward Bound—Myers et al. 

(2004).

83. Cave and Quint (1990); Gandara (2004); Pell 

Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher 

Education (2006).

84. Ladd (1992).

85. Calahan et al. (2004); Gandara (2004).
Recommendation 3. Surround Students with College-Going Adults and Peers

( 28 )

Mentors can take on a variety of roles for 

students: 

•	 Serve as college-going role models.

Mentors can serve as examples of college-going adults from the community 

and share their experiences in preparing for college, completing a college 

degree, and pursuing a career.86

•	 Assist with the college entry process. 

The one-on-one relationship mentors 

have with students allows them to provide individualized assistance with the 

college application and selection process for students interested in pursuing a four-year degree.87 This might 

include helping with a college application, reading an application essay, assisting with a financial aid application, 

or researching college options (see recommendation 5).

•	 Monitor academic progress. Mentors can monitor students’ academic 

progress by reviewing report cards 

and discussing students’ high school 

coursework.88 Mentors can advocate 

for students who are struggling academically to receive tutoring or additional help.

•	 Listen and advise. A mentor can simply serve as a caring adult who listens 

to the student, discusses his or her issues or concerns, and offers advice as 

needed.89

To fulfill these roles, mentors need to communicate regularly with students.90 The 

86. Gandara (2004).

87. Cave and Quint (1990); Johnson (1998); Ladd 

(1992); Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity 

in Higher Education (2006).

88. Johnson (1998). 

89. Calahan et al. (2004); Schirm, Stuart, and 

McKie (2006).

90. Johnson (1998); Schirm, Stuart, and McKie 

(2006).

panel recommends that mentors communicate or meet at least monthly with firstyear and sophomore students, and at least 

weekly with juniors and seniors who are 

engaged in the college application and selection processes. High schools also can schedule social events or recreational activities 

that bring together mentors and students. 

An initial mentor training can prepare 

mentors for their role. Providing examples 

of activities for mentors and students to 

complete together can support the mentoring relationship. In addition, high school 

staff should monitor mentor relationships 

by checking in with students and mentors 

to ensure that mentoring relationships are 

supporting students.91

2. Facilitate student relationships with peers 

who plan to attend college through a structured program of extracurricular activities.

The panel recommends that high schools 

use extracurricular offerings to promote the 

formation of college-going peer groups. The 

goal of these activities is to provide students 

with an opportunity to develop friendships 

with peers who plan to attend college. 

College access programs can bring a group 

of students together on a regular basis 

throughout the school year to focus on 

preparing for college. These programs develop college-going peer groups by providing opportunities for students to work together toward a common goal of reaching 

college. Activities that encourage students 

to interact and collaborate can encourage 

new relationships, and these programs can 

be used to promote a college-going identity. 

For example, a program might create visible markers of group participation, such 

as designating a group name and meeting 

space or developing a group newsletter.92

91. Johnson (1998). 

92. Gandara (2004); Guthrie and Guthrie (2002); 

Mehan (1996).
Recommendation 3. Surround Students with College-Going Adults and Peers

( 29 )

High schools also can develop student 

groups that encourage academically oriented friendships, such as a debate club 

or an honor society.93 Schools can infuse 

these extracurricular activities with a college-going message. For example, a debate 

club might visit a college to meet with the 

college debate team, or a community service club might collaborate with a student 

organization from a local college.

3. Provide hands-on opportunities for students to explore different careers, and assist 

them in aligning postsecondary plans with 

their career aspirations. 

The panel recommends that high schools 

engage students in career exploration activities that provide hands-on experiences 

with a career or occupation. A high school 

can design a sequence of career exploration activities that identify students’ career 

interests and provide a variety of activities 

that inform and build on these interests.94

For example, career or interest inventories 

can be used to help students identify the 

type of work or career that interests them. 

High schools can use this information to 

invite local professionals from these career fields to speak about their education 

and career paths.95 Students can then be 

matched to job-shadowing opportunities 

that allow them to follow an adult throughout the day and experience the day-to-day 

work of a profession that matches their 

area of interest.96 By developing relationships with local employers, high schools 

can link students to job-shadowing activities and help interested students obtain 

short-term internships.

High schools can use career interests as 

a starting point for discussions about 

93. Gandara (2004); Mehan (1996).

94. Kemple, Poglinco, and Snipes (1999).

95. Kemple (2004); Mehan (1996).

96. Haimson and Deke (2003); Hershey et al. (1999); 

Kemple, Poglinco, and Snipes (1999); MacAllum 

et al. (2002).

students’ postsecondary plans.97 Students 

may have limited understanding of the 

level or type of education required for an 

occupation or career field. High schools 

should help students learn about the skills, 

knowledge, and postsecondary education 

needed for their area of interest and provide examples of local colleges that offer 

a degree in their area.98 This information 

can be used to develop a long-term education plan for students that can be updated 

and revised over time.

Potential roadblocks and solutions

Roadblock 3.1. Mentoring relationships 

between students and mentors do not last, 

and the availability of mentors changes 

over time. 

Suggested Approach. High schools can 

partner with local colleges that offer college students a chance to earn academic 

credits for volunteer work. College students who earn academic credit for their 

mentoring role may be more likely to 

maintain their relationship with students 

throughout the school year. Local colleges 

often have service-learning opportunities 

or campus organizations that can facilitate 

regular meetings with mentors. 

Roadblock 3.2. Ninth-grade students are 

not interested in discussing careers or their 

career interests. 

Suggested Approach. Students may relate to the experience and career path of 

high school alumni who share the same 

background and perspective as they do. 

High schools should invite alumni to speak 

with students about their occupations and 

career paths. Listening to the outlook and 

advice of a role model who shares their 

background and perspective may build 

students’ interest in a career.

97. Calahan et al. (2004); Roads to Success (2008).

98. Austin Independent School District, Office of 

Program Evaluation, (2002).
Recommendation 3. Surround Students with College-Going Adults and Peers

( 30 )

Roadblock 3.3. Our school already offers 

many extracurricular activities and we cannot add another.

Suggested Approach. Given limited 

amounts of school resources and staff 

time, the panel recommends that high 

schools think critically about the range 

of extracurricular activities they offer. 

High schools should consider the value 

added by each activity and consider how 

activities contribute to the school’s college 

goals. A strategic plan can help schools 

think through the goals and expected outcomes of each activity, as well as how to 

efficiently allocate available resources for 

extracurricular activities. A high school 

also could require completion of certain 

college-going milestones, such as submission of a financial aid application, as a requirement for attending an extracurricular 

activity or social event.

Roadblock 3.4. Our school has insufficient 

resources to offer college access programs 

or other activities that bring together college-going peers.

Suggested Approach. Schools can nominate students for summer bridge programs 

at local colleges that allow students to interact with college-going peers, take additional 

academic coursework, and gain exposure to 

a college campus. Although these programs 

often target 12th-grade students who were 

admitted to a college, summer programs 

also are available for students in grades 9 

through 11. These programs can help students learn about the social and cultural 

challenges of attending college. For example, 

a program might teach students about time 

management and study skills or provide opportunities to explore the college campus. 

High schools can inform students about the 

availability of these programs and help them 

understand the benefits of participating.
( 31 )

Recommendation 4. 

Engage and assist 

students in completing 

critical steps for 

college entry

Low-income and first-generation 

students often face challenges in 

completing the steps to college entry, 

such as taking college admissions 

tests, searching for colleges, submitting 

college applications, and selecting a 

college.99 Students may not be aware 

of these steps, may lack information on 

how to complete them, and may not 

receive sufficient support and advice 

from those around them.100

High schools should engage students 

in the college entry process, providing 

hands-on assistance for each step. 

Students who want to attend a twoor four-year institution should receive 

guidance in preparing for and taking 

the college admissions tests and 

searching for a college that matches 

their qualifications, interests, and 

goals. High schools should coordinate 

college visits to expose students to 

the college environment and to help 

them select a college. By providing 

one-on-one assistance with college 

applications, schools can ensure that 

students submit applications that are 

complete, on time, and of sufficient 

quality. This recommendation is 

targeted at assisting students who are 

interested in attending a two- or fouryear institution.

99. Cabrera and La Nasa (2000); Roderick et al. 

(2008).

100. Choy et al. (2000); Cunningham, Erisman, 

and Looney (2007); Horn and Chen (1998); Ishitani 

and Snider (2004); Kao and Tienda (1998); Plank 

and Jordan (2001); Venezia and Kirst (2005).

Level of evidence: Moderate

The panel judged the level of evidence for 

this recommendation to be moderate. Six programs with studies meeting standards with 

or without reservations assisted students 

with the college entry process.101 Although 

these programs consisted of additional strategies to prepare students for college, all of 

them focused on helping students complete the steps to college entry. Three of 

the programs had a positive impact on college enrollment,102 and three had no impact 

on enrollment.103 The evidence supporting 

this recommendation primarily consists of 

programs that target low-income and firstgeneration students with average academic 

achievement. Only one program, which did 

not have an impact on college enrollment, 

targeted students at risk for dropping out of 

high school.104 Since programs that assisted 

students with the college entry process did 

not consistently lead to positive impacts, the 

panel defined the level of evidence for this 

recommendation as moderate.

Brief summary of evidence to 

support the recommendation

Six programs with studies meeting standards provided students assistance with 

the college entry process.105 Five of these 

101. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsora-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

102. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998).

103. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

104. QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006).

105. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsora-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009).
Recommendation 4. Engage and assist students in completing critical steps

( 32 )

programs helped students with college 

entrance exams by offering exam preparation classes, providing waivers for exam 

fees, or encouraging students to take the 

exams.106 All but one of the programs offered students the opportunity to visit 

college campuses.107 Although there was 

limited information to assess the nature of 

these visits, they were a common feature 

of these programs. Most of the programs 

offered hands-on assistance with the college application process. For example, Talent Search provided individual counseling 

and advice on the college application process and helped orient students to the college entry steps. Some Career Beginnings 

sites offered classes on how to complete 

college applications. QOP case managers 

and Sponsor-a-Scholar mentors assisted 

students with college applications, and 

Sponsor-a-Scholar held workshops for students on the application process.

How to carry out this 

recommendation

1. Ensure students prepare for, and take, the 

appropriate college entrance or admissions 

exam early. 

College entrance exams, both the practice 

exams and actual exams, represent a potential barrier for students interested in a 

four-year college. However, students may 

not know about the exams or may not 

know how to prepare for them, and they 

may not follow through in scheduling or 

taking the exams. High schools should 

make sure that students interested in attending a four-year institution prepare for 

106. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, 

Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

107. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, 

Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009). 

and take the practice exams by 11th grade, 

and the actual exam before 12th grade. 

Students who wait until their senior year 

to take the actual exam could miss a college application deadline or not have an 

opportunity to retake the test. 

To ensure that students take the exams 

at the appropriate times, the panel recommends that schools clearly communicate the timeline for the testing schedule, 

including registration deadlines and test 

dates, to all students (see Exhibit 3 for an 

example of an entrance exam schedule). 

For example, schools could communicate 

information about key deadlines through 

email or phone blasts that reach all students, in-person visits to English classes 

by high school staff knowledgeable about 

the entrance tests, or by setting up information tables at athletic events. School 

staff can assist students with registering 

for the test, remind them about the testing 

schedule or other deadlines, or offer assistance with fee waivers.108 For example, 

teachers in homeroom classes or study 

periods could encourage students to register for entrance exams and discuss how 

to prepare for the exams, such as getting 

a good night’s sleep and arriving to the 

exam early.

Schools should ensure that students are 

prepared for college entrance exams by 

offering exam preparation classes or 

workshops, either directly through the 

school or by partnering with college access programs or other organizations.109

Exam preparation classes can be offered 

on Saturdays or during other non-school 

hours,110 and test preparation can include 

providing direct tutoring, offering practice tests, or using training software for 

108. Calahan et al. (2004); Maxfield et al. (2003).

109. Calahan et al. (2004); Cave and Quint (1990); 

Johnson (1998); Maxfield et al. (2003); Myers et 

al. (2004).

110. Cave and Quint (1990); Maxfield et al. (2003).
Recommendation 4. Engage and assist students in completing critical steps

( 33 )

test preparation.111 If the school partners 

with another organization to provide exam 

prep classes, an academic coordinator can 

arrange the promotion, enrollment, and 

content of the class.112

2. Assist students in their college search. 

Students should receive assistance in finding a postsecondary program that matches 

their qualifications, interests, and goals.113

Schools should set up one-on-one meetings with students to discuss the types of 

schools that are a good fit for them to consider and submit applications. School staff 

should help students coordinate their ca111. Maxfield et al. (2003). 

112. Johnson (1998).

113. Constantine et al. (2006); Johnson (1998); 

Mehan (1996); St. John et al. (2002).

reer interests and future plans, encouraging students to consider factors such as:

•	 Geography/location

•	 Tuition cost

•	 Financial aid

•	 School size 

•	 Admission requirements

•	 Retention rates

•	 Demographics

•	 Available majors

Schools should help students understand 

how to gather information on colleges 

that will help in their search. For example, students can be given an assignment 

that requires them to fill in information 

about a college that can be obtained from 

the college’s website. The assignment can 

be used as a starting point for a discussion about the type of information students should be seeking, where they can 

SAT Test Dates for 2008/09

Test Date Test Main Deadline Late Fee Deadline

Nearby Test 

Locations

October 4, 2008 SAT I & II September 9, 2008 September 16, 2008 High Schools A & B

November 1, 2008 SAT I & II September 26, 2008 October 10, 2008 High Schools A & C

December 6, 2008 SAT I & II November 4, 2008 November 18, 2008 High Schools B & C

January 24, 2009 SAT I & II December 26, 2008 January 6, 2009 High Schools A & B

March 14, 2009 SAT I February 10, 2009 February 24, 2009 High Schools A & C

May 2, 2009 SAT I & II March 31, 2009 April 9, 2009 High Schools B & C

June 6, 2009 SAT I & II May 5, 2009 May 15, 2009 High Schools A & B

Exhibit 3. Example of a college entrance exam schedule

ACT Test Dates for 2008/09

Test Date Main Deadline Late Fee Deadline Nearby Test Locations

September 13, 2008 August 12, 2008 August 22, 2008 High Schools A & B

October 25, 3008 September 19, 2008 October 3, 2008 High Schools A & C

December 13, 2008 November 7, 2008 November 20, 2008 High Schools B & C

February 7, 2008 January 6, 2008 January 16, 2008 High Schools A & B

April 4, 2008 February 27, 2008 March 13, 2009 High Schools A & C

June 13, 2008 May 8, 2009 May 22, 2009 High Schools B & C

Source: Adapted from materials created by a National College Advising Corps program site.
Recommendation 4. Engage and assist students in completing critical steps

( 34 )

find that information on college websites, 

and how to compare different colleges. 

Students should also be guided to books 

or websites, such as the U.S. Department 

of Education’s College Navigator website 

(http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/) or 

database of accredited institutions (http://

ope.ed.gov/accreditation/), that can assist 

them in searching for colleges.114 Students 

should be encouraged to apply to multiple colleges to help them find a match 

school,115 or to consider applying to a 

backup college to which they are more 

confident about being admitted.

3. Coordinate college visits. 

The panel recommends that high schools 

organize trips for students to visit college campuses. These visits can introduce 

114. Other useful resources include the College Board Matchmaker (http://collegesearch.

collegeboard.com/search/adv_typeofschool.

jsp) or the Sallie Mae College Answer (http://

www.collegeanswer.com/selecting/schoolcost/

isc_index.jsp). These and other college planning sites are accessible through the Pathways 

to College Network College Planning Resource 

Directory (http://www.pathwaystocollege.net/

collegeplanningresources/). 

115. Roderick et al. (2008).

students to college and the college environment, inform students about the college 

application and selection process, and help 

them consider different college options. 

These trips should be more than a campus 

tour—students should have a chance to 

explore campus resources, observe campus life, and interact with college students 

(see Exhibit 4 for an example of a college 

visit schedule). For example, students can 

shadow college students, possibly alumni 

from their high school, throughout their 

day, attending classes, eating lunch, and 

walking around campus together.116

High schools should contact the admissions office of a college to set up meetings that allow students to hear from an 

admissions officer, a college professor, 

and a panel of students. Student groups 

on campus that represent the background 

or culture of high school students, such 

as a Latino student group, can provide a 

useful perspective on college and campus 

life.117 A high school can plan activities 

that allow students to interact with campus resources, such as visiting a science 

laboratory or using the college library. 

116. Calahan et al. (2004).

117. Gandara (2004).

Time Activity Description

9:00am Arrive at college campus

9:30am–10:30am Group information session College admissions staff provide information about the 

college and a summary of the college search and application process and financial aid.

10:45am–11:45am Small group tours Small group tours led by current college students (each 

group includes a high school chaperone).

12:00pm–1:00pm Lunch in college dining hall High school students have lunch with student tour guides 

and college admissions staff and have an opportunity to 

ask additional questions.

1:00pm–2:00pm Observe college class Small groups of students visit college classrooms.

2:30pm Leave college campus

Source: Adapted from materials created by a National College Advising Corps program site.

Exhibit 4. Example of a college visit schedule
Recommendation 4. Engage and assist students in completing critical steps

( 35 )

Students also should be encouraged to 

participate in college access programs or 

summer activities that facilitate overnight 

stays on a campus.118

4. Assist students in completing college 

applications. 

Without assistance, students may not invest sufficient time in completing college 

applications or may not devote attention 

to key details. Schools should provide 

students who plan to attend a four-year 

college with hands-on assistance in completing their college applications. High 

schools should work with students to ensure that their applications are complete, 

submitted by deadlines, and (if applicable) 

of sufficient quality for acceptance. Because each student’s needs and interests 

are unique, the panel recommends that, 

to the extent possible, school staff provide assistance to students one-on-one 

or during small workshops or classes designed to assist students with completing 

college applications, writing application 

essays, or reminding them about application deadlines.119

The panel suggests that schools develop 

mechanisms for clearly communicating 

timelines for application milestones that 

118. Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); Cave and 

Quint (1990); Myers et al. (2004).

119. Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); Calahan 

et al. (2004); Cave and Quint (1990); Maxfield 

et al. (2003); Mehan (1996); Kahne and Bailey 

(1999); Kuboyama (2000); Seftor, Mamun, and 

Schirm (2009).

occur over the course of the year (see Exhibit 5 for an example of a timeline).120

Schools can provide a handout that lists 

the key dates that students need to consider for the application process in their 

junior and senior years.121 The components of a timeline could include college 

entrance exams, college applications, the 

Free Application for Federal Student Aid 

(FAFSA) and state financial aid forms, admission acceptances, and financial aid and 

housing acceptances. The timelines can 

be formatted so that students can enter 

in dates specific to the colleges they are 

considering. Schools can use the timelines 

in one-on-one meetings with students to 

track student progress in meeting key 

deadlines. Schools should make sure that 

all informational materials about college 

applications are available in multiple languages and formats.

In providing one-on-one assistance, high 

schools can help students fill out an application, coach students on how to write a 

college application essay, and discuss college application fee waivers. Schools should 

encourage students who need letters of 

recommendation to request these letters in 

advance of the deadline to ensure that they 

can be completed on time. Since much of 

the communication with college admissions 

offices is electronic, schools should ensure 

that students create or designate an email 

account early in the application process to 

use in communicating with colleges.

120. Mehan (1996).

121. Ibid.
Recommendation 4. Engage and assist students in completing critical steps

( 36 )

April 2008

	Visit a college during spring vacation.

June 2008

	Ask teachers for letters of recommendation before summer vacation.

	Visit two colleges by the end of the month.

July 2008

	Brainstorm college essay topics.

	Visit two more colleges by the end of the month.

August 2008

	Obtain admission applications for colleges being considered.

	Write a rough draft of the college application essay. 

	Search for college scholarships.

September 2008

	Complete a final draft of the college essay.

	Check in with the high school’s College and Career Center 

on a regular basis. 

	Request that high school transcripts be sent.

October 2008

	Complete college applications (or the Common Application, a general 

application form used by more than 150 independent colleges) by 

the end of the month.

November–December 2008

	Early action or early decision deadline for some colleges.

	Continue to search and apply for scholarships.

January 2009

	Application deadline for most colleges and universities (January 1 or 15).

	Contact colleges to make sure your application materials were received.

	Fill out the FAFSA (released January 1).

February 2009

	Complete the FAFSA prior to the deadline for most schools 

(February 1 or 15).

	Search for scholarships at the colleges you are considering.

March 2009

	Update FAFSA application, if needed.

	Receive college acceptance letters. 

April 2009

	Attend open houses for colleges that offered admittance.

May 2009

	Select a college and send a deposit to the school. 

	Request final high school transcripts be sent.

Exhibit 5. Example of a college admissions timeline

Source: Timeline adapted from materials created by a National College Advising Corps program site 

and an application timeline created by Sallie Mae at www.salliemae.com/before_college/students_

plan/select_school/getting_in/understanding/application_timeline.htm.
Recommendation 4. Engage and assist students in completing critical steps

( 37 )

Potential roadblocks and solutions

Roadblock 4.1. Our counselors have large 

caseloads, making it difficult for them to 

help each student fill out applications or 

register for tests. 

Suggested Approach. Guidance counselors do not need to be the only resource 

for helping students with critical steps to 

college entry. Schools can consider partnering with college access programs that 

provide adults to assist students. Schools 

also can invite volunteers from the community, including college students, graduate students, or other college graduates to 

assist students with the process. Another 

potential source of volunteers is retired 

professionals who previously worked in 

college admissions or who have knowledge 

of the college entry process. Schools also 

can ensure that teachers have adequate 

knowledge about the college application 

process to assist students who approach 

them with questions.

Roadblock 4.2. The time required to travel 

to SAT/ACT test prep sites is a barrier for 

students because the sites are located so 

far away. 

Suggested Approach. Consider making 

the school a test prep site. This might 

make it more convenient for the students 

to enroll in test prep classes and might 

give students more incentive to register 

for and take the entrance exam.

Roadblock 4.3. Our staff do not have 

current information about college 

requirements. 

Suggested Approach. Teachers and counselors may be the first people whom students turn to with questions about the 

college application process. Schools may 

want to provide teachers with a short overview of the critical milestones for applying 

to college at the beginning of the year and 

provide follow-up information at critical 

points throughout the year, such as when 

college applications are typically due. 

Schools may want to consider providing 

guidance counselors with extended professional development opportunities to 

update their knowledge about the college 

application process. Schools also should 

provide a workshop or other training for 

teachers on how to write effective letters 

of recommendation. 

Roadblock 4.4. Parents have limited 

time to participate in college visits organized by the school because of their work 

schedules. 

Suggested Approach. Although involving 

parents in college visits can be difficult because of conflicts with work schedules, students and parents should be encouraged to 

visit a local college campus at their convenience. These visits can be less formal than 

the school-organized trips, but they should 

provide an opportunity for parents to explore college life on campus with their child. 

High schools can provide parents with a college trip itinerary that includes key places 

to visit on campus and contact information 

for the college admissions office.

Roadblock 4.5. College visits require staff 

time and funding that are not available at 

our school. 

Suggested Approach. High schools should 

contact the admission offices of local colleges to determine whether there are available resources to support college visits. 

High school alumni who attended a local 

college may be willing to sponsor a trip for 

students or may be able to link the school 

to other alumni who can assist with the 

college visit. High schools also can collaborate with college access programs that have 

funding to support college visits and can 

coordinate trips.
( 38 )

Recommendation 5. 

Increase families’ 

financial awareness, 

and help students 

apply for financial aid

Financial aid plays an important role 

in making college affordable and 

improving access to college, especially 

for first-generation students and 

students from low-income families. 

However, these students and their 

families often have limited knowledge 

of financial aid opportunities and may 

overestimate the cost of college.122

This can create the impression that a 

college education is out of reach and 

might discourage students from taking 

the necessary steps in high school to 

prepare for college. Even when parents 

and students are aware of financial 

aid opportunities, the financial aid 

application process can be a barrier, 

with complex rules and complicated 

forms that can create additional 

roadblocks for students.123

High schools can ensure that students 

take the necessary steps to obtain 

financial aid by educating students and 

their parents early in high school about 

college affordability and the availability 

of financial aid and by helping them 

identify potential sources of aid. Students 

benefit from hands-on assistance in 

meeting financial aid deadlines and 

completing application forms.

122. Grodsky and Jones (2007); Horn, Chen, and 

Chapman (2003); King (2006); MacAllum et al. 

(2007); Tomas Rivera Policy Institute (2004).

123. Dynarski and Scott-Clayton (2007); Roderick et al. (2008).

Level of evidence: Moderate

The panel judged the level of evidence 

for this recommendation as moderate because there is evidence that the recommended practices increased the financial 

assistance application rate and the college enrollment rate. Two programs with 

studies meeting standards with reservations informed students about financial 

aid opportunities and provided hands-on 

assistance in completing financial aid applications.124 Both of these programs had 

a positive impact on financial aid applications and college enrollment. Although 

five other programs with studies meeting 

standards with and without reservations 

provided financial aid services, the level 

and intensity of these services were often 

unclear.125 Since the two programs that 

closely correspond with the panel’s recommendation had a positive impact on 

financial aid application and college enrollment, the panel assigned a moderate 

level of evidence.

Brief summary of evidence to 

support the recommendation

The types of practices recommended by 

the panel formed a major part of Talent 

Search and the FAFSA Experiment, and 

both had a statistically significant impact on application for financial aid and 

postsecondary enrollment.126 Almost all 

Talent Search projects provide individual financial aid counseling, financial aid 

workshops for students and/or parents, 

assistance with financial aid applications, 

and scholarship searches.127 The FAFSA 

124. FAFSA Experiment—Bettinger et al. (2009); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006).

125. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, 

Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009). 

126. FAFSA Experiment—Bettinger et al. (2009); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006).

127. Calahan et al. (2004). 
Recommendation 5. Increase families’ financial awareness

( 39 )

Experiment compared two financial aid 

interventions. The first had a tax professional provide one-on-one assistance in 

filling out the FAFSA based on a family’s 

income tax return, provide information on 

the family’s financial aid eligibility for local 

colleges, and offer to submit the FAFSA at 

no cost. A second intervention provided 

families only information on their financial aid eligibility. The first intervention 

had a positive impact on the proportion of 

individuals who submitted the FAFSA and 

enrolled in college, whereas the second 

had no impact on either outcome.

Five other programs with studies meeting standards provided assistance with 

the financial aid application process: Upward Bound, Career Beginnings, Sponsora-Scholar, EXCEL, and QOP. Upward Bound 

and Career Beginnings had studies measuring financial aid outcomes, but neither had 

an impact on these outcomes. Both Sponsora-Scholar and Career Beginnings had a positive impact on college enrollment,128 and 

the three remaining programs had no impact on enrollment.129 The level and intensity of financial aid services varied across 

Upward Bound and Career Beginnings sites. 

Some sites provided financial aid counseling and hands-on assistance with financial aid applications, and others offered 

informational workshops for students and 

parents. Sponsor-a-Scholar mentors and 

QOP case managers assisted students with 

financial aid applications, and both programs held workshops on the financial aid 

process. The studies of these five programs 

offered limited information on the financial 

aid services provided for students.

128. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998).

129. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

How to carry out this 

recommendation

1. Organize workshops for parents and students to inform them prior to 12th grade 

about college affordability, scholarship and 

aid sources, and financial aid processes. 

High schools should inform students and 

parents about financial aid and the cost 

of college early in high school. The panel 

recommends that high schools organize 

separate workshops to inform parents and 

students about financial aid.130 The workshops should address misconceptions 

about college costs and build awareness 

of financial aid. The panel recommends 

holding an initial workshop on college 

affordability in 9th or 10th grade, ensuring that students and parents understand 

the cost of college and the aid available to 

make it affordable. A workshop on scholarship and aid sources should occur in 

10th grade so that students and parents 

can begin to think about the sources of 

different forms of aid. Although students 

complete the FAFSA in their senior year, 

information about the financial aid application process should be covered in the 

junior year to prepare students for the 

process. These three financial aid topics 

are discussed next.

•	 College affordability. Students who 

think that college is too expensive or 

who lack information about the availability of aid may not take the necessary steps early in high school to 

prepare for college.131 The panel recommends that high schools provide information about college affordability—

both the cost of college and ways to 

cover the cost—starting in 9th grade. 

Schools can create a worksheet that 

130. Advisory Committee on Student Financial 

Assistance (2008); Bailis et al. (1995); Constantine 

et al. (2006); Cunningham, Erisman, and Looney 

(2007); Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009). 

131. Luna De La Rosa (2006). 
Recommendation 5. Increase families’ financial awareness

( 40 )

displays potential costs for college 

next to potential sources of financial 

aid to demonstrate the realistic cost 

to families. Students should receive 

information on the typical tuition cost 

for two- and four-year colleges, differences between public and private institutions, and tuition estimates for local 

and regional colleges. High schools 

can provide a worksheet that has a 

side-by-side comparison of the cost 

of these schools and should help students and parents distinguish the different types of college costs, including tuition, fees, room and board, and 

books and supplies. 

Students need to understand the types 

of financial aid available to cover these 

costs, including grants, loans, scholarships, tax credits, and work-study programs. Descriptions of financial aid, 

loan obligations, and grants can be 

confusing for individuals who may have 

limited interactions with banks and 

lending agencies; accordingly, conversations should be developed in a manner 

that is understandable to the student 

and his or her family. The workshops 

should encourage students and parents 

to estimate their financial aid eligibility 

using a tool to forecast eligibility based 

on FAFSA (e.g., FAFSA4caster, http://

www.fafsa4caster.ed.gov).132

•	 Scholarship and aid sources. One 

workshop should assist students in 

navigating the vast array of financial 

aid sources to identify relevant opportunities. A list of available federal 

and state grants and their eligibility 

requirements can help students determine likely sources of aid. During 

the workshop, high schools also can 

provide a list of local and regional 

sources of scholarships available for 

students, as well as websites on which 

132. Advisory Committee on Student Financial 

Assistance (2008).

they can search more broadly for 

scholarships (e.g., www.fastweb.com, 

www.latinocollegedollars.org). Although high school advisors often 

maintain information on scholarship 

opportunities, students may not access 

this information unless they regularly 

visit a school’s advising office.133 High 

schools can disseminate scholarship 

information during the workshop and 

follow up with updated or additional 

information on the school’s website or 

in its monthly newsletter. Schools can 

designate a staff member to collect and 

update financial aid, scholarship, and 

grant opportunities for students.

•	 Financial aid application process.

High schools should hold workshops 

to inform students and parents about 

the financial aid application process, 

including details about the process 

for submitting the FAFSA. Students 

should understand the information that 

is needed to complete the FAFSA and 

should know about the online and hardcopy versions of the application. High 

schools should explain that the FAFSA 

plays a role in determining eligibility 

for federal loans and grants as well as 

state grants, scholarships, and other 

forms of aid. Informing students about 

key concepts, such as the estimated 

family contribution (EFC), can help students understand the meaning of their 

financial aid materials. Students should 

understand the steps in the process 

that occur after submitting the FAFSA, 

including receipt of the student aid report and a financial aid package.

Workshops on financial aid should be 

held for parents as well as for students.134

High schools should develop a plan for 

engaging parents and encouraging them 

to become invested in the financial aid 

133. Luna De La Rosa (2006).

134. Calahan et al. (2004); Gandara (2004); 

Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006).
Recommendation 5. Increase families’ financial awareness

( 41 )

and college application processes. For 

example, a parent institute that includes 

sessions on financial aid and other aspects 

of the college entry process could be held 

throughout the school year.135 Inviting 

parents to informal social gatherings at 

the school, such as picnics or family dinners, can encourage parent involvement as 

well.136 Offering child care at these events 

can make it easier for parents to attend 

and participate. The workshops for parents should discuss how they can help students complete the financial aid process 

and encourage them to assist students in 

meeting key deadlines. 

2. Help students and parents complete financial aid forms prior to eligibility deadlines.

The panel recommends that high schools 

provide hands-on assistance to students 

and parents in completing financial aid 

forms prior to critical deadlines. In addition to workshops providing information 

about financial aid, high schools should 

hold workshops to assist high school seniors and their parents in completing the 

FAFSA form, to answer student questions, 

and to explain the information requested 

on the form.137 The workshops should include volunteers who are knowledgeable on 

the FAFSA and can provide one-on-one help 

in completing the application form.138 High 

schools should reach out to financial aid 

officers from local colleges who can train 

teachers or volunteers on the FAFSA and 

who can assist individual students during 

the workshop. Students should be notified 

of the information needed to fill out the 

FAFSA, such as income information from 

parents’ tax forms, before the session. High 

schools can coordinate with the school 

135. Tierney and Jun (2001); Standing et al. 

(2008). 

136. Gandara et al. (1998).

137. Advisory Committee on Student Financial 

Assistance (2008); Cave and Quint (1990). 

138. Bailis et al. (1995); Calahan et al. (2004); 

Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

library or computer lab so that students can 

complete the FAFSA on the Internet. 

Even though high schools can reach a 

broad group of students through lineby-line assistance at a workshop, students may have complex questions specific to their financial situation or may 

be uncomfortable raising questions at a 

group meeting.139 Therefore, high schools 

should provide individual assistance or 

counseling following a workshop to further assist students in completing the 

FAFSA or other aid applications.140 For 

high schools that provide mentoring services (see recommendation 3), mentors 

can provide one-on-one assistance if they 

are knowledgeable about financial aid or 

if they receive training.141 Individual financial aid counseling also can be helpful 

for answering questions about the Student Aid Profile, award letter, or financial 

aid decisions that are made after a student submits the FAFSA.

Potential roadblocks and solutions

Roadblock 5.1. Our school does not 

have staff who are trained on financial 

aid policy. 

Suggested Approach. Financial aid officers in local colleges will be knowledgeable about financial aid and can be invited to assist students during a workshop 

or through one-on-one sessions.142 High 

schools also could invite the financial aid 

officer to train teachers on financial aid 

and the application process so that they 

can assist students.

139. Luna De La Rosa (2006).

140. Advisory Committee on Student Financial 

Assistance (2008); Bailis et al. (1995); Calahan et 

al. (2004); Maxfield et al. (2003).

141. Johnson (1998); Pell Institute for the Study 

of Opportunity in Higher Education (2006).

142. Cave and Quint (1990).
Recommendation 5. Increase families’ financial awareness

( 42 )

Roadblock 5.2. Guidance counselors may 

not have information about college costs or 

information about the changing nature of 

college costs. 

Suggested Approach. The panel suggests 

that high schools identify and train staff at 

the school who are willing to learn about 

financial aid and to serve as a resource 

for students. Math teachers or family 

consumer science teachers may have backgrounds that are useful for understanding 

the financial aid process. Establishing contacts with financial aid staff at local colleges can make it easier for teachers to stay 

current with information on college costs. 

The financial aid staff from local colleges 

could be useful for training teachers and 

other staff at the high school on financial 

aid topics.
( 43 )

Appendix A. 

Postscript from 

the Institute of 

Education Sciences

What is a practice guide? 

The health care professions have embraced a mechanism for assembling and 

communicating evidence-based advice to 

practitioners about care for specific clinical conditions. Variously called practice 

guidelines, treatment protocols, critical 

pathways, best practice guides, or simply 

practice guides, these documents are systematically developed recommendations 

about the course of care for frequently encountered problems, ranging from physical conditions, such as foot ulcers, to psychosocial conditions, such as adolescent 

development.143

Practice guides are similar to the products of typical expert consensus panels 

in reflecting the views of those serving 

on the panel and the social decisions that 

come into play as the positions of individual panel members are forged into statements that all panel members are willing 

to endorse. Practice guides, however, are 

generated under three constraints that do 

not typically apply to consensus panels. 

The first is that a practice guide consists 

of a list of discrete recommendations that 

are actionable. The second is that those 

recommendations taken together are intended to be a coherent approach to a 

multifaceted problem. The third, which is 

most important, is that each recommendation is explicitly connected to the level 

of evidence supporting it, with the level 

represented by a grade (strong, moderate, or low). 

The levels of evidence, or grades, are 

usually constructed around the value of 

143. Field and Lohr (1990).

particular types of studies for drawing 

causal conclusions about what works. 

Thus, one typically finds that a strong 

level of evidence is drawn from a body of 

randomized controlled trials, the moderate level from well-designed studies that 

do not involve randomization, and the low 

level from the opinions of respected authorities (see Table 1). Levels of evidence 

also can be constructed around the value 

of particular types of studies for other 

goals, such as the reliability and validity 

of assessments. 

Practice guides also can be distinguished 

from systematic reviews or meta-analyses such as What Works Clearinghouse 

(WWC) intervention reviews or statistical 

meta-analyses, which employ statistical 

methods to summarize the results of studies obtained from a rule-based search of 

the literature. Authors of practice guides 

seldom conduct the types of systematic 

literature searches that are the backbone 

of a meta-analysis, although they take advantage of such work when it is already 

published. Instead, authors use their expertise to identify the most important 

research with respect to their recommendations, augmented by a search of recent 

publications to ensure that the research 

citations are up-to-date. Furthermore, the 

characterization of the quality and direction of the evidence underlying a recommendation in a practice guide relies less 

on a tight set of rules and statistical algorithms and more on the judgment of the 

authors than would be the case in a highquality meta-analysis. Another distinction 

is that a practice guide, because it aims for 

a comprehensive and coherent approach, 

operates with more numerous and more 

contextualized statements of what works 

than does a typical meta-analysis.

Thus, practice guides sit somewhere between consensus reports and meta-analyses in the degree to which systematic 

processes are used for locating relevant 

research and characterizing its meaning. 
Appendix A. Postscript from the Institute of Education Sciences

( 44 )

Practice guides are more like consensus 

panel reports than meta-analyses in the 

breadth and complexity of the topic that 

is addressed. Practice guides are different 

from both consensus reports and metaanalyses in providing advice at the level 

of specific action steps along a pathway 

that represents a more-or-less coherent 

and comprehensive approach to a multifaceted problem. 

Practice guides in education at the 

Institute of Education Sciences

The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) 

publishes practice guides in education to 

bring the best available evidence and expertise to bear on the types of systemic 

challenges that cannot currently be addressed by single interventions or programs. Although IES has taken advantage 

of the history of practice guides in health 

care to provide models of how to proceed 

in education, education is different from 

health care in ways that may require that 

practice guides in education have somewhat different designs. Even within health 

care, where practice guides now number 

in the thousands, there is no single template in use. Rather, one finds descriptions 

of general design features that permit 

substantial variation in the realization 

of practice guides across subspecialties 

and panels of experts.144 Accordingly, the 

templates for IES practice guides may vary 

across practice guides and change over 

time and with experience.

The steps involved in producing an IESsponsored practice guide are first to select 

a topic, which is informed by formal surveys of practitioners and requests. Next, a 

panel chair is recruited who has a national 

reputation and up-to-date expertise in the 

topic. Third, the chair, working in collaboration with IES, selects a small number of 

panelists to co-author the practice guide. 

144. American Psychological Association 

(2002).

These are people the chair believes can 

work well together and have the requisite 

expertise to be a convincing source of recommendations. IES recommends that at 

least one of the panelists be a practitioner 

with experience relevant to the topic being 

addressed. The chair and the panelists are 

provided a general template for a practice 

guide along the lines of the information 

provided in this appendix. They also are 

provided with examples of practice guides. 

The practice guide panel works under a 

short deadline of six to nine months to produce a draft document. The expert panel 

members interact with and receive feedback from staff at IES during the development of the practice guide, but they understand that they are the authors and, thus, 

responsible for the final product.

One unique feature of IES-sponsored practice guides is that they are subjected to 

rigorous external peer review through the 

same office that is responsible for independent review of other IES publications. 

A critical task of the peer reviewers of a 

practice guide is to determine whether 

the evidence cited in support of particular 

recommendations is up-to-date and that 

studies of similar or better quality that 

point in a different direction have not been 

ignored. Peer reviewers also are asked to 

evaluate whether the evidence grade assigned to particular recommendations by 

the practice guide authors is appropriate. 

A practice guide is revised as necessary to 

meet the concerns of external peer reviews 

and to gain the approval of the standards 

and review staff at IES. The process of external peer review is carried out independent of the office and staff within IES that 

instigated the practice guide.

Because practice guides depend on the 

expertise of their authors and their group 

decisionmaking, the content of a practice 

guide is not and should not be viewed as a 

set of recommendations that in every case 

depends on and flows inevitably from scientific research. It is not only possible but 
Appendix A. Postscript from the Institute of Education Sciences

( 45 )

also likely that two teams of recognized 

experts working independently to produce 

a practice guide on the same topic would 

generate products that differ in important 

respects. Thus, consumers of practice 

guides need to understand that they are, 

in effect, getting the advice of consultants. 

These consultants should, on average, provide substantially better advice than an 

individual school district might obtain on 

its own because the authors are national 

authorities who have to reach agreement 

among themselves, justify their recommendations in terms of supporting evidence, and undergo rigorous independent 

peer review of their product. 

Institute of Education Sciences
( 46 )

Appendix B. 

About the authors

Panel

William G. Tierney, Ph.D., (Chair) is currently University Professor and WilburKieffer Professor of Higher Education at the 

University of Southern California’s Rossier 

School of Education, as well as director 

of the Center for Higher Education Policy 

Analysis. His research interests pertain 

to access, issues of equity, organizational 

effectiveness, and the changing nature of 

academic work. He recently concluded a 

three-year project that examined how to improve financial aid strategies for low-income 

youth and their families. He also recently 

concluded a project on how to improve governance in four-year colleges and universities. His recent books include Urban High 

School Students and the Challenge of Access

(Peter Lang), Preparing for College: Nine Elements of Effective Outreach (SUNY), and Increasing Access to College (SUNY).

Thomas Bailey, Ph.D., is the George and 

Abby O’Neill Professor of Economics and 

Education in the Department of International and Transcultural Studies at Teachers College, Columbia University. He also 

is the director of the Institute on Education and the Economy at Teachers College. In 1996, Dr. Bailey established the 

Community College Research Center at 

the Institute, which pursues a wide variety 

of quantitative and qualitative research 

focused primarily on improving educational outcomes for students at community colleges, especially low-income and 

minority students. Dr. Bailey also directs 

the National Center for Postsecondary Research, funded by the Institute of Education Sciences, which is conducting rigorous evaluations of widely used strategies 

for low-skilled students, including intensive summer bridge programs and learning communities. He is an economist, with 

specialties in education, labor economics, 

and econometrics.

Jill Constantine, Ph.D., is a senior economist and associate director of research 

at Mathematica Policy Research. Dr. Constantine has led a number of large-scale 

research and evaluation projects related 

to education programs, including several 

in the field of higher education. She was 

the project director for the Evaluation of 

College Corps. She also served as the deputy project director and, later, as project 

director for the U.S. Department of Education’s National Evaluation of Talent Search. 

Dr. Constantine also has led a number of 

other education projects, including those 

in the areas of Beginning Reading, teacher 

preparation, and Early Head Start. Dr. Constantine has published extensively in the 

education field. 

Neal Finkelstein, Ph.D., is a senior research scientist at WestEd, developing research and evaluation designs that study 

program implementation in K–12 public 

schools, and overseeing randomized field 

trials implementation in education settings. 

His areas of expertise include K–12 school 

finance, academic preparation programs 

for high school youth, school-to-work, and 

early childhood education. Dr. Finkelstein 

served as director of Educational Outreach 

Research and Evaluation for the University 

of California, where he implemented research and evaluation designs on 10 campuses to study the effectiveness of K–12 

student and school academic programs, 

particularly on postsecondary education 

opportunities. He also served as senior 

program officer for the National Research 

Council, supporting the investigation of 

equity, adequacy, and productivity in K–12 

public education financing.

Nicole Farmer Hurd, Ph.D., is the executive director of the National College Advising Corps (NCAC), which is headquartered at the University of North Carolina 
Appendix B: About the Authors

( 47 )

at Chapel Hill. The corps is a coalition 

of university-based college advising programs serving more than 48,000 students 

in 12 states. NCAC places recent college 

graduates in public high schools to partner with guidance counselors in an effort 

to increase their college-going rates. Dr. 

Hurd, who served as an assistant dean and 

director of the Center for Undergraduate 

Excellence at the University of Virginia, 

was the founding director of the College 

Guide Program, which served as the model 

for the Advising Corps. Dr. Hurd received 

the Governor of Virginia’s Award for Volunteerism and Community Service and 

was the 2007 faculty recipient of the University of Virginia’s Raven Award. Dr. Hurd 

remains an administrator in higher education, serving in the Office of Undergraduate Admissions at the University of North 

Carolina at Chapel Hill. 

Staff

Jeffrey Max, M.P.A., is a researcher at 

Mathematica Policy Research, with experience conducting quantitative and qualitative research in the field of education. 

He has contributed to studies of teacher 

quality interventions, including evaluations of teacher incentives, teacher preparation, and teacher certification. His past 

work includes a study in one state of the 

transfer process from community colleges 

to teacher preparation programs.

Christina Clark Tuttle, M.P.P., is an education researcher at Mathematica Policy 

Research. Her work has focused on studying opportunities for disadvantaged students and school reform, contributing 

to Mathematica’s evaluations of Upward 

Bound, QOP, the New York City voucher experiment, and charter schools. Ms. Tuttle 

is the deputy project director of Mathematica’s national evaluation of Knowledge 

Is Power Program. She is a WWC certified 

reviewer and deputy principal investigator for the high school math topic area of 

the WWC.
( 48 )

Appendix C. 

Disclosure of potential 

conflicts of interest

Practice guide panels are composed of individuals who are nationally recognized 

experts on the topics about which they are 

rendering recommendations. IES expects 

that such experts will be involved professionally in a variety of matters that relate 

to their work as a panel. Panel members 

are asked to disclose their professional 

involvements and to institute deliberative 

processes that encourage critical examination of the views of panel members as 

they relate to the content of the practice 

guide. The potential influence of panel 

members’ professional engagements is 

further muted by the requirement that 

they ground their recommendations in 

evidence that is documented in the practice guide. In addition, the practice guide 

undergoes independent external peer review prior to publication, with particular 

focus on whether the evidence related to 

the recommendations in the practice guide 

has been appropriately presented.

The professional engagements reported 

by each panel member that appear most 

closely associated with the panel recommendations are noted below.

Dr. Nicole Farmer Hurd is the executive 

director of the National College Advising 

Corps, a national college peer mentoring 

program. Although this program is not referenced in the text of the practice guide, 

four of the exhibits are adapted from materials used by National College Advising 

Corps sites.
( 49 )

Appendix D. 

Technical information 

on the studies

A search for research on college access 

programs in the United States from 1988 

to 2008 resulted in more than 500 studies. Of these, 99 studies had causal designs and examined programs that aimed 

to prepare secondary students (grades 6 

through 12) academically for college, assist them in completing the steps to college entry, and improve their likelihood of 

enrolling in college. These were reviewed 

according to What Works Clearinghouse 

(WWC) standards. Sixteen studies of 10 

programs met WWC evidence standards 

with or without reservations. Correlational 

studies that used longitudinal surveys of 

high school students, such as the National 

Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS),145

to analyze the relationship between student characteristics and college outcomes 

were not reviewed against WWC standards 

because they do not provide evidence on 

the effectiveness of a practice or intervention. The panel focused on the programs 

with studies meeting standards to define 

a level of evidence for each recommendation in the practice guide.

An overview of the programs with studies 

meeting standards is provided in Table D1, 

which also shows the relevance of each 

program for the recommendations. In 

many cases, a program implemented only 

one aspect of the panel’s recommendation. 

For example, several programs with studies meeting standards implemented the 

first step of recommendation 3, mentoring services, but they did not implement 

steps two (peer groups) and three (career 

exploration). In addition, many programs 

implemented practices that did not fully 

align with the panel’s recommendation, or 

the studies provided insufficient detail to 

145. National Center for Education Statistics 

(2002).

determine the extent to which a program 

included the recommended practices. 

College access programs consist of multiple components that address a variety 

of steps students must take to prepare for 

and enter college. The bundling of multiple 

practices within an access program makes 

it difficult to assess the effectiveness of a 

single practice. This presents a challenge 

for the practice guide, which aims to provide specific strategies that schools can 

implement to improve access to college. 

The panel reviewed implementation reports of programs with studies meeting 

standards to assess the relative importance of each program component and to 

better understand program implementation (see Table D1). The panel assigned a 

level of evidence for each recommendation 

after considering the number of programs 

with studies meeting standards that related to each recommendation; the degree 

to which programs implemented the recommendation; and the programs’ impacts 

on high school academic performance, 

completion of the critical steps for college 

entry, and college enrollment.

The panel noted two key issues in its consideration of the evidence: 

•	 Service receipt by the comparison 

group. Several of the studies meeting 

standards were effectiveness studies 

that compared enrollment or participation in a college access program to 

the existing college preparation services available to students.146 In some 

cases, the comparison group received 

a fair amount of college access services. For example, an evaluation of 

Upward Bound reported that 54 percent of comparison group students 

146. In contrast to efficacy studies that show the 

effect of a program relative to a control that receives no intervention or services, effectiveness 

studies show the effectiveness of a program relative to other available services or programs.
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 50 )

received college access services, and 

an evaluation of Career Beginnings 

noted that 35 percent of comparison 

group students received services similar to that program’s.147 Since schools 

often implement more than one college 

access program, students in the comparison group may participate in other 

college access programs. Among comparison students in the Upward Bound 

study, 14 percent participated in Upward Bound Math and Science, and 12 

percent participated in Talent Search. 

Similarly, the study of Career Academies notes that comparison group 

students had the option of enrolling 

in other similar programs offered by 

their high school or district.

•	 Programs operated by postsecondary institutions and community 

organizations. Although the practice 

guide is designed to help high schools 

and school districts take actionable 

steps to increase college attendance, 

the panel notes that many of the programs with studies meeting standards 

were implemented by postsecondary 

institutions or community organizations. Four programs were primarily implemented by a postsecondary 

institution and two by nonprofit or 

community-based organizations. The 

panel focused on describing the practices it deemed were effective for high 

school students and could feasibly be 

implemented by a high school. 

Studies that potentially 

meet standards 

The panel used 15 studies that potentially 

met standards but were not assigned a 

WWC rating because there was insufficient 

information to assess baseline equivalence 

of the treatment and control groups. To 

meet standards with reservations, a study 

147. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Upward Bound—Myers et al. (2004).

had to demonstrate baseline equivalence 

on at least three measures, including one 

measure of socioeconomic status (SES). 

Establishing baseline equivalence on SES 

is critical because there are differences in 

college enrollment rates between high- and 

low-SES students even when controlling for 

race and academic ability.148 Table D2 lists 

the studies that potentially met standards 

that had insufficient information to establish baseline equivalence or did not demonstrate equivalence on a measure of SES.

This appendix describes the evidence used 

to support each of the recommendations 

made by the panel. After describing the 

level of evidence for the recommendation, 

we summarize the evidence used to support each recommendation. Since several 

of the programs with studies meeting standards are relevant for multiple recommendations, we provide a brief description of 

each program and its study below.

Talent Search is a federal program that 

informs students about the high school 

courses needed to prepare for college and 

the availability of financial aid to cover 

the cost of college. The program provides 

hands-on assistance with financial aid applications and helps students complete 

the college application process. Talent 

Search projects are operated by two- and 

four-year colleges and also provide college visits, academic support, and counseling. A quasi-experimental study of the 

program in Indiana, Florida, and Texas 

met standards with reservations.149 The 

study examined the cohort of students in 

9th grade in the 1995/96 school year and 

used propensity score matching to create 

a comparison group of students from the 

same schools or districts with the same 

demographic, socioeconomic, and academic characteristics as Talent Search participants. The program had a statistically 

148. Advisory Committee on Student Financial 

Assistance (2006); Black and Sufi (2002).

149. Constantine et al. (2006).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 51 )

significant impact on financial aid application and college enrollment in all three 

states. The findings for college persistence 

were smaller than the impact on enrollment and not consistently positive across 

the three states.

The Sponsor-a-Scholar program selects 

at-risk students from the Philadelphia 

public school system and offers them an 

opportunity to participate in a mentoring 

relationship with an adult volunteer for 

five years as well as $6,000 for collegerelated expenses. Mentors are expected to 

meet with students at least monthly, and 

a program coordinator monitors mentor 

relationships. In addition, the program 

provides academic support and assistance 

with the college application and financial 

aid processes, including SAT prep classes, 

college visits, and workshops on financial 

aid; selecting a college; and preparing 

for the challenges of college. The study 

of Sponsor-a-Scholar matched a total of 

180 participants across four cohorts to a 

comparison group of Philadelphia public 

school students based on race, gender, 

school, and grade point average (GPA).150

The author found that the program increased college attendance in the first two 

years after high school but had no impact 

on college retention.

151

The FAFSA (Free Application for Federal 

Student Aid) Experiment offered an intervention to assist low-income families 

with obtaining information on financial 

150. Johnson (1998).

151. College enrollment in the second year after 

high school was significant at the 0.10 level. The 

What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) adjusts for 

multiple comparisons when a study examines 

many outcomes simultaneously since the statistical significance of findings may be overstated. 

However, an adjustment for multiple comparisons could not be conducted for this study because there was insufficient information to calculate an effect size and measure significance based 

on WWC standards (the study did not include the 

mean outcomes and standard deviations for the 

treatment and control groups).

aid eligibility and applying for financial 

aid. An ongoing study of the intervention 

randomly assigned individuals in Ohio and 

North Carolina to (1) the main treatment 

group that received assistance in completing and submitting the FAFSA (an estimate 

of their eligibility for financial aid) and information on financial aid opportunities, 

(2) an information-only treatment group 

that received a written estimate of each 

family’s financial aid eligibility (but no 

assistance in completing the FAFSA), or 

(3) a control group that received an existing booklet on the importance of college 

and financial aid programs.152 Staff from 

H&R Block conducted the intervention, 

providing services to individuals who received tax preparation assistance from the 

company. The most recent study reported 

initial findings within a year of the intervention. For dependent participants, who 

were primarily high school seniors, the 

main treatment had a significant positive 

impact on submission of the FAFSA and 

college enrollment, whereas the information-only treatment did not significantly 

impact either outcome.

Career Beginnings is a collaboration 

among local colleges, public schools, and 

the business community that offers summer jobs, education services (e.g., tutoring), assistance in preparing for college, 

and adult mentors. The program enrolls 

students in their junior year of high school 

and holds workshops on preparing for college, taking college entrance exams, and 

completing college admissions forms. A 

study of seven Career Beginnings sites conducted in the second year of the program 

randomly assigned 1,233 eligible students 

to Career Beginnings or a control group.153

The study did not find a statistically significant impact on enrollment in two-year 

colleges or enrollment in four-year colleges, 

but it reported a significant impact when 

these two outcomes were combined (i.e., 

152. FAFSA Experiment—Bettinger et al. (2009).

153. Cave and Quint (1990). 
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 52 )

enrollment in two- and four-year colleges). 

The program did not have a significant effect on scholarship receipt, taking out a 

student loan, or college persistence.

Talent Development High School is a 

high school reform model for high schools 

struggling with poor student attendance, 

discipline problems, low student achievement, and high dropout rates. The model 

consists of Ninth Grade Success Academies 

that organize first-year high school students into self-contained learning communities, and Career Academies for students 

in grades 10 through 12 that form learning 

communities around a career theme. The 

main components of the model include a 

college preparatory curriculum; extended 

class periods; an after-school program for 

students with severe attendance and discipline problems; and partnerships between 

schools, families, and communities. Kemple et al. (2005) conducted an evaluation 

of the model using a quasi-experimental 

design that matched five Talent Development High Schools in the Philadelphia public school system to similar high schools 

based on race/ethnic composition and 

promotion rates. The program had significant positive impacts on dropping out 

of school and the number of high school 

course credits earned.

Upward Bound is a long-standing federal 

program designed to assist low-income 

students in preparing for, enrolling in, and 

succeeding in college. Projects are hosted 

primarily by four-year colleges and offer 

academic courses throughout the school 

year and during an intensive six-week 

summer session often held on a college 

campus. Other program services include 

tutoring, preparation for college entrance 

exams, extracurricular activities, college 

tours, and financial aid workshops. Three 

reports cover the evaluation of Upward 

Bound and include a nationally representative sample of projects.154 At each site, 

applicants were randomly assigned to the 

program or to a control group, and the 

most recent follow-up study measured 

impacts seven to nine years after the expected date of high school graduation. 

This study reports no statistically significant impacts on high school outcomes 

(i.e., completion of course credits, GPA, 

or diploma), financial aid receipt, college 

enrollment, college selectivity, or number 

of college credits earned. The program increased the rate of postsecondary enrollment and the likelihood of receiving a degree, license, or certificate among students 

with lower educational expectations.

Career Academies are a high school 

reform initiative in which students are 

organized into small learning communities around a particular career theme. 

The academies combine academic and 

technical curricula and partner with local 

employers to provide career exploration 

and work-based learning opportunities 

for students. Kemple (2000, 2001, 2004, 

2008) conducted a random assignment 

evaluation of about 1,400 students in nine 

schools within large, urban districts serving a disadvantaged student population. 

The author reports that the program did 

not have an impact on high school graduation or college enrollment, persistence, 

or degree completion eight years after 

students’ expected graduation. 

The Quantum Opportunities Program 

(QOP) is an intensive program that offers 

case management, mentoring, tutoring, and 

other education and support services for 

high school students. Students are matched 

to a case manager in 9th grade and can receive services for up to five years, even if 

they drop out of school or move to another 

district. Students receive financial incentives for participating in program activities. The random assignment study of QOP 

154. Myers and Schirm (1999); Myers et al. (2004); 

Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 53 )

by Schirm et al. (2006) included 1,069 students in seven sites and found no impact 

on attainment of a high school diploma or 

General Education Development (GED) test, 

enrollment in college or vocational training, 

persistence in college, or earning a bachelor’s or associate’s degree. 

EXCEL is a scholarship incentive and 

support program sponsored by a public 

university in the Midwest that provides 

academic enrichment activities through 

summer institutes and weekend seminars on the university’s campus. Students 

receive a scholarship to the sponsoring 

institution that covers tuition, fees, and 

books if they complete a college preparatory curriculum, maintain a B average in 

high school, participate in program activities, and earn a score of 18 on the ACT. 

The program assists students throughout high school and enlists parental participation and commitment. A relatively 

small random assignment study of about 

70 students by Bergin et al. (2004) found 

that the program did not have an impact 

on college enrollment.

Middle College High Schools are alternative high schools designed to help students who have dropped out or are close 

to dropping out of high school remain in 

school and earn high school diplomas. 

The schools are located on a college campus and emphasize experiential learning, 

employ a thematic curriculum, offer team 

teaching, and provide additional support 

services. Dynarksi et al. (1998) evaluated 

a Middle College High School program in 

Seattle, Washington, using a randomized 

controlled trial. Students were randomly 

assigned to Middle College High School 

or to a control group condition in which 

they attended their traditional local high 

school. The study found no impacts on 

dropping out of school or the attainment 

of a high school diploma or GED.
Appe

ndix D. Technical information on the studies ( 54 )

Program and Study Details Recommendations

Brief Citation

Program Study 

Design

Analysis 

Sample 

Size 

(students)

Study 

Location

Program 

Grade 

Levels

Target 

Population

Relevant 

Implementation Studies

1. 

Courses

2. 

Assess

3. 

Networks

4. 

College 

Entry

5. 

Financial 

Aid

Positive effects on one or more relevant outcomesBettinger et al. (2009)

Free 

Application 

for Federal 

Student 

Aid (FAFSA) 

Experiment

Randomized 

controlled 

trial (RCT)

866a Ohio and 

Charlotte, NC

Grade 12 Low-income 

families with a 

high school senior 

or a recent high 

school graduateb

X

Cave et al. (1990)

Career 

Beginnings

RCT 1,233 Seven of 24 

program sites 

in the following 

states: New 

York, Indiana, 

Florida, 

California, 

and Ohio 

Grades 

11–12

Low-income 

students in 

urban areas

X X X

Constantine et al. (2006)

Talent 

Search

Quasiexperimental 

design (QED)

10,297 to 

43,414c

Florida, 

Indiana, 

and Texas

Grades 

9–12d

Low-income and 

potentially firstgeneration college 

students

Calahan 

et al. (2004)

X X X X

Johnson (1998)

Sponsor-aScholar QED 139 to 401e Philadelphia Grades 8–12f Students with average 

achievement 

and eligible for 

free or reducedprice lunch

X X X X X

Kemple et al. (2005)

Talent 

Development High 

School

QED 11 schoolsg Philadelphia Grades 

9–12

Students in 

schools that 

have difficulty 

with attendance, 

discipline, 

achievement, 

and dropouts

Kemple 

and Herlihy 

(2004)

X

No detectable effects on relevant outcomesBergin et al. (2007)

EXCEL RCT 73 Medium-sized 

city in the 

Midwest

Grades 

8–12

Minority students 

with average 

academic 

achievement

X X X

Dynarksi et al. (1998)

Middle 

College 

High 

Schools

RCT 394 Seattle, WA Grades 

9–12

Students who 

are high school 

dropouts or likely 

dropouts

Hershey et al. 

(1995)

X

(continued)

Table D1. Studies of college access programs that met WWC standards with or without reservations
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 55 )

Program and Study Details Recommendations

Brief Citation

Program Study 

Design

Analysis 

Sample 

Size 

(students)

Study 

Location

Program 

Grade 

Levels

Target 

Population

Relevant 

Implementation Studies

1. 

Courses

2. 

Assess

3. 

Networks

4. 

College 

Entry

5. 

Financial 

Aid

No detectable effects on relevant outcomes (continued)Kemple (2000, 2001, 2004, 2008)

Career 

Academies

RCT 1,458 Nine Career 

Academies sites: 

Pennsylvania, 

Maryland, 

Florida, Texas, 

California, and

 District of 

Columbia 

Grades 

9–12

Low-income 

students in large, 

urban schools

Kemple and 

Rock (1996); 

Kemple et al. 

(1999)

X

Schirm et al. (2006)

Quantum 

Opportunity 

Program 

(QOP)

RCT 1,069 Six QOP sites: 

Cleveland, 

District of 

Columbia, 

Fort Worth, 

Houston, 

Memphis, 

Philadelphia, 

and Yakima, WA

Grades 

9–12

At-risk students in 

schools with high 

dropout rates

Maxfield 

et al. (2003)

X X X X X

Seftor et al. (2009); Myers et al. (2004); Myers and Schirm (1999); Myers et al. (1997)

Upward 

Bound

RCT 2,292h Nationally 

representative 

sample of 

Upward Bound 

projects

Grades 

9–12

Low-income 

and potentially 

first-generation 

students

Moore 

et al. (1997)

X X X X

a. This represents the sample size for the subgroup relevant to this practice guide: dependent participants who were mostly high school seniors. The study targeted low-income families with a high school senior; a recent high school graduate; or an older, independent adult who was enrolled in college or who wanted to enroll in college. The total analysis sample included 16,745 individuals. b. The study also targeted low-income families with an independent adult who was enrolled in college or who wanted to enroll in college. However, the review of the study for this pracTable D1. Studies of college access programs that met WWC standards with or without reservations tice guide focused on the subgroup of dependent participants.c. Sample size varies by state and analysis. Texas had a within-school analysis sample of 34,869 and an across-school analysis sample of 34,346. Indiana had a sample size of 10,927. Florida had a sample size of 43,414 for the within-school analysis, and 14,721 for the across-school analysis.d. Talent Search can start as early as 6th grade, but the study focuses on 9th graders.e. Sample size varies by outcome.f. Students receive services through the first year after high school graduation.g. The authors used individual student data but did not report the number of students in the sample. All outcome measures had a sample size of 11 schools, but some measures included more cohorts of students than did others.h. Samples size varied for different outcomes. This represents the sample size for the analysis of college enrollment and financial aid.

(continued)
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 56 )

Program and Study Details Recommendations

Brief 

Citation

Program Analysis 

Sample 

Size

Study 

Location

1. 

Courses

2. 

Assess

3. 

Networks

4. 

College 

Entry

5. 

Financial 

Information

Insufficient information to establish baseline equivalence

Allensworth et 

al. (2008)

College 

preparatory 

coursework 

requirement

Between 21,587 

and 26,197 

students per 

cohort (10 cohorts)

Chicago, IL X

Attewell and 

Domina (2008)

Advanced 

high school 

curriculum

Between 544 and 

3,279 students 

depending on the 

analysis 

National X

Crook (1990) College Now 926 studentsa City 

University 

of New York

X

Dougherty et 

al. (2006)

Advanced 

Placement (AP) 

courses

Between 4,959 and 

41,458 students 

per subgroupb

Texas X

Gandara (2002, 

2004); Gandara 

et al. (1998)

High School 

Puente

144 students California 

high schools

X X

Hargrove et al. 

(2008)

AP Courses Between 38,907 

and 42,199 

students per 

cohort (4 cohorts)

Texas public 

high schools

X

Howell, 

Kurlaender, 

and Grodsky 

(2009)

California Early 

Assessment 

Program

More than 1 

million students

CSU–

Sacramento 

students

X

Jeong (2009) AP courses Between 12,130 

and 12,870 

students 

depending on the 

analysis

National X

Keng and Dodd 

(2008)

AP courses/

exams

Varies by analysis 

and cohortc

University 

of Texas at 

Austin

X

Moreno (2002) Puente 62 students 

(31 matched pairs)

California 

high schools

X X

Opuni (1999) Project GRAD 555 students for 

math analysis; 

547 students for 

reading analysisd

Houston, TX X

Standing et al. 

(2008)

GEAR UP 2,687 students 

(administrative 

record analysis) 

and 2,578 students 

(survey analysis)

National X X

Watt et al. 

(2006)

AVID 20 high schools Texas X X

a. Most analyses use a sample of 926 students. One analysis of enrollment has a larger sample of 25,399 students, and another 

analysis has a sample of 743 students.

b. All analysis is by subgroup, resulting in varying sample sizes.

c. Sample sizes range across four cohorts and across 10 different AP subjects.

d. These sample sizes are for the specific analyses in this study eligible for a WWC review.

Table D2. Studies of college access programs that potentially met WWC standards
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 57 )

Recommendation 1. 

Offer courses and curricula that 

prepare students for college-level 

work, and ensure that students 

understand what constitutes a 

college-ready curriculum by 9th grade

Level of evidence: Low

Despite the importance of this recommendation, the level of evidence that supports it is low by WWC standards. This is 

primarily a function of the challenge of 

conducting research on course taking in 

any experimental or quasi-experimental 

capacity. More than perhaps any other 

recommendation in this guide, the related 

evidence is subject to major concerns 

about selection bias: are the differences in 

observed outcomes between students who 

do and do not enroll in a given course attributable to the effects of that course or to 

some unobservable characteristics—motivation, for example—that lead students to 

take that course in the first place?

The evidence for taking a college-ready 

curriculum consists of six studies that potentially met standards.155 Two of the studies provide mixed evidence on the effect 

of a rigorous high school curriculum,156

and four studies show positive effects of 

Advanced Placement (AP) courses.157 The 

evidence for academic advising is stronger, 

with six relevant programs that had studies 

meeting standards, but the impact of academic advising could not be isolated from 

other program components.158 Despite the 

155. Allensworth et al. (2008); Attewell and 

Domina (2008); Dougherty, Mellor, and Jian 

(2006); Hargrove, Godin, and Dodd (2008); Jeong 

(2009); Keng and Dodd (2008).

156. Allensworth et al. (2008); Attewell and 

Domina (2008).

157. Dougherty, Mellor, and Jian (2006); Hargrove, Godin, and Dodd (2008); Jeong (2009); 

Keng and Dodd (2008).

158. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Middle College High School—Dynarski et al. (1998); 

limited evidence for this recommendation, 

the panel believes that offering the courses 

needed to prepare for college and informing about those courses are critical steps 

for improving college access.

Summary of evidence

The panel reviewed 25 studies related to 

college readiness and curricula. Of these, 

six were related to curricular offerings, 

none of which provided sufficient evidence 

to assign a WWC rating but could potentially meet standards.159 Five of the college 

readiness studies examined the effects of 

the Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) program specifically: of these, 

four did not meet standards,160 and the 

other could potentially meet standards.161

The fourteen remaining studies addressed 

elements of academic and curricular advising. Of these, studies of six programs met 

WWC standards with or without reservations, and two of these had a positive effect on college enrollment.162 Three did not 

meet evidence standards, and the remaining five could potentially meet standards. 

Mixed evidence on implementing a 

college-ready or college prep curriculum

The panel drew on an extensive body of 

correlational work to reinforce its opinion 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); Upward 

Bound—Myers et al. (2004); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, 

and McKie (2006).

159. Allensworth et al. (2008); Attewell and 

Domina (2008); Dougherty, Mellor, and Jian 

(2006); Hargrove, Godin, and Dodd (2008); Jeong 

(2009); Keng and Dodd (2008).

160. Bailey (2002); Black et al. (2008); Lozano, 

Watt, and Huerta (2009); Watt, Huerta, and Lozano (2007).

161. Watt et al. (2006).

162. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Middle College High School—Dynarski et al. (1998); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); Upward 

Bound—Myers et al. (2004); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, 

and McKie (2006).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 58 )

that schools must offer courses and curricula that prepare students for college. 

The panel identified five studies using data 

from the National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES)—typically, NELS, the Education Longitudinal Study (ELS), or High 

School and Beyond (HSB)163—that showed a 

positive correlation between course taking 

and outcomes related to this guide.164 Additionally, six recent quasi-experimental 

studies were identified and reviewed—

two on rigorous curricula and four on AP 

specifically—that provide more cautionary evidence (and even some unintended 

negative consequences) and could potentially meet standards.165 Also, five studies of the AVID program were reviewed 

and demonstrated positive effects of the 

program, which mandates enrollment in 

the college prep track for all students, but 

most of these did not meet standards and 

one provided insufficient evidence to be 

assigned a rating (but could potentially 

meet standards).166

Two studies with quasi-experimental designs (QEDs) were identified that studied 

the effect of requiring students to enroll in a college prep curriculum.167 Most 

recently and notably, Allensworth et al. 

(2008) use an interrupted time-series cohort design to measure the effects of the 

policy in Chicago that ended remedial 

classes and required college prep coursework for all students in the district. Although the study does not demonstrate 

163. National Center for Education Statistics 

(1992, 2002, 2006b)

164. Adelman (1999, 2006); Gamoran and Hannigan (2000); Lee and Ready (2009); Lee, Croninger, 

and Smith (1997).

165. Allensworth et al. (2008); Attewell and 

Domina (2008); Dougherty, Mellor, and Jian (2006); 

Hargrove, Godin, and Dodd (2008); Jeong (2009); 

Keng and Dodd (2008); Spielhagan (2006).

166. Bailey (2002); Black et al. (2008); Lozano, 

Watt, and Huerta (2009); Watt, Huerta, and Lozano (2007); Watt et al. (2006).

167. Allensworth et al. (2008); Attewell and 

Domina (2008).

equivalence between its treatment and 

comparison groups, given that the samples are constructed from similar groups 

of students at the same schools at different periods of time, it is likely that they 

would be similar on observable measures. 

The study finds that although more students completed the 9th grade with credits in algebra and English, there was no 

effect on test scores, dropout rates, or the 

likelihood of entering college, and failure rates increased. Attewell and Domina 

(2008) use NELS data to demonstrate that 

taking a more intense curriculum in high 

school has positive effects on 12th-grade 

test scores and probabilities of entering 

and completing college. Although the authors used propensity score techniques 

to match samples of students, evidence of 

equivalence between the groups was not 

presented for each outcome.

Although AP has been extensively studied, 

few evaluations use a comparison group 

design to estimate the effect of AP course 

taking on college outcomes. The panel identified four QEDs that could not be assigned 

a rating because they did not provide information on the equivalence of the treatment 

and comparison groups. Dougherty’s (2006) 

student-level analysis indicates that in all 

considered subgroups in Texas (Blacks, 

Hispanics, Whites, low-income students, 

and non-low-income students), the rate of 

bachelor’s degree attainment in each of the 

three treatment groups (college-going high 

school graduates who pass one or more 

AP exams, those who take but do not pass 

any AP exams, and those who take one 

or more AP courses but do not take any 

AP exams) is significantly higher than the 

rate of bachelor’s degree attainment in the 

control group (college-going high school 

graduates who do not take any AP courses 

or exams), but no evidence is provided on 

the equivalence of those groups although 

they are matched on SES and 8th-grade 

test scores. Similarly, using ELS data, Jeong 

(2009) finds that enrollment in AP coursework in 11th or 12th grade is associated 
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 59 )

with a significantly higher probability of 

completing high school within four years 

after the sophomore year of high school 

and a significantly higher probability of 

entering a four-year college within four 

years after the sophomore year of high 

school. Hargrove (2008) reports that students who took both the AP course and the 

AP exam had higher college GPAs, earned 

more credits, and had higher graduation 

rates than did students who took only the 

AP course or a non-AP course in the same 

subject area. Keng and Dodd (2008) find 

that students who take AP courses and receive college credit for their exam scores 

have better college outcomes than do students of similar abilities who do not participate in AP, but again, no information is 

provided to enable the panel to determine 

the equivalence of those groups.

AVID is an academic intervention that targets students “in the academic middle”—

those who are potentially first-generation 

college students earning average grades—

and encourages them to enroll in the college prep curriculum at their school, including honors and AP classes. AVID places 

low-track students in high-track classes and 

provides support for the students to transition to college. AVID works hard to place 

its students in college prep courses. It also 

provides students with exposure to an academic environment similar to that found in 

college classrooms. College entry skills and 

academic survival skills including study 

habits, organization, management, critical 

reading skills, and standardized college entrance exam preparation are areas targeted 

in the AVID elective class. 

Like AP, the intervention has been extensively but not rigorously studied. Four 

studies of the program with causal designs did not meet standards. One studied the effects of AVID on a set of matched 

schools in Texas, although not enough information was provided to determine the 

equivalence of the treatment and comparison groups, and found that AVID schools 

showed increases in enrollment in courses 

of high rigor and in high school graduation 

by the authors’ calculations.

Limited evidence on academic advising

The evidence to support the panel’s suggestion that schools promote comprehension of what constitutes a college-ready 

curriculum and develop a four-year course 

trajectory with each 9th grader that leads 

to a fulfilled college prep track is stronger 

but not sufficient for a moderate rating. 

The panel reviewed 13 empirical studies 

with causal designs located in the WWC literature search, including six that met standards with or without reservations,168 four 

that could potentially meet standards,169

and three that did not meet standards.170

Of the six that met WWC standards,171 the 

evaluations nevertheless could not isolate 

the effect of the advising practice from 

other aspects of the intervention.

Talent Search provides its students with 

information about the types of courses 

they should take to prepare for college. In 

Sponsor-a-Scholar, the mentor and a class 

coordinator work with students and school 

staff to ensure that students are enrolled in 

a college preparation course of study. Two 

quasi-experimental studies of the programs 

168. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Middle 

College High Schools—Dynarski et al. (1998); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—

Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

169. Puente—Gandara (2002, 2004); Puente—

Gandara, Mejorado, Gutierrez, and Molina (1998); 

Puente—Moreno (2002).

170. Bailis et al. (1995); Math and Science Upward 

Bound—Olsen et al. (2007); Early Academic Outreach Program—Quigley (2003).

171. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Middle 

College High Schools—Dynarski et al. (1998); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—

Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 60 )

found positive effects of their respective 

programs on college enrollment.172

Other applicable college outreach programs 

involve academic advising in some capacity. QOP is designed so that case managers 

provide advice on selecting college preparatory courses in high school. EXCEL provides 

assistance in signing up for a college preparation curriculum in high school, and it requires that students pursue rigorous college 

preparation coursework to receive a scholarship. Middle College High Schools encourage disadvantaged students to enroll in college-level courses through dual enrollment 

opportunities on a college campus. Upward 

Bound projects offer academic counseling in 

addition to the host of courses that parallel 

or anticipate the high school’s college prep 

curriculum.173 However, rigorous studies of 

these four programs that met WWC standards did not demonstrate any impacts on 

outcomes relevant to this guide.

The panel identified causal studies of three 

otherwise relevant programs for this recommendation that could potentially meet 

standards but did not provide sufficient 

information to assign a rating. The Puente 

program ensures that students are placed 

in college prep courses, and a school counselor assists students with selecting college-level classes and may talk about college prep requirements during the Puente 

class. The reviewed studies of Puente demonstrated positive effects on high school 

courses fulfilling California’s A–G requirements and on enrollment in a four-year 

college. GEAR UP provides information 

on the types of courses students should 

take to prepare for college. Although the 

national evaluation of the program does 

not yet report on high school outcomes, 

the authors find that students in GEAR UP 

schools are more likely to take above-gradelevel science courses in middle school, 

172. Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998).

173. Moore et al. (1997).

and for African-American students, more 

rigorous courses in general. The Gateway 

to Higher Education program, designed to 

increase minority opportunities for college 

(particularly in the areas of math and science), requires its participants to enroll in 

a curriculum designed to keep students on 

track to college, including a requirement 

for science courses with lab components. 

One study of Gateway found that it had a 

positive effect on high school graduation, 

the number of college prep courses taken, 

and the number of Regents exams taken, 

particularly in math and science. Regents 

tests are the standardized subject examinations required of New York State high 

school students.

Recommendation 2. 

Utilize assessment measures 

throughout high school so that 

students are aware of how 

prepared they are for college, 

and assist them in overcoming 

deficiencies as they are identified

Level of evidence: Low

The panel determined that the level of evidence supporting this recommendation is 

low. In this case, the rating is not necessarily a result of limited or poor research: the 

ability to implement related data and assessment systems is a fairly recent development. 

Advances in both capabilities and resources 

devoted to state longitudinal datasets have 

been promising, but these data do not yet 

exist for many jurisdictions. As they become 

more prevalent, the panel expects that research on their use also will expand.

Although four programs with studies meeting standards included practices related to 

data use and additional instruction to assist students, these practices were neither 

isolated in the evaluation nor necessarily a major component of the program.174

174. Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); Talent 
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 61 )

Studies of two programs175 potentially 

meeting standards suggest that the use of 

data to identify and notify students of their 

academic progress during high school had 

an impact on college outcomes. There also 

is suggestive evidence that district- or statewide use of assessments associated with 

college readiness (such as PLAN and ACT) 

is associated with improved college outcomes, but this correlation does not mean 

that requiring students to take those tests 

caused improved access to college.176

Summary of evidence

To support its recommendation, the panel 

reviewed 12 studies of eight programs or 

interventions that use assessments and 

data to improve college access for disadvantaged students. For those students 

identified as not college ready, the panel 

recommends that schools and districts 

develop individualized plans to support 

these students. The panel was able to derive support for this suggestion from the 

methods college prep and college access 

programs use to help students “catch up.” 

This includes four programs with studies that met WWC standards with or without reservations;177 two of which showed 

positive effects on college enrollment.178

However, for each of these four programs, 

the applicability to this recommendation 

is most tenuous, since the relevant component involves providing tutoring and 

other academic support to students identified as needy.

Development High Schools—Kemple, Herlihy, 

and Smith (2005); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie 

(2006).

175. College Now—Crook (1990); California Early 

Assessment Program (EAP)—Howell, Kurlaender, 

and Grodsky (2009).

176. ACT (2008a, 2008b, 2009a, 2009b).

177. Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); Talent Development High School—Kemple, Herlihy, and Smith 

(2005); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006).

178. Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998).

More directly relevant to the recommendation was a series of eight quasi-experimental studies of four other programs 

more concentrated on using assessment 

measures to facilitate college readiness:

California’s Early Assessment Program

(EAP) is a collaboration with the California 

State University (CSU) system to ensure 

that college-bound high school graduates 

attain the level of English and mathematics skills articulated by CSU faculty as necessary for college success. CSU modified 

the 11th-grade California Standards Tests 

to assess English and math and provide 

timeline information to juniors about their 

readiness for college English and math 

courses. The modified test provides diagnostic information at the student level. 

Students who are not assessed as college 

ready have the opportunity to enroll in 

an Expository Reading and Writing Course 

(ERWC) in their senior year to address deficiencies. The ERWC materials encourage 

students’ independent thinking and grappling with text. One quasi-experimental 

study of EAP179 showed positive effects 

on reducing the need for remediation in 

college, but it did not provide sufficient 

information to ensure that the matched 

groups of students were equivalent and

had matched on a measure of socioeconomic status.180 Another compared the 

outcomes of students enrolled in a 12thgrade English course piloting the ERWC 

materials to those in a regular 12th-grade 

English class.181 The authors found that 

the treatment group’s performance on a 

Reading and Composing Skills Test (RCST) 

was higher using a one-tailed significance 

test; however, using a two-tailed test and 

adjusting for clustering, the WWC found 

that this difference was not significant.

College Now is an early warning and 

support system for students. Students 

179. Howell, Kurlaender, and Grodsky (2009).

180. Ibid.

181. California State University (2005).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 62 )

are evaluated in their junior high school 

year based on a combination of their GPA 

and scores on the Regents tests. They are 

then told if they have the option to earn 

college credits free of charge in a dual enrollment program, or whether they are in 

need of remediation (in reading, writing, 

or math). One quasi-experimental study 

of College Now could not be assigned a 

rating because it did not provide information on the equivalence of the treatment 

and comparison groups.182 According to 

reported point estimates, College Now 

participants are more likely than nonparticipants to enroll in senior College of New 

York (CUNY) colleges, to enroll in bachelor 

of arts programs, and to enroll for second and third semesters in CUNY; College 

Now participants also take fewer remedial 

courses and earn more degree credits in 

the first two semesters in CUNY than do 

nonparticipants.

GEAR UP is a schoolwide program designed to increase college awareness and 

preparedness for disadvantaged students, 

and it is supposed to provide individualized academic support for students. According to the first report from the national study of GEAR UP programs (which 

does not report on any high school or postsecondary outcomes and does not provide 

sufficient information to assign a rating), 

the supplemental services provided to 

students, such as tutoring, were targeted 

to those students with academic problems 

and those who were not performing well 

on standardized assessments.183 Another 

study of GEAR UP in California similarly 

does not provide information to establish 

group equivalence and shows no significant effect of GEAR UP by 8th grade.184

Project GRAD staff place a premium on 

data analysis—to understand and track 

students’ progress toward meeting gradu182. Crook (1990).

183. Standing et al. (2008).

184. Cabrera et al. (2006).

ation requirements and to improve GPAs, 

achievement levels, and other student outcomes. One component of one study of 

Project GRAD potentially met standards. 

The study did not provide sufficient information to establish equivalence of its treatment and comparison groups (the other 

approaches do not meet WWC standards). 

The authors report that middle school students in the treatment group outperformed 

students in the comparison group on both 

reading and math on the Stanford 9185

and Texas Assessment of Academic Skills 

(TAAS)186 tests.187 The other study components examined program impacts on high 

school outcomes but did not use a design 

that met WWC standards. The panel also 

identified a well-designed, rigorous study of 

Project GRAD in Houston, Texas, that nevertheless does not meet standards because 

the treatment and comparison schools are 

not equivalent in terms of race/ethnicity 

and the study does not provide evidence of 

equivalence on a measure of SES, which is a 

necessary condition of meeting standards 

for this guide.188 However, the authors report that the program had no impact on 

the completion of algebra in ninth grade, 

high school student achievement, four-year 

graduation rates, or completion of a college 

prep curriculum on-time. 

Finally, support comes from correlational 

studies showing positive effects from implementation of different elements of ACT’s 

College Readiness System:

189 EXPLORE 

and PLAN, administered in 8th and 10th 

grades as precursors to the ACT; the ACT 

(along with the SAT, one of two national 

college admissions tests); and COMPASS, 

the national college placement test administered by ACT. The argument for administering such exams jurisdiction-wide to all 

185. Pearson (1996).

186. Texas Education Agency (2002).

187. Opuni (1999)

188. Snipes et al. (2006).

189. ACT (2008a, 2008b, 2009a, 2009b).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 63 )

students is that it sets signals for academic 

achievement and provides everyone, even 

students who had not previously considered college, with the chance to identify academic strengths and weaknesses. The correlational studies conducted by ACT found 

that outcomes improved jurisdiction-wide 

for the entire population of tested students 

at rates similar to those of college-bound 

students nationally.

Recommendation 3. 

Surround students with adults and 

peers who build and support their 

college-going aspirations

Level of evidence: Low

The panel defined the level of evidence 

for this recommendation as low because 

of limited evidence that the recommended 

practices improve college enrollment rates. 

Although the panel identified evidence 

that supports mentoring—the first step of 

this recommendation—there is limited evidence on the other two steps. Six programs 

with studies meeting or potentially meeting standards are aligned with one or more 

steps in this recommendation.190 Three of 

these programs had a positive impact on 

college enrollment,191 and three did not 

impact enrollment.192 However, isolating 

the impact of the recommended practices 

is difficult because these programs included a variety of other strategies. A few 

correlational studies reported a relationship between having friends with college 

plans and college enrollment, but they do 

190. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); Puente—

Gandara (2002); Career Academies—Kemple 

(2004); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); 

Upward Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm 

(2009).

191. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Puente—Gandara (2002); Sponsor-a-Scholar—

Johnson (1998). 

192. Career Academies—Kemple (2004); QOP—

Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009). 

not provide evidence on the causal effect 

of college-going peers.193 Despite the low 

evidence rating, the panel believes that 

linking students with college-going adults 

and peers is important for building aspirations and supporting college entry.

Summary of evidence 

The panel separately reviewed studies 

for each of the steps that make up this 

recommendation. 

Mixed evidence on mentoring

Four programs had studies that met 

or potentially met standards and provided mentoring services.194 Studies of 

Sponsor-a-Scholar, Career Beginnings, 

and Puente reported a positive impact 

on college enrollment,195 whereas a 

study of QOP found no impact on college 

enrollment.196

The Sponsor-a-Scholar program matched 

Philadelphia public school students to an 

adult mentor for five years starting in 9th 

grade. Mentors were expected to meet with 

students at least monthly to monitor their 

academic performance and assist them in 

preparing and applying for college. For example, the program asked mentors to review students’ report cards for each grading period and to help students stay on 

track academically. A program coordinator recruited mentors, matched them to 

students, and monitored mentoring relationships. The quasi-experimental study of 

Sponsor-a-Scholar found that the program 

increased college attendance in the first two 

193. Horn and Chen (1998); Hossler, Schmit, and 

Vesper (1999); Sokatch (2006).

194. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Puente—Gandara (2002, 2004); Sponsor-aScholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, 

and McKie (2006).

195. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—

Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006).

196. QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 64 )

years after high school but had no impact 

on whether students remained enrolled between the first and second years.197

The Career Beginnings program offered 

students a two-year relationship with an 

adult mentor in addition to academic tutoring, summer jobs, and various college 

preparation activities. Mentors were collegeeducated professionals who served as role 

models for students and assisted them in 

developing career goals and applying to college. The random assignment study of Career Beginnings did not report a significant 

impact on enrollment in two-year colleges 

or enrollment in four-year colleges, but it reported a significant impact when these two 

outcomes were combined (i.e., enrollment in 

two- and four-year colleges). Although mentors were an important component of the 

Career Beginnings approach, the program 

included several other activities, such as 

summer employment, that make it difficult 

to assess the role of mentoring in contributing to program impacts.

QOP assigned a case manager to at-risk 

students for five years who was expected 

to serve in a mentoring role. Case managers worked with about 15 to 25 participants and often developed relationships 

described as similar to “that of a caring 

aunt or uncle.”198 In addition to mentoring services, the program offered supplemental instruction, support services, and 

community service activities. The random 

assignment study of QOP in seven sites 

found no impact on college enrollment, 

retention, or attainment.199

The High School Puente program had one 

study that potentially meets standards. 

The quasi-experimental study did not provide sufficient information to assign a rat197. The author reports that college enrollment 

in the second year after high school was significant at the 0.10 significance level. 

198. Maxfield et al. (2003). 

199. Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006). 

ing. The study matched 72 Puente students 

in three California high schools to 72 nonPuente students based on grades, reading 

scores, ethnicity, social background, and 

gender.200 However, there was insufficient 

information to determine whether these 

two groups were comparable on a measure of socioeconomic status (a requirement for quasi-experimental studies in 

this guide to meet standards with reservations). The author reports a significant 

positive effect on four-year college enrollment but did not provide information on 

the statistical significance of other college 

enrollment outcomes. The Puente program recruited mentors from the local 

community to serve as role models for 

Latino high school students and to spend 

time with students’ families. As a note 

of caution, the study found that mentors 

had difficulty establishing a relationship 

with 9th-grade students who were often 

focused on the day-to-day challenges at 

school rather than on long-term education 

plans. The authors suggest this may have 

been related to the characteristics of the 

mentors themselves, and they report that 

group activities for mentors and students 

and efforts by mentors to reach out to parents were useful strategies.

The panel relied on three additional programs for mentoring practices, although 

these programs had studies that did not 

meet WWC standards. The College Bound 

program recruits Boston College students 

to mentor students in local high schools. 

The mentors develop a relationship with 

students through monthly meetings and 

advise them about the college application 

and selection processes.201 The Washington 

State Achievers program, which also includes college scholarships, links students 

to “hometown mentors” from the community who assist students with the college 

and financial aid application processes be200. Gandara (2002). 

201. Ladd (1992).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 65 )

ginning in their junior year.202 The I Have 

a Dream program does not match students 

to mentors, but it has a program coordinator who is expected to assist and support 

students throughout middle and high school 

on their path to college.203

Limited evidence on the role of peers

 Three programs with studies that met 

or potentially met standards focused on 

the role of peers, including one that had a 

positive impact on college enrollment,204

one that had no impact on enrollment,205

and one with a study that did not measure 

college enrollment.206 All three programs 

organized students into groups that facilitated academically oriented friendships. 

However, these programs do not provide 

direct evidence on the role of peers because 

they consist of several other components 

designed to improve college access.

Only one program with a study meeting 

standards relied on an approach relevant 

for this recommendation.207 Career Academies group students into small learning 

communities of 50 to 75 students who 

take academy classes together throughout high school. The program encouraged collaboration among students and 

expected the academies to serve as “communities of support” for students. This 

approach promoted the formation of academically oriented peer groups among 

students. Although a large random assignment study of Career Academies in 

nine schools found no impact on high 

school graduation, college enrollment, or 

postsecondary attainment, the effectiveness of the small learning community 

approach to career exploration activi202. Engle, Bermeo, and O’Brien (2006).

203. Kahne and Bailey (1999); Kuboyama (2000); 

McGrath and Hayman (1997).

204. Gandara (2004).

205. Kemple (2004).

206. Watt et al. (2006).

207. Kemple (2004). 

ties cannot be distinguished from other 

aspects of the program.208

The panel used practices from two programs with studies that potentially meet 

standards. The Puente program encouraged the formation of peer groups by mixing high- and low-achieving Latino students in an English class for two years.209

In addition, Puente students participated 

in a club that supported their college preparation activities. The study of Puente potentially meets standards because there 

was insufficient information to assess 

baseline equivalence of the treatment 

and control groups. The study reported 

a significant positive impact on four-year 

college enrollment, but it did not provide 

information on statistical significance for 

other types of college enrollment.

The AVID program places promising students on a college preparatory track and 

provides multiple activities to prepare and 

support these students academically. The 

program encourages the formation of a 

peer group by having students take a yearlong AVID course that teaches study skills, 

provides tutoring, and assists students in 

preparing for college. The program promotes a group identity by using an AVID 

logo, setting aside a classroom for AVID 

students, and providing opportunities for 

students to collaborate.210 One study of 

AVID potentially meets standards, but it 

provided insufficient information to assess 

equivalence of the matched treatment and 

comparison groups. The study matched 

10 AVID high schools to 10 non-AVID high 

schools based on student race and SES 

as well as school size, type (i.e., urban or 

rural), and accountability rating.211 The 

authors did not report college enrollment 

outcomes but found a positive effect of 

the program on school-level achievement. 

208. Ibid. 

209. Gandara (2004).

210. Guthrie and Guthrie (2002); Mehan (1996).

211. Watt et al. (2006).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 66 )

However, the study did not report the statistical significance of this finding.

Lack of evidence on career exploration 

The panel identified two programs with 

studies meeting standards that offered career exploration activities, although neither 

had an impact on college enrollment.212

Career exploration activities represent a 

major component of the Career Academies 

approach and are commonly implemented 

by Upward Bound sites. The panel could 

not isolate the effect of career exploration 

activities because both programs consist of 

several other components—Career Academies offer a comprehensive school-towork approach that organizes students into 

small learning communities and combines 

vocational and college preparatory curricula, and Upward Bound prepares students 

academically for college through classes offered during the school year and summer.

Career Academies implement a variety 

of career exploration activities, including speakers from the business community, visits to employer sites, career fairs, 

and job shadowing.213 Career Academies 

often offer a sequence of career activities, beginning with interest inventories 

and employer site visits, and leading up 

to job shadowing and internships.214 Career Academies students take classes in 

learning communities that are organized 

around different career themes.

Most Upward Bound grantees offer career 

development activities, such as career planning assistance, meetings with employers, 

employer site visits, and job shadowing.215

Although detailed information about these 

activities is not available, an implementation 

212. Kemple (2004); Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm 

(2009).

213. Kemple, Poglinco, and Snipes (1999).

214. Ibid.

215. Moore et al. (1997).

study of Upward Bound found that a majority of sites provide job-shadowing opportunities. A random assignment study of Upward Bound found no significant impact on 

high school completion, college enrollment, 

or college credits earned.216 The program 

did have a positive significant impact on 

four-year college attendance for first-generation students. However, these impacts cannot be attributed specifically to career development activities because Upward Bound 

included several other components.

The panel relied on practices from four programs that did not have studies meeting 

standards. The Lansing Area Manufacturing Partnership (LAMP) linked students to 

work-based learning experiences in a local 

General Motors factory, including several 

hands-on activities. Although a study of the 

program matched participants to nonparticipants based on gender, race, age, GPA, and 

school, the two groups were not matched 

on an indicator of socioeconomic status.217

An implementation study of the School-toWork Opportunities Act included surveys 

of school-to-work partnerships, student 

surveys, and case studies of eight states.218

According to the study, students viewed 

one-on-one interaction with an adult—job 

shadowing, paid jobs, and unpaid internships—as the most useful type of career 

exploration activity. An implementation of 

GEAR UP in Austin, Texas, describes how the 

program used online interest inventories to 

identify students’ career interests and help 

them understand the knowledge and skills 

needed for their area of interest.219 The 

Roads to Success program, which is being 

evaluated in a random assignment study 

216. Myers et al. (2004); Seftor, Mamun, and 

Schirm (2009). 

217. MacAllum et al. (2002). In addition, the study 

did not provide information to assess the equivalence of the treatment and comparison groups 

used in the analysis.

218. Hershey et al. (1999).

219. Austin Independent School District, Office 

of Program Evaluation (2002).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 67 )

that has not produced impact findings yet, 

helps students link their career interests and 

education plans.220

Recommendation 4. 

Engage and assist students 

in completing critical steps 

for college entry

Level of evidence: Moderate

The panel judged the level of evidence for 

this recommendation to be moderate. Six 

programs with studies meeting standards 

with or without reservations provided assistance with the college entry process.221

Although these programs consisted of 

other strategies to prepare students for 

college, all of them focused on helping students complete the steps to college entry. 

Three of the programs had a positive impact on college enrollment,222 and three 

had no impact on enrollment.223 The panel 

notes that the evidence for this recommendation focuses on programs that serve 

low-income and first-generation students 

with average academic achievement. Only 

one program, which did not find an impact, specifically targeted students at risk 

for dropping out of high school.224 Since 

programs that assisted students with the 

college entry process did not consistently 

220. Roads to Success (2008a, 2008b). 

221. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsora-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009). 

222. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998).

223. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009). One 

of the studies finding no detectable effects on 

college access or enrollment outcomes found 

mixed effects on high school academic outcomes, 

which the panel deemed not relevant for this 

recommendation.

224. QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006). 

lead to positive impacts, the panel defined 

the level of evidence for this recommendation as moderate.

Summary of evidence 

Six programs that assisted students with 

the college entry process had studies that 

met standards.225 Three of these programs 

had positive effects on college access or 

college enrollment outcomes,226 and three 

had no impact on college enrollment.227

A main purpose of the Talent Search program is to assist students with the college 

entry process. The program sites often 

have staff who work directly with students 

to counsel and advise them about the college admissions process.228 An implementation study found that more than 90 percent of projects provide college orientation 

activities, college visits, and counseling.229

In addition, project directors described 

college visits as one of the top two activities that contributed to program objectives.230 The large-scale study of Talent 

Search participants in three states found 

positive effects on the percentage of students taking college entrance exams and 

college enrollment.231

225. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsora-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009). 

226. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998). 

227. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009). One 

of the studies finding no detectable effects on 

college access or enrollment outcomes found 

mixed effects on high school academic outcomes, 

which the panel deemed not relevant for this 

recommendation.

228. Calahan et al. (2004).

229. Ibid.

230. Ibid. 

231. Constantine et al. (2006).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 68 )

The Sponsor-a-Scholar program in Philadelphia had an academic coordinator who 

set up college entrance exam preparation 

classes, planned college visits, and held 

workshops on selecting a college and preparing for the challenges of college.232 In 

addition, mentors were expected to provide one-on-one assistance with the college admissions process. The author reports that the program had a significant 

positive impact on a broad measure of 

college preparation activities that summed 

up the number of preparation activities in 

which students participated.

There is limited information on the college 

preparation activities offered by the seven 

Career Beginnings sites that were studied. 

The random assignment study found that 

sites offered workshops or classes on taking college entrance exams and classes on 

completing college admissions forms.233

Career Beginnings had a positive impact 

on college enrollment; the direct effect of 

the college preparation activities cannot 

be determined, however, since the extent 

of these college preparation activities was 

not clear.

Upward Bound projects helped students 

prepare for college entrance exams (PSAT 

and SAT) and provided assistance with 

college applications and financial aid 

forms.234 The program also provided opportunities for students to visit colleges, 

and many sites encouraged students to 

live on campus for the summer academic 

course sessions. Although there was limited information on the quality or intensity 

of these services, they are a common part 

of program services. Upward Bound had 

no effects on enrollment or persistence in 

two- or four-year colleges for program participants, but it had a significant impact on 

four-year college attendance for students 

with low academic expectations. 

232. Johnson (1998).

233. Cave and Quint (1990).

234. Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

An implementation study of the QOP sites 

suggests several types of activities to assist students in completing the steps for 

college entry. Case managers encouraged 

students to take college entrance exams 

and in some sites paid the exam registration fees.235 Several QOP sites also helped 

participants prepare for entrance exams 

by offering tutoring or purchasing training software. A few sites also purchased 

books and CD-ROMs that provided enrollees with test-taking tips and sample examinations. Case managers provided assistance in completing college applications 

and organized college visits for students. 

The large-scale random controlled trial of 

QOP found no significant effects on college enrollment. Perhaps most relevant to 

this recommendation, study authors also 

noted that QOP’s policy of having a case 

manager on duty for a large number of 

hours weekly was somewhat unrealistic 

and therefore not always implemented according to the QOP model.

EXCEL staff encouraged and guided students through the college application process. The EXCEL program also held workshops on campus and allowed students 

to live in college dormitories during the 

summer sessions. The summer institutes 

provided writing instruction to assist students in writing essays. A small random 

assignment study of EXCEL in one Midwestern city found no detectable effects 

on college enrollment the fall after high 

school graduation.236

Three additional programs had studies 

that potentially met standards237 or did 

not meet standards.238 The panel judged 

the practices discussed in the studies to 

235. Maxfield et al. (2003).

236. Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007).

237. Puente—Gandara (2002); AVID—Watt et al. 

(2006).

238. I Have a Dream—Kahne and Bailey (1999); 

I Have a Dream—Kuboyama (2000); I Have a 

Dream—McGrath and Hayman (1997).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 69 )

be similar to practices implemented in 

programs with studies that met standards 

with or without reservations and included 

practices described in these studies as 

supplemental evidence of a practice.

A study of the AVID program potentially 

meets standards but could not be rated because there was insufficient information to 

assess baseline equivalence. Students participating in AVID were given extra coaching on how to write statements of purpose 

and how to fill out college applications 

and financial aid forms, and they were reminded about test and application deadlines. At one site, to familiarize students 

with college catalogs and to help them 

choose an appropriate college, students 

received a handout called “Choosing Your 

College” that contained a checklist of information typically found in college catalogs 

and were instructed to fill in the information for a particular college according to 

the assigned checklist.239 The study that 

potentially met standards did not measure 

the program’s effect on college enrollment 

but reported a positive effect on schoollevel achievement. However, the study did 

not provide information on the statistical 

significance of this finding.

Counselors from the Puente program arrange college visits, including overnight 

trips, for students.240 Parents often are invited on these visits to make them more 

comfortable with the college environment. 

The program also introduces students to 

representatives from Latino student groups 

on campus. A study of the Puente program 

potentially meets standards and reported 

a positive impact on four-year college enrollment. A national study of GEAR UP that 

potentially meets standards found that college visits were common across all of the 

sites and that the number of college visits 

239. Mehan (1996); Watt et al. (2006).

240. Gandara (2004); Grubb, Lara, and Valdez 

(2002).

offered grew over time.241 The study focused on program implementation in the 

7th and 8th grades, but it did not provide 

sufficient information to assess baseline 

equivalence. The initial findings described 

the program’s effect on students’ and parents’ education expectations and knowledge of postsecondary opportunities.

In the I Have a Dream program, sites worked 

individually with and monitored each participant’s college application process. One site 

hired a college counselor from a prestigious 

private school to meet with each participant, 

and another site assigned an AmeriCorps 

member to focus entirely on this process.242

There were no studies of the I Have a Dream 

program that met standards. 

Recommendation 5. 

Increase families’ financial 

awareness, and help students 

apply for financial aid

Level of evidence: Moderate

The panel judged the level of evidence for 

this recommendation as moderate because 

there is evidence that the recommended 

practices increased the financial assistance 

application rate and the college enrollment 

rate. Two programs with studies meeting 

standards with reservations informed students about financial aid opportunities 

and provided hands-on assistance in completing financial aid applications.243 Both 

of these programs had a positive impact 

on financial aid application and college 

enrollment. Although five other programs 

with studies meeting standards with and 

without reservations provided financial 

aid services, the level and intensity of 

241. Standing et al. (2008). 

242. Kahne and Bailey (1999); Kuboyama (2000); 

McGrath and Hayman (1997).

243. FAFSA Experiment—Bettinger et al. (2009); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006).
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 70 )

these services were often unclear.244 Two 

of these studies measured financial aid 

outcomes and found no impact,245 and 

the findings for college enrollment were 

mixed across these five studies. Since the 

two programs that closely correspond 

with the panel’s recommendation had a 

positive impact on financial aid application 

and college enrollment, the panel assigned 

a moderate level of evidence.

Summary of evidence 

Seven programs with studies meeting 

standards offered some form of financial 

aid assistance, often informing students 

and parents about financial aid or helping 

students with financial aid applications.246

The types of practices recommended by 

the panel formed a major part of Talent 

Search and the FAFSA Experiment, and 

both had a significant impact on application for financial aid and college enrollment.247 Five other programs offered financial aid assistance, but the studies of 

these programs did not provide sufficient 

information on the type and frequency 

of these services. Among these five programs, two had studies measuring financial aid outcomes and found no impact,248

two found a positive impact on college 

244. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, 

Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009). 

245. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Upward Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm 

(2009).

246. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

FAFSA Experiment—Bettinger et al. (2009); Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); Talent 

Search—Constantine et al. (2006); Sponsor-aScholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009). 

247. FAFSA Experiment—Bettinger et al. (2009); 

Talent Search—Constantine et al. (2006). 

248. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Upward Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm 

(2009).

enrollment,249 and three found no impact 

on enrollment.250

The FAFSA Experiment compared two interventions designed to improve the financial aid and college enrollment rates. 

The main intervention consisted of an 

H&R Block tax professional using a family’s income tax return and a structured 

protocol of questions to fill out the FAFSA, 

offering to submit the FAFSA form free 

of charge, and providing information on 

financial aid eligibility for local colleges. 

A second intervention offered families information on their financial aid eligibility 

based on their tax return without assisting them in completing or submitting the 

FAFSA. The main intervention had a significant positive impact on financial aid 

application and college enrollment for the 

dependent participants, who were mostly 

high school seniors. The information-only 

intervention did not have an impact on 

either outcome. 

A primary goal of Talent Search is to inform students about the availability of financial aid, provide financial aid counseling, and assist students in completing the 

FAFSA. Almost all Talent Search projects 

report providing these services, and both 

students and project staff emphasize the 

importance of financial aid assistance.251

Programs often provide general information that raises awareness of financial aid 

in the middle school and early high school 

grades and then offer counseling and oneon-one support in filling out the FAFSA in 

the junior and senior years. A quasi-experimental study of Talent Search students in 

Florida, Indiana, and Texas found that the 

program had a substantial impact on the 

financial aid application rate and postsec249. Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); 

Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998).

250. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

QOP—Schirm, Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward 

Bound—Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

251. Calahan et al. (2004). 
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 71 )

ondary enrollment.252 The authors found 

effect sizes between 0.34 and 0.67 for the 

financial aid application rate, and persistence of these effects when controlling for 

high school graduation.

Five other programs with studies meeting standards provided assistance with 

the financial aid process, but detailed information on their financial aid practices 

was lacking.253

Although Upward Bound focuses on providing academic coursework during the 

school year and summer, the program offers several nonacademic services as well. 

An implementation study of Upward Bound 

found that most sites provide assistance 

with financial aid, but the intensity of these 

services varied widely.254 Some sites offered 

a workshop on financial aid, whereas others 

met with students and parents on multiple 

occasions to assist with the financial aid 

application process.255 The prevalence of 

one-on-one financial aid counseling could 

not be determined from the available studies. The random assignment study of the 

program did not find a significant impact 

on financial aid application or receipt, or on 

postsecondary enrollment or attainment.256

The study did report a significant impact on 

financial aid application for students who 

participated in the program for a longer 

period of time.

The implementation of financial aid assistance in the Career Beginnings program 

252. Constantine et al. (2006). The study found 

differences in the financial aid application rate 

between participants and nonparticipants of 14, 

17, and 28 percentage points in Indiana, Florida, 

and Texas, respectively.

253. EXCEL—Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007); 

Career Beginnings—Cave and Quint (1990); Sponsor-a-Scholar—Johnson (1998); QOP—Schirm, 

Stuart, and McKie (2006); Upward Bound—Seftor, 

Mamun, and Schirm (2009). 

254. Moore et al. (1997).

255. Ibid.

256. Seftor, Mamun, and Schirm (2009).

is not clear from the seven sites included 

in the study meeting standards.257 The 

study reports that one site enlisted the 

help of a financial aid officer and another 

held classes on completing financial aid 

forms, although there is limited information to assess the prevalence and quality 

of financial aid services. A random assignment study of Career Beginnings found 

that the program did not have a significant 

impact on scholarship receipt or student 

loan usage, but it did increase college enrollment (i.e., enrollment in a two- or fouryear college).

Sponsor-a-Scholar mentors and QOP case 

managers assisted students with financial aid applications, and both programs 

held workshops on the financial aid process.258 The studies of both programs did 

not provide enough detail to determine 

the frequency or quality of these services, 

and neither study measured financial aid 

outcomes. As described, Sponsor-a-Scholar 

had a positive impact on college enrollment, and QOP had no impact on college 

enrollment, retention, or degree attainment. Although a study of EXCEL notes 

that the program assisted parents with 

financial aid forms, there is no additional 

information to determine the financial 

aid assistance provided through the program.259 A relatively small random assignment study of about 70 students found 

that the program did not have a positive 

impact on college enrollment.260

The panel examined two programs with 

studies that potentially meet standards 

for practices related to engaging parents. 

Parent involvement formed a major part of 

the Puente program (described in recommendation 3). The program has parents 

attend interviews along with students, 

257. Cave and Quint (1990). 

258. Johnson (1998); Schirm, Stuart, and McKie 

(2006).

259. Bergin, Cooks, and Bergin (2007).

260. Ibid.
Appendix D. Technical information on the studies

( 72 )

hosts informal parent nights, and holds 

one-on-one parent meetings with a Puente 

counselor.261 Parents receive financial aid 

information and counseling. A national 

study of GEAR UP that potentially meets 

standards created a matched comparison group of GEAR UP and non–GEAR UP 

schools, but it did not provide sufficient 

information to assess equivalence of the 

analysis sample. As part of the study, the 

authors found that sites that effectively 

engaged parents used two practices: 9- 

to 10-week parent institutes and individual counseling sessions for parents and 

children.262 The institutes consisted of 

a series of workshops to inform parents 

about how to help their children prepare 

for college.

The panel considered practices from three 

other programs that provided financial aid 

information or assistance, but it did not 

have a study that met standards. The Baltimore College Bound program conducted 

presentations on financial aid for students 

261. Grubb, Lara, and Valdez (2002).

262. Standing et al. (2008).

in the 9th and 10th grades and provided 

individual assistance with financial aid 

and college applications in the 11th and 

12th grades. A quasi-experimental study 

of the program compared participants 

and nonparticipants but did not include 

an indicator of socioeconomic status to 

match students. The Kids2College program provided financial aid information 

to middle school students as part of its 

college awareness program that helped 

prepare students for college. A study of 

the program examined the pre- and postprogram outcomes of participants, but it 

did not have a comparison group of students.263 The Neighborhood Academic Initiative (NAI) coordinates a Family Development Institute that includes information 

on financial aid and works with a financial 

aid officer from the University of Southern California to assist students in completing financial aid application forms.264

The panel did not identify any comparison 

group studies of the NAI.

263. Cunningham, Erisman, and Looney (2007). 

264. Tierney and Jun (2001).
( 73 )

References

Achieve, Inc. (2008). American Diploma 

Project Algebra II end-of-course exam: 

2008 annual report. Washington, DC: 

Author.

Achieve, Inc. (2009). Closing the expectations gap: Fourth annual 50-state progress report on the alignment of high 

school policies with the demands of 

college and careers. Washington, DC: 

Author.

ACT. (2007). Using EXPLORE and PLAN data 

to evaluate GEAR UP programs. Iowa 

City, IA: ACT, Inc. 

ACT. (2008a). COMPASS guide to successful 

high school outreach: Setting the right 

course for college success. Iowa City, IA: 

ACT, Inc. 

ACT. (2008b). The forgotten middle: Ensuring that all students are on target for 

college and career readiness before high 

school. Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc. 

ACT. (2009a). Readiness and success: Statewide implementation of EXPLORE and 

PLAN. Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc. 

ACT. (2009b). Statewide administration of 

the ACT: A key component in improving 

student access to college and work. Iowa 

City, IA: ACT, Inc.

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the toolbox. Academic intensity, attendance 

patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department 

of Education.

Adelman, C. (2006). The toolbox revisited: 

Paths to degree completion from high 

school through college. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Education, Office of 

Vocational and Adult Education. 

Advisory Committee on Student Financial 

Assistance. (2006). Mortgaging our future: How financial barriers to college 

undercut America’s global competitiveness. Washington, DC: Author.

Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (2008). Early and often: 

Designing a comprehensive system of 

financial aid information. Washington, 

DC: Author. 

Alexander, N. A. (2002). Race, poverty, and 

the student curriculum: Implications 

for standards policy. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 675–693.

Allensworth, E., Nomi, T., Montgomery, N., 

& Lee, V. E. (2008). College preparatory 

curriculum for all: Consequences of ninthgrade course taking in algebra and English on academic outcomes in Chicago. 

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research. 

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for 

educational and psychological testing. 

Washington, DC: AERA Publications.

American Psychological Association. 

(2002). Criteria for practice guideline 

development and evaluation. American 

Psychologist, 57(12), 1048–1051.

Attewell, P., & Domina, T. (2008). Raising the 

bar: Curricular intensity and academic 

performance. Educational Evaluation 

and Policy Analysis, 30(1), 51–71. 

Austin Independent School District, Office 

of Program Evaluation. (2002). GEAR UP 

Austin: Impacting lives project, 2000–

2001 evaluation. Austin, TX: Author. 

Avery, C., & Kane, T. J. (2004). Student perceptions of college opportunities: The 

Boston COACH program. In C. M. Hoxby 

(Ed.), College choices: The economics of 

where to go, when to go, and how to pay 

for it (pp. 355–394). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. 

Bailey, T. (2009). Challenge and opportunity: Rethinking the role and function of developmental education in 

community college. In A. C. Bueschel 

& A. Venezia (Eds.), New directions for 

community colleges: Policies and practices to improve student preparation and 

success (pp. 11–30). San Francisco, CA: 

Jossey-Bass.

Bailey, W. V. (2002). An evaluation of the 

efficacy of the Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) program 
References

( 74 )

(Doctoral dissertation, University of 

Virginia, 2002). Dissertation Abstracts 

International, 63(6A), 2126. 

Bailis, L. N., Hahn, A., Aaron, P., Nahas, J., 

& Leavitt, T. (1995). A new field emerges: 

College access programs. Waltham, MA: 

Brandeis University, Center for Human 

Resources.

Baum, S., & Ma, J. (2007). Education pays: 

The benefits of higher education for individuals and society. Washington, DC: 

College Board.

Bergin, D. A., Cooks, H. C., & Bergin, C. C. 

(2007). Effects of a college access program for youth underrepresented in 

higher education: A randomized experiment. Research in Higher Education, 

48(6), 727–750.

Bettinger, E., Long, B. T., Oreopoulos, P., & 

Sanbonmatsu, L. (2009). The role of information and simplification in college 

decisions: Results from the FAFSA Experiment. Unpublished manuscript.

Black, A. C., Little, C. A., McCoach, D. B., 

Purcell, J. H., & Siegle, D. (2008). Advancement Via Individual Determination: Method selection in conclusions 

about program effectiveness. Journal of 

Educational Research, 102(2), 111–124.

Black, S., & Sufi, A. (2002). Who goes to college? Differential enrollment rates by 

race and family background (Working 

Paper 9310). Cambridge, MA: National 

Bureau of Economic Research.

Cabrera, A. F., Deil-Amen, R., Prabhu, R., 

Terenzini, P. T., Lee, C., & Franklin, R. E., Jr. 

(2006). Increasing the college preparedness of at-risk students. Journal of Latinos and Education, 5(2), 79–97. 

Cabrera, A. F., & La Nasa, S. M. (2001). 

On the path to college: Three critical 

tasks facing America’s disadvantaged. 

Research in Higher Education, 42(2), 

119–149.

Cabrera, A. F., & La Nasa, S. M. (2000). Understanding the college choice of disadvantaged students. San Francisco, CA: 

Jossey-Bass. 

Calahan, M., Silva, T., Humphrey, J., 

Thomas, M., & Cunningham, K. (2004). 

Implementation of the Talent Search 

program, past and present: Final report 

from phase I of the national evaluation. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy 

Research.

California State University. (2005). Pilot 

study evaluation of the Early Assessment 

Program’s professional development in 

English 2004–2005. Long Beach, CA: 

California State University, Office of the 

Chancellor. 

Campbell, P. B., Wahl, E., Slater, M., Iler, E., 

Moeller, B., Ba, H., et al. (1998). Paths to 

success: An evaluation of the Gateway 

to Higher Education program. Journal 

of Women and Minorities in Science and 

Engineering, 4(2–3), 297–308. 

Cave, G., & Quint, J. (1990). Career Beginnings impact evaluation: Findings from a 

program for disadvantaged high school 

students. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

Choy, S. P. (2002). Access & persistence: Findings from 10 years of longitudinal research on students. Washington, DC: 

American Council on Education.

Choy, S. P., Horn, L. J., Nunez, A., & Chen, X. 

(2000). Transition to college: What helps 

at-risk students and students whose parents did not attend college. New Directions 

for Institutional Research, 107, 45–63.

Christie, K., & Zinth, K. (2008). Ensuring successful student transitions from the middle 

grades to high school. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. 

Constantine, J. M., Seftor, N. S., Sama Martin, E., 

Silva, T., & Myers, D. (2006). Study of the 

effect of the Talent Search program on 

secondary and postsecondary outcomes 

in Florida, Indiana, and Texas: Final report from phase II of the national evaluation. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy 

Research. 

Crook, D. (1990). The impact of College 

Now: An assessment of the retention 

and academic progress of program participants who entered CUNY in fall 1987 

[and] College Now alumni survey, fall 

1990. New York: Kingsborough Community College.
References

( 75 )

Cunningham, A. F., Erisman, W., & Looney, S. M.

(2007). From aspirations to action: The 

role of middle school parents in making 

the dream of college a reality. Washington, DC: Institute of Higher Education Policy.

Dougherty, C., Mellor, L., & Jian, S. (2006). 

The relationship between Advanced 

Placement and college graduation. Austin, TX: National Center for Educational 

Accountability.

Dounay, J. (2006). Ensuring rigor in the 

high school curriculum: What states are 

doing. Denver, CO: Education Commission for the States. 

Dounay, J. (2008). Improving outcomes 

for traditionally underserved students 

through Early College High Schools. 

Denver, CO: Education Commission for 

the States. 

Dynarski, M., Gleason, P., Rangarajan, A.,

& Wood, R. (1998). Impacts of dropout prevention programs: Final report. Princeton, 

NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.

Dynarski, S. M., & Scott-Clayton, J. E. 

(2007). College grants on a postcard: A 

proposal for simple and predictable federal student aid (Hamilton Project discussion papers, 2008-01). Washington, 

DC: The Brookings Institution. 

Ellwood, D. T., & Kane, T. J. (2000). Who 

is getting a college education? Family 

background and the growing gaps in 

enrollment. In S. Danziger & J. Waldfogel (Eds.), Securing the future: Investing in children from birth to college

(pp. 283–324). New York: Russell Sage 

Foundation.

Engle, J., Bermeo, A., & O’Brien, C. (2006). 

Straight from the source: What works for 

first-generation college students. Washington, DC: Pell Institute for the Study 

of Opportunity in Higher Education.

Field, M. J., & Lohr, K. N. (Eds.). (1990). Clinical practice guidelines: Directions for a 

new program. Washington, DC: National 

Academy Press.

Gamoran, A., & Hannigan, E. C. (2000). Algebra for everyone? Benefits of collegepreparatory mathematics for students 

with diverse abilities in early secondary school. Educational Evaluation and 

Policy Analysis, 22(3), 241–254.

Gandara, P. (2002). A study of High School 

Puente: What we have learned about 

preparing Latino youth for postsecondary education. Educational Policy, 

16(4), 474–495. 

Gandara, P. (2004). Building bridges to college. 

Educational Leadership, 62(3), 56–60.

Gandara, P., Mejorado, M., Gutierrez, D., & 

Molina, M. (1998). Final report of the evaluation of High School Puente: 1994–1998. 

New York: Carnegie Corporation. 

Gewertz, C. (2009). Ninth grade, by the numbers. Education Week, 28(24), 26–29.

Grodsky, E., & Jones, M. T. (2007). Real 

and imagined barriers to college entry: 

Perceptions of cost. Social Science Research, 36(2), 745–766. 

Grubb, W. N., Lara, C. N., & Valdez, S. (2002). 

Counselor, coordinator, monitor, mom: 

The roles of counselors in the Puente 

program. Educational Policy Journal, 

16(4), 547–571. 

Guthrie, L. F., & Guthrie, G. P. (2002). The magnificent eight: AVID best practices study.

Burlingame, CA: Center for Research, 

Evaluation and Training in Education.

Haimson, J., & Deke, J. (2003). Preparing 

for productive careers: Students’ participation in and use of career-focused 

learning activities. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research. 

Hamilton, L., Halverson, R., Jackson, S., 

Mandinach, E., Supovitz, J., and Wayman, J. (2009). Using student achievement data to support instructional 

decision making (NCEE 2009-4067). 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education 

Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

Hargrove, L., Godin, D., & Dodd, B. (2008). 

College outcomes comparisons by AP 

and non-AP high school experiences

(Research Rep. No. 2008-3). New York: 

College Board. 

Hershey, A. M., Silverberg, M. K., Haimson, J., 

Hudis, P., & Jackson, R. (1999). Expanding 
References

( 76 )

options for students: Report to Congress on 

the national evaluation of school-to-work 

implementation. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research. 

Horn, L. J., & Chen, X. (1998). Toward resiliency: At-risk students who make it to 

college. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational 

Research and Improvement. 

Horn, L. J., Chen, X., & Chapman, C. (2003). 

Getting ready to pay for college: What 

students and their parents know about 

the cost of college tuition and what they 

are doing to find out (Statistical analysis 

report, NCES 2003-030). Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Hossler, D., Schmit, J., & Vesper, N. (1999). 

Going to college: How social, economic, 

and educational factors influence the 

decisions students make. Baltimore, MD: 

The Johns Hopkins University Press. 

Howell, J. S., Kurlaender, M., & Grodsky, E. 

(2009). Postsecondary preparation and 

remediation: Examining the effect of the 

early assessment program at California 

State University. Davis, CA: University of 

California–Davis.

Ikenberry, S. O., & Hartle, T. W. (1998). Too 

little knowledge is a dangerous thing: 

What the public thinks about paying 

for college. Washington, DC: American 

Council on Education.

Ishitani, T. T., & Snider, K. G. (2004, May). 

Longitudinal effects of college preparation programs on college retention.

Paper presented at the 44th Annual 

Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Boston. 

Jackson, C. K. (2009). A little now for a lot 

later: A look at a Texas Advanced Placement incentive program. Ithaca, NY: 

Cornell University, School of Industrial 

and Labor Relations. 

Jeong, D. W. (2009). High school completion, college entrance, and Advanced 

Placement programs in U.S. secondary 

schools. New York: Teachers College at 

Columbia University, Community College Research Center.

Johnson, A. W. (1998). An evaluation of 

the long-term impacts of the Sponsora-Scholar program on student achievement. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy 

Research.

Kahne, J., & Bailey, K. (1999). The role of social capital in youth development: The 

case of “I Have a Dream” programs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 

21(3), 321–343.

Kallison, J., & Stader, D. (2008). Final evaluation report: 2007 high school summer 

bridge program. Arlington, TX: Texas 

Higher Education Coordinating Board.

Kane, T. J., & Rouse, C. E. (1995). Labormarket returns to two- and four-year 

college. The American Economic Review, 

85(3), 600–614.

Kao, G., & Tienda, M. (1998). Educational 

aspirations of minority youth. American 

Journal of Education, 106(3), 349–384.

Karp, M. M., Calcagno, J. C., Hughes, K. L., 

Jeong, D. W., & Bailey, T. R. (2007). The 

postsecondary achievement of participants in dual enrollment: An analysis of 

student outcomes in two states. St. Paul, 

MN: University of Minnesota, National 

Research Center for Career and Technical Education.

Karp, M. M., Calcagno, J. C., Hughes, K. L., 

Jeong, D. W., & Bailey, T. (2008). Dual 

enrollment students in Florida and New 

York City: Postsecondary outcomes 

(CCRC Brief No. 37). New York: Columbia University Teachers College. 

Kemple, J. J. (2001). Career Academies: Impacts on students’ initial transitions to 

post-secondary education and employment. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. 

Kemple, J. J. (2004). Career Academies: 

Impacts on labor market outcomes and 

educational attainment. New York: 

Manpower Demonstration Research 

Corporation.

Kemple, J. J. (2008). Career Academies: Longterm impacts on labor market outcomes, 

educational attainment, and transitions 

to adulthood. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. 
References

( 77 )

Kemple, J. J., Herlihy, C. M., & Smith, T. J., 

(2005). Making progress toward graduation: Evidence from the Talent Development High School model. New York: 

Manpower Demonstration Research 

Corporation.

Kemple, J. J., Poglinco, S. M., & Snipes, J. C. 

(1999). Career Academies: Building career awareness and work-based learning 

activities through employer partnerships.

New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

Kemple, J. J., & Snipes, J. C. (2000). Career 

Academies: Impacts on students’ engagement and performance in high school. 

New York: Manpower Demonstration 

Research Corporation. 

Keng, L., & Dodd, B. G. (2008). A comparison of college performances of AP and 

non-AP student groups in 10 subject 

areas (Research Rep. No. 2008-7). New 

York: College Board. 

King, J. E. (2006). Missed opportunities revisited: New information on students who do 

not apply for financial aid. Washington, 

DC: American Council on Education. 

Klopfenstein, K., & Thomas, M. K. (2009). 

The link between Advanced Placement experience and early college success. Southern Economic Journal, 75(3), 

873–891.

Kuboyama, E. (2000). East Palo Alto I Have a 

Dream program evaluation report. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, School of 

Education.

Ladd, G. T. (1992). College bound: 1989–

1992: The Fund for the Improvement of 

Postsecondary Education, FIPSE final report. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College, 

School of Education.

Lee, V. E., & Ready, D. D. (2009). U.S. high 

school curriculum: Three phases of 

contemporary research and reform. The 

Future of Children, 19(1), 135–156.

Lee, V. E., Croninger, R. G., & Smith, J. B. 

(1997). Course-taking, equity, and 

mathematics learning: Testing the constrained curriculum hypothesis in U.S. 

secondary schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(2), 99–121.

Lozano, A., Watt, K. M., & Huerta, J. (2009). 

A comparison study of 12th grade students’ college anticipations, aspirations, 

and college preparatory measures. Manuscript submitted for publication. 

Luna De La Rosa, M. (2006). Is opportunity 

knocking?: Low-income students’ perceptions of college and financial aid. 

American Behavioral Scientist, 49(12), 

1670–1686. 

MacAllum, K., Glover, D. M., Queen, B., & 

Riggs, A. (2007). Deciding on postsecondary education: Final report (NPEC 

2008-850). Washington, DC: National 

Postsecondary Education Cooperative.

MacAllum, K., Yoder, K., Kim, S., & Bozick, R.

(2002). Moving forward: College and 

career transitions of LAMP graduates. 

Washington, DC: Academy for Educational Development.

Martinez, M., & Klopott, S. (2003). Improving college access for minority, lowincome, and first-generation students. 

Washington, DC: Pathways to College 

Network Clearinghouse.

Maxfield, M., Castner, L., Maralani, V., & 

Vencill, M. (2003). The Quantum Opportunity Program demonstration: Implementation findings. Washington, DC: 

Mathematica Policy Research.

McCauley, D. (2007). The impact of Advanced Placement and dual enrollment 

programs on college graduation.San 

Marcos, TX: Texas State University.

McGrath, R. E., & Hayman, J. (1997). The 

Paterson, New Jersey, I Have a Dream 

program: Academic performance and 

outcomes. Teaneck, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University, School of Psychology.

Mehan, H. (1996). Constructing school success: The consequences of untracking 

low-achieving students. New York: Cambridge University Press. 

Moore, M. T., Fasciano, N. J., Jacobson, J. E., 

Myers, D., & Waldman, Z. (1997). The 

national evaluation of Upward Bound. A 

1990’s view of Upward Bound: Programs 

offered, students served, and operational issues. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica 

Policy Research. 
References

( 78 )

Moreno, J. F. (2002). The long-term outcomes of Puente. Educational Policy, 

16(4), 572–587. 

Myers, D. E., & Moore, M. T. (1997). The 

national evaluation of Upward Bound: 

Summary of first-year impacts and program operations. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.

Myers, D., Olsen, R., Seftor, N., Young, J., & 

Tuttle, C. (2004). The impacts of regular 

Upward Bound: Results from the third 

follow-up data collection. Princeton, NJ: 

Mathematica Policy Research. 

Myers, D., & Schirm, A. (1999). The impacts 

of Upward Bound: Final report for phase 

I of the national evaluation. Princeton, 

NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.

National Center for Education Statistics. 

(1992). High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 1980 Sophomores: 

Data Files.

National Center for Education Statistics. 

(2002). National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988: Base-Year to Fourth 

Follow-up Data Files.

National Center for Education Statistics. 

(2004). Student effort and educational 

progress. The Condition of Education, 60.

National Center for Education Statistics. 

(2005). Student effort and educational 

progress. The Condition of Education, 

52–63.

National Center for Education Statistics. 

(2006a). Student effort and educational 

progress. The Condition of Education, 

56–71. 

National Center for Education Statistics. 

(2006b). Education Longitudinal Study 

of 2002: Base-Year to Third Follow-up 

Data Files. 

National Center for Education Statistics. 

(2008). Student effort and educational 

progress. The Condition of Education, 

32–43. 

National Conference on Citizenship. (2006). 

America’s civic health index: Broken engagement. Washington, DC: Author.

Nunez, A., & Cuccaro-Alamin, S. (1998). 

First-generation students: Undergraduates whose parents never enrolled in 

postsecondary education: Statistical analysis report (NCES 98-082). Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Olsen, R., Seftor, N., Silva, T., Myers, D., DesRoches, D., & Young, J. (2007). Upward 

Bound math-science: Program description 

and interim impact estimates. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Opuni, K. A. (1999). Project GRAD: Graduation really achieves dreams. 1998–99 

program evaluation report. Houston, 

TX: Houston University.

Pathways to College Network. (2004). A 

shared agenda: A leadership challenge 

to improve college access and success. 

Boston, MA: Author.

Pearson. (1996). Stanford Achievement Test 

Series, Ninth Edition—Complete Battery.

Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity 

in Higher Education. (2006). Expanding 

access and opportunity: The Washington 

State Achievers scholarship. Washington, DC: Author. 

Perkins, R., Kleiner, B., Roey, S., & Brown, J. 

(2004). The high school transcript study: 

A decade of change in curricula and 

achievement, 1990–2000 (NCES No. 2004-

455). Washington, DC: U.S. Department 

of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics.

Perna, L., Rowan-Kenyon, H. T., Thomas, S. L., 

Bell, A., Anderson, R., & Li, C. (2008). The 

role of college counseling in shaping college opportunity: Variations across high 

schools. The Review of Higher Education, 

31(2), 131–160. 

Plank, S. B., & Jordan, W. J. (2001). Effects 

of information, guidance, and actions 

on postsecondary destinations: A study 

of talent loss. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 947–979. 

Quigley, D. D. (2003). The Early Academic 

Outreach Program (EAOP) and its impact 

on high school students’ completion of 

the University of California’s preparatory coursework (CSE Tech Report No. 

589). Los Angeles, CA: University of 

California, CRESST. 
References

( 79 )

Quint, J., Thompson, S. L., & Bald, M. (2008). 

Relationships, rigor and readiness: Strategies for improving high schools. New 

York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

Roads to Success: Program evaluation report, fall 2008. (2008a). New York: Roads 

to Success. 

Roads to Success: Program evaluation report #2, December 2008. (2008b). New 

York: Roads to Success. 

Robinson, S., Stempel, A. & McCree, I. 

(2005). Gaining traction, gaining ground: 

How some high schools accelerate learning for struggling students. Washington, 

DC: The Education Trust. 

Roderick, M., Nagaoka, J., Coca, V., & 

Moeller, E. (2008). From high school to 

the future: Potholes on the road to college. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research. 

Schirm, A., Stuart, E., & McKie, A. (2006). 

The Quantum Opportunity Program 

demonstration: Final impacts. Princeton, 

NJ: Mathematica Policy Research. 

Seftor, N. S., Mamun, A., & Schirm, A. 

(2009). The impacts of regular Upward 

Bound on postsecondary outcomes 7–9 

years after scheduled high school graduation. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy 

Research.

Siskin, L. S., & Weinstein, M. (2008). Supplemental survey to “Creating support 

structures and services for Title I high 

schools implementing the International 

Baccalaureate programs.” New York: Institute for Education and Social Policy. 

Smith, T. M., Young, B. A., Bae, Y., Choy, S. 

P., & Alsalam, N. (1997). The condition 

of education (NCES 97-388). Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Snipes, J. C., Holton, G. I., Doolittle, F., & Sztejnberg, L. (2006). Striving for student 

success: The effect of Project GRAD on high 

school student outcomes in three urban 

school districts. New York: Manpower 

Demonstration Research Corporation. 

Sokatch, A. (2006). Peer influences on 

the college-going decisions of low 

socioeconomic status urban youth. 

Education and Urban Society, 39(1), 

128–146. 

Spielhagen, F. R. (2006). Closing the achievement gap in math: The long-term effects 

of eighth-grade algebra. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(1), 34–59. 

Standing, K., Judkins, D., Keller, B., & 

Shimshak, A. (2008). Early outcomes 

of the GEAR UP program: Final report.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Education. 

St. John, E. P., Musoba, G. D., Simmons, A. B., 

& Chung, C. (2002). Meeting the access 

challenge: Indiana’s Twenty-First Century Scholars program. [New agenda 

series, 4(4)]. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina 

Foundation for Education.

Texas Education Agency. (2002). Texas Assessment of Academic Skills.

Tierney, W. G., & Jun, A. (2001). A university helps prepare low-income youths 

for college: Tracking school success. 

Journal of Higher Education, 72(2), 

205–225. 

Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. (2004). 

Caught in the financial aid information 

divide. Los Angeles, CA: Author.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2002). The big payoff: 

Educational attainment and synthetic 

estimates of work-life earnings. Washington, DC: Author.

U.S. General Accounting Office. (1990). 

Higher education: Gaps in parents’ and 

students’ knowledge of school costs and 

federal aid (No. GAO/PEMD-90-20BR). 

Washington, DC: Author.

Venezia, A., & Kirst, M. W. (2005). Inequitable opportunities: How current education systems and policies undermine 

the chances for student persistence and 

success in college. Educational Policy, 

19(2), 283–307.

Watt, K. M., Huerta, J., & Lozano, A. (2007). 

A comparison study of AVID and GEAR 

UP 10th-grade students in two high 

schools in the Rio Grande Valley of 

Texas. Journal of Education for Students 

Placed At Risk, 12(2), 185–212.
References

( 80 )

Watt, K. M., Powell, C. A., Mendiola, I. D., 

& Cossio, G. (2006). Schoolwide impact 

and AVID: How have selected Texas high 

schools addressed the new accountability measures? Journal of Education for 

Students Placed At Risk, 11(1), 57–73. 

Wimberly, G. L., & Noeth, R. J. (2005). College 

readiness begins in middle school: ACT 

policy report. Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc.