College Completion: Additional Efforts Could Help Education with Its Completion Goals
Published: 2003-05-23T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Because of concerns that not enough students who start college are completing a bachelor's degree, we examined (1) the extent to which students who enroll in a 4-year college complete a bachelor's degree and identify the factors that affect completion; (2) what states and 4-year colleges and universities are doing to foster bachelor's degree completion; and (3) what the Department of Education (Education) is doing to foster degree completion.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: More than half of all students who enrolled in a 4-year college completed a bachelor's degree within 6 years. Students were less likely to complete if neither parent had completed a degree, they were black, they worked 20 or more hours per week, or they transferred to another college. Students had a greater likelihood of completing if they were continuously enrolled, attended full-time, or had more rigorous high school curriculum. After controlling for other factors, GAO found that disadvantaged students were no less likely to complete a degree than other students. However, students from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to attend college in the first place. States are beginning to hold colleges accountable for retaining and graduating their students, and Education has been discussing this with the higher education community. Many states are publishing retention and graduation rates for their colleges, and some have tied performance in these areas to funding. According to Education, providing information on colleges' retention and graduation performance can help prospective students make informed decisions. However, the measure used by Education may not fully reflect an institution's performance because institutional goals and missions are not captured in the measure. In its strategic plan, Education has identified goals to reduce gaps in college completion and increase overall completion. It also has some evaluation and dissemination efforts related to retention and completion, however, these efforts do not systematically identify and disseminate promising retention and graduation practices to help states and institutions.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: A college degree is a key ingredient for success in the job market. Those  with postsecondary degrees on average earn more than those without  such degrees and bring important skills to the workplace. Completing  college can serve as a means for disadvantaged students to improve their  economic and social circumstances. Beyond the societal benefits, the  federal government has additional interests in encouraging college  completion. Research indicates that those who stay in college and advance  toward a degree are less likely to default on a student loan—the federal  government provided student borrowers with $35 billion in new loans in  fiscal year 2001. In addition to the investment the federal government  makes in higher education, states, parents, and students make substantial  investments. To help protect these investments, policymakers have begun  to focus on accountability of colleges and universities, especially  regarding college completion rates. The Department of Education  (Education) has begun to discuss this issue with the higher education  community.
Because of concerns that not enough students who start college are  completing a bachelor’s degree, you asked us to determine (1) the extent  to which students—including those from lower socioeconomic  backgrounds—who enroll in a 4-year college or university complete a  bachelor’s degree and the factors that affect bachelor’s degree completion;  (2) what states and 4-year colleges and universities are doing to foster  bachelor’s degree completion and what is known about the effectiveness  of these efforts; and (3) what Education is doing to foster bachelor’s  degree completion.
To determine the extent to which students complete bachelor’s degrees  and the factors that affect completion, we conducted a logistic regression  using data from Education’s 1995-1996 Beginning Postsecondary Students  study, which tracked over a 6-year period the academic progress and  degree completion of individual students beginning with the time they first  enrolled in postsecondary study in 1995-1996. We analyzed data for those  students who in 1995-1996 were enrolled in a 4-year institution or were  enrolled at some other type of institution, but transferred to a 4-year  institution at some point during the 6-year period. As a result, our analysis  excludes other types of students, such as community college students who  did not transfer to a 4-year institution. To identify what states and 4-year  colleges and universities are doing to foster bachelor’s degree completion,  we conducted a survey of state higher education executive officer  agencies representing all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto  Rico. We received responses representing 48 of the 52 jurisdictions (92  percent). We also interviewed state officials and administrators at   11 public colleges and universities in Florida, Maryland, Oregon, Texas,  and Virginia. We selected these states and institutions based on geographic  dispersion and the variety of efforts reported to us by experts and in the  survey. To identify what Education is doing to foster bachelor’s degree  completion, we talked with Education officials and reviewed program and  planning documents. A more detailed explanation of our methodology is  included in appendix I. We conducted our work between April 2002 and  May 2003 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Many factors affect why some students graduate from college and our  review would not be complete without first considering the extent to  which students with different characteristics advance to higher levels of  education. Many students will complete their education without ever  having enrolled in college. Figure 1 shows some of the differences in  educational participation and attainment for a group of students who were  followed over a 12-year period starting in the eighth grade.
We reported in February 2002 that low-income, black, and Hispanic  students complete high school at lower rates than other students.  Students from these groups who graduate from high school also enroll in  college at lower rates than their peers, even though the overall rate at  which students enter college directly from high school has been  increasing. According to research, factors such as family income and  parents’ educational attainment influence students’ expectations about  college. Low-income students and students from families in which neither  parent has earned a bachelor’s degree were less likely to expect to finish  college and ultimately enrolled at lower rates than other students.  Academic preparation was also cited as a factor affecting postsecondary  enrollment. Low-income, black, and Hispanic high school graduates were  less likely to be well prepared academically to attend a 4-year college.  Even among those who were qualified for college, however, low-income  and Hispanic students were less likely to take college entrance  examinations and apply for admission, two necessary steps for enrolling in  a 4-year institution.
There are a variety of postsecondary options for students after high  school. Over 15 million students were enrolled in some type of higher  education in the fall of 2000. Most students were enrolled in degree- granting 2-year or 4-year institutions. After considering their academic  qualifications, students can choose to apply to institutions with varying  levels of selectivity. Community colleges, for example, provide  postsecondary opportunities for students who might not have the  qualifications to start at most 4-year institutions. Additionally, students  may wish to choose an institution based on its mission. For example,  Minority Serving Institutions are recognized by statute, in part, for their  mission to educate minority students.
The institutions students attend have differing graduation rates.  Institutional graduation rates may vary based upon such factors as the  mission, selectivity, and type of institution. For example, institutions that  focus on providing postsecondary opportunities to disadvantaged  students—addressing Education’s goal of increasing participation in  higher education—may have lower graduation rates than institutions that  do not serve many disadvantaged students. To ensure that students and  their parents have some information about how colleges are performing  with respect to graduating their students, Congress passed the Campus  Security and Student Right-to-Know Act. This act, as amended, requires  that institutions participating in any student financial assistance program  under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 disclose to current and  prospective students information about the graduation rates of first-time,  full-time undergraduate students. The law requires that institutions report  the percentage of students who graduate or complete within 150 percent  of the normal program completion time. This would mean that 4-year  institutions would track groups of entering students over a 6-year period,  and 2-year institutions would track groups of entering students over a   3-year period. While information collected as part of this act is the  principal federal measure available to hold institutions accountable for  their performance in graduating their students, there are currently no  federal sanctions or incentives associated with college graduation rates.  As part of discussions with the higher education community, Education  has held panel discussions with student-aid experts, state officials, and  business leaders, among other participants, about improving  accountability.
Four-year institutions calculate their graduation rate by determining the  proportion of first-time, full-time students who enroll in a given year and  have graduated from the same institution within a 6-year period. Students  who have not graduated from the institution where they first enrolled by  the end of the 6-year period are classified as not having finished a degree,  even if they transferred and completed a degree at another institution.  Data from Education’s 1995-96 Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS)  study—a longitudinal study which followed the retention and degree  completion of students from the time they enrolled in any postsecondary  institution over a 6-year period—illustrates how graduation rates are  understated due to this treatment of transfer students. Figure 2 shows the  completion status of the nearly 1.4 million students who started their  postsecondary education at a 4-year institution in 1995-96 (no transfers  into 4-year institutions from 2-year institutions or certificate programs  were included). Over one-quarter of the students who started at a 4-year  institution transferred from their first institution to another institution. If  only those who completed a bachelor’s degree at the first institution of  attendance are considered, the graduation rate is 51 percent. However, an  additional 8 percent transferred to another institution and completed a  bachelor’s degree within the 6-year period.
section_title: Over Half of Students Enrolled in a 4-Year College or University Completed Their Degree within 6 Years, but Certain Factors Affect the Likelihood of Doing So
paragraphs: Over half of students who enrolled in a 4-year college or university  completed a bachelor’s degree within 6 years of beginning postsecondary  education, according to our analysis of BPS data. However, background  characteristics such as being black or a first-generation college student  were associated with lower rates of completion. Whereas students were  more likely to complete a bachelor’s degree within 6 years if, among other  things, they had a more rigorous curriculum in high school, attended  college full-time, were continuously enrolled, worked less than 20 hours  per week, or did not transfer. After controlling for other factors, we found  that disadvantaged students were no less likely to complete a bachelor’s  degree than other students. Notwithstanding this fact, as we have noted,  students from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to attend college  in the first place.
For various reasons, not all students who enroll in college will ultimately  attain a degree. Based on Education’s 1995-96 BPS study, 52 percent of the  estimated 1.8 million students who enrolled in a 4-year institution at some  point during the subsequent 6-year period (including approximately  450,000 students who transferred from a less than 4-year institution)  completed their bachelor’s degree. Of the 48 percent of students who had  not attained a bachelor’s degree, nearly 14 percent were still enrolled in a  4-year institution at the end of the 6-year period, as shown in figure 3. See  appendix II for completion rates by characteristics and appendix III for  descriptions of the variables used in our analysis and a discussion of their  levels of significance.
Of the background characteristics we analyzed, being black or a first- generation college student was associated with lower completion rates.  Students with either of these characteristics were about a third less likely  to complete college as students without these characteristics. The  completion rate for black students was 38 percent compared with   55 percent for both white and Asian students. As for students who had at  least one parent with a bachelor’s degree, their rate of completion was   59 percent compared with 43 percent for students who were first- generation college students. Being a first-generation student affected  completion regardless of race. For example, first-generation white  students were no more likely to complete college than first-generation  black students.
Students who had a more rigorous high school curriculum and achieved  better grades in high school and during the first year of college were more  likely to complete college. About 80 percent of students who had the  most rigorous high school curriculum completed college compared with  47 percent who had the least rigorous curriculum. Additionally, the higher  the grades a student earned both in high school and in the first-year of  college, the higher the likelihood of completion. Regarding first-year  college grade point average, about 71 percent of students who earned  higher than a 3.0 had completed college compared with 51 percent who  earned between a 2.0 and 3.0. Students were more than twice as likely to  complete college for every one-point increase in first-year college grade  point average.
Decisions students make regarding attendance, participation in collegiate  clubs, and work had varying effects on completion. Students who were  continuously enrolled during their studies were more than 6 times as likely  to graduate than students who experienced one or more breaks from  enrollment Additionally, students who attended college full-time were  more than twice as likely to graduate as students who attended part-time  or some combination of part-time and full-time, all other factors equal.  Students who reported participating in collegiate clubs were one and one- half times as likely to graduate as students who did not participate. Less  than half of students reported such participation. Students who worked   20 or more hours per week were less likely to complete a bachelor’s  degree than students who did not work. However, working less than   20 hours per week was not associated with lower completion rates. Figure  4 illustrates bachelor’s degree completion rates by the number of hours  worked per week.
Transferring between institutions was also associated with a lower  likelihood of completion in that students who transferred were a little less  than half as likely to complete as students who did not. About 69 percent  of students who started at a 4-year institution and did not transfer attained  a bachelor’s degree compared with 47 percent of students who started at a  4-year institution and transferred to another 4-year institution. The rate of  completion for students who started at a 2-year institution and transferred  to a 4-year institution was roughly half of those who started at a 4-year  institution and did not transfer. Figure 5 illustrates the bachelor’s degree  completion rate after 6 years according to type of institution first attended  and transfer status.
After controlling for other factors, we found that disadvantaged students  were no less likely to complete a bachelor’s degree than other students.  However, as we have noted, students from disadvantaged backgrounds are  less likely to attend college in the first place.
section_title: States and 4-Year Institutions Had Various Methods to Foster Bachelor’s Degree Completion
paragraphs: While states and 4-year colleges and universities are employing various  methods to foster bachelor’s degree completion, information on the  effectiveness of these efforts is limited. Over two-thirds of the states  responding to our survey reported having at least one effort in place to  foster bachelor’s degree completion. Half the states indicated additional  actions they would like to take to foster bachelor’s degree completion, but  cited state budget constraints as a factor preventing them from moving  forward. As a way to foster bachelor’s degree completion, 4-year colleges  and universities we visited were engaged in activities designed to improve  the learning experience for students and strengthen support of students. In  some cases, officials attributed increases in retention to their efforts to  foster completion.
subsections: section_title: States Are Using a Variety of Efforts to Foster Bachelor’s Degree Completion, but Would Like to Do More
paragraphs: Thirty-four of the 48 states responding to our survey, including the 5 states  we visited—Florida, Maryland, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia—reported  having at least one effort in place to foster bachelor’s degree completion.  Most of these states reported efforts that fell into three broad categories:  (1) efforts to increase the overall number of college graduates by  increasing the number of students entering postsecondary education;   (2) efforts to help colleges improve their performance in retaining and  graduating students; and (3) efforts to help individual students remain in  college and to encourage timely completion for these students. While  states reported that almost half of their approaches have been evaluated,  the instances where states provided specific evaluation results were  limited. Half of the states indicated that there were additional actions they  would like to take to foster bachelor’s degree completion, but cited state  budget constraints as a factor preventing them from moving forward.
subsections: section_title: States Seek to Increase the Number of Students Entering Postsecondary Education
paragraphs: Nineteen states have efforts to increase the number of bachelor’s degrees  awarded by increasing the number of students enrolling in postsecondary  education. This approach includes efforts such as increasing the number  of students ready for college, educating students and parents about college  requirements and costs, and providing financial assistance to help cover  college costs.
Increasing student readiness for college. Some states have efforts to  improve the academic readiness of students so that more students have  the opportunity to attend college. Kentucky has a P-16 partnership that  focuses on aligning standards between high school and college to ensure  students are academically prepared for college. Kentucky reported in our  survey that the state had aligned high school graduation standards with  college admissions standards by creating a single high school curriculum  for all students. The state has adopted an online diagnostic test designed  for sophomores and juniors to test their readiness for college mathematics  in time to improve these skills and avoid remedial placement in college.  Oregon has implemented proficiency-based admissions standards that  specify certain knowledge and skills students should demonstrate for  admission to its public universities. The standards are intended to provide  more accurate information about student readiness for college and  encourage students to choose challenging coursework that will prepare  them for college. Oklahoma uses assessments in the eighth and tenth  grades to provide students feedback on their progress in preparing for  college. In addition to student feedback, colleges use assessment results to  improve curricula and instruction. The state reported that since this effort  began 10 years ago there have been increases in the number of high school  students taking college preparatory courses, particularly among black  students.
Educating students and parents about college. To increase the  numbers of students enrolling in postsecondary education and ultimately  completing a bachelor’s degree, some states are focusing on raising  awareness among students and parents about the benefits and costs of  postsecondary education. Texas, for example, has a plan that centers on  counseling students and their parents about what is necessary to enroll in  postsecondary education. The state provides information on the benefits  of postsecondary education, the academic preparation necessary for  enrolling, and the costs of attending, including information about available  financial aid and how to qualify. These efforts are designed to support its  goal of increasing its enrollment from just under 1 million students in   2000 by adding 500,000 new college students by 2015.
Providing financial aid for college. Financial assistance is another way  states seek to increase the number of students enrolling in college. Several  states have programs that provide monetary assistance to academically  qualified students based on academic merit, financial need, or some  combination of the two. For example, Oklahoma provides free tuition at  public institutions for students whose families have incomes below  $50,000 and meet other requirements, including completing a prescribed  high school course of study with at least a 2.5 grade point average.  Oklahoma reported that the performance of students in this program has  exceeded that of the general student population. Another example is the  West Virginia Higher Education Grant Program, which provides assistance  to academically qualified, but needy students who attend college in West  Virginia or Pennsylvania. West Virginia’s evaluation of the program  revealed that grant recipients had higher graduation rates than students  receiving other types of financial aid and students who received no  financial aid.
section_title: State Efforts to Help Colleges Improve Their Performance in Retaining and Graduating Students
paragraphs: Many states reported efforts to improve the performance of colleges in the  areas of retaining and graduating their students. Such efforts include  promoting accountability for colleges by collecting and, in some instances,  publishing retention and graduation rates. States also promote  accountability by tying funding—mainly for public colleges—to  performance. States are also sharing information with colleges about  retention strategies to foster increased rates of bachelor’s degree  completion.
Promoting accountability for colleges. In order to hold colleges and  universities accountable for their performance in the areas of student  retention and graduation, states must first collect consistent information  from these institutions. Three-fourths of the states that responded to our  survey reported that they collect data that allow them to calculate and  track retention and graduation rates for individual institutions and across  the state. Specifically, 24 of these states reported that they collect  enrollment and graduation data on individual students from public  institutions only, and 9 states reported collecting these data from both  public and private institutions in their states. Having these data allows  the state to calculate retention and graduation rates for each institution  and the system as a whole. Additionally, because the institutions provide  the state with individual student records, the state can track the  educational progress of a student who attends more than one institution.  This enables the states to include transfer students in their graduation  rate. The data are limited to student transfers within the state.
Eighteen states reported that they promote accountability by publishing  the performance of their colleges and universities on measures, including  retention and graduation rates because some officials believe that this  motivates colleges to improve their performance in those areas. In  Virginia, a state that uses multiple accountability measures, officials told  us that institutions are not compared with other institutions in the state  with respect to the various performance measures. Rather, each institution  works with the state to identify a national peer group of institutions with  similar characteristics with which to be compared. In this way, institutions  can see whether their performance is on par with institutions that have  similar missions and serve similar types of students. In addition to  measuring retention and graduation rates, Virginia requires its public  institutions to measure and report on certain student learning outcomes to  demonstrate the value of each institution to its students.
Nine states reported accountability efforts that have financial implications  for colleges and universities to encourage them to graduate their students  in a timely manner. These efforts include linking a portion of state funding  to an institution’s performance on multiple measures or making incentive  payments to institutions based on their performance in the areas of  retention and completion. Tennessee has a performance-funding program  in which institutions earn about 5 percent of their state funding for  performance on multiple indicators, such as retention and graduation. In  another variation, Pennsylvania provides a financial bonus to any 4-year  institution in the state, whether public or private, that graduates more than  40 percent of in-state students within 4 years.
Sharing retention strategies. Five states reported efforts to improve  institutional performance by sharing information among state and college  officials about strategies to help students remain in college. For example,  the Oregon University System formed a retention work group to provide a  forum for developing and sharing campus initiatives to enhance retention.  The group has used annual systemwide and institutional data on retention  and graduation to identify areas that need to be addressed to increase  retention. The group looks at retention efforts that seem to be working on  specific campuses and shares information with other campuses. As a  result of its work with tribal governments to increase retention of Native  American students, the system developed a Native American resource  guide that includes information about topics such as outreach and  retention efforts of colleges, financial assistance, childcare programs, and  community college transfer procedures. Officials in Oregon attribute the  increases in graduation rates at most campuses in the system to the work  of this group.
section_title: State Efforts to Help Individual Students Remain in College and to Encourage Timely Completion
paragraphs: Twenty-two states reported efforts directly aimed at helping students  remain in college and encouraging timely completion for these students.  Many such state-level programs provided funding to support efforts  carried out by individual colleges, such as programs that provide academic  and social support directly to students. Other efforts seek to ease student  transfers among colleges, utilize technology to help students complete  their degree, or include financial incentives to encourage students to  complete their bachelor’s degrees in a timely manner.
Funding college programs that provide support services for  students. Several states provide funding for college-run programs  designed to support students in need of assistance. For example, through  its Access and Success program, the Maryland Higher Education  Commission provides funds to colleges and universities for the operation  of programs to increase retention and graduation rates of their  undergraduates. The colleges have used these funds to, among other  things, operate summer bridge programs that acclimate students to college  the summer before they enroll and provide advising, tutoring, and  counseling services to students who are already enrolled. New York’s  Collegiate Science and Technology Entry Program, aimed at increasing the  number of low-income students who pursue careers in math, science,  technology, or health-related fields, provides funding for services such as  enriched science and math instruction, graduate school test preparation,  and career awareness.
Facilitating transfer among institutions. Seven states reported efforts  to facilitate transfer from one college to another as an approach to foster  bachelor’s degree completion. Officials in Florida told us that establishing  policies that help students transfer from community colleges to 4-year  institutions was important because the community college system is  considered the point of entry for most college students in the state. Florida  has common course numbering for all public institutions in the state and  requires public institutions to accept transfer credits for any course they  offer that a student completes at another institution. Officials told us this  policy prevents students from needlessly duplicating coursework, saving  both the state and students money, along with reducing the time it takes to  complete a degree. Florida also has a statewide policy that guarantees  admission to the state university system as a junior for any student who  completes an Associate of Arts degree. Officials in Florida told us that  without these policies it would be difficult for community college students  or other transfer students to complete their degrees. They acknowledged,  however, that these policies could be at odds with encouraging timely  degree completion because they make it easier for students to exit and  reenter postsecondary education.
Using distance learning. A few states reported using technology to  enhance access and make it easier for students to complete a degree.  Kentucky, for instance, has a virtual university and library that offers  credit courses and academic advising for those who work or have family  situations that may not allow them to come to campus. This also aids on- campus students who need greater course availability. Students taking  advantage of these electronic offerings have grown from fewer than   300 students in 1999 to nearly 10,000 in 2002.
Using financial incentives to encourage students’ timely  completion. Some states have financial aid programs to encourage timely  degree completion. These programs may have time limits and/or may  require students to earn a minimum number of credits each year for  participation. For example, the University of Alaska Scholars Program,  targeted at the top 10 percent of high school graduates, offers financial aid  for eight semesters provided that the scholar remains in good standing.  Other states have programs that impose financial penalties if students  repeat coursework or take too long to graduate. Florida’s in-state students  must pay the full tuition rate—without state subsidies—for any courses  they repeat more than once. Utah requires that students who enroll for  credits in excess of 135 percent of what is usually needed for a degree pay  higher tuition for the excess credits. Texas passed a law designed to  encourage students to minimize the number of courses they take to  complete their degree. State residents who complete their coursework and  degrees in the state with no more than three attempted hours in excess of  the minimum required for graduation are eligible to apply for a   $1,000 tuition rebate from their institution. Officials told us that about  1,500 students received tuition rebates in the 2001-2002 academic year.
section_title: Half the States Would Like to Do More to Foster Bachelor’s Degree Completion
paragraphs: Twenty-four states listed at least one area in which they would like to do  more to increase bachelor’s degree completion rates. Many of these  desired actions dealt with increasing financial aid for students and  increased financial support to colleges to help their students succeed.  Some wanted to offer special funding for colleges that perform well in  certain areas related to retention and college completion. Others wanted  to improve preparation of high school graduates for college or improve  transitions from one level of education to another. Almost without  exception, the states cited state budget constraints as a significant factor  preventing them from moving forward with these actions.
section_title: Four-Year Institutions Foster Completion by Improving Learning and Support of Students
paragraphs: Our visits to 11 colleges and universities in five states showed that  initiatives in these institutions cluster around two main approaches to  foster bachelor’s degree completion: (1) enhancing the learning  experience by creating smaller learning communities that foster greater  connections to the institution and (2) strengthening support of students to  promote academic success. In some cases, officials attributed increases in  retention rates or higher retention rates for certain groups of students to  these approaches.
subsections: section_title: Enhancing the Learning Experience
paragraphs: Nearly all of the colleges and universities we visited were engaged in  efforts designed to enhance the learning experience for students, primarily  by creating smaller communities that foster greater connections to the  institution. These approaches aim to increase students’ engagement in  academics and provide them with a network of faculty and other students  who can support them academically and socially. These approaches are  employed both in and out of the classroom, and most focus on easing the  transition from high school to college for first-year college students.
Linking courses. Several of the colleges we visited are trying to enhance  the learning environment by giving students a small classroom experience  that will provide them greater opportunities to connect with faculty and  their peers, not unlike the experience they would have had in high school.  For example, Texas A & M University at Corpus Christi, a Hispanic Serving  Institution, requires all full-time, first-year students to enroll in learning  communities—clusters of three or four classes in which the course  content is linked. Students are typically enrolled in a large lecture course  with 150 or more students and two other courses with 25 or fewer  students from the lecture course. In addition to covering course content,  instructors help students learn how to succeed in their first year of  college, helping with topics such as study skills on an as needed basis.
Portland State University provides its students smaller learning  communities in the freshman and sophomore years through its University  Studies program. According to officials there, the university developed the  program in 1994 to address disappointing retention rates from the  freshman to sophomore year. Officials told us that, because few students  live on campus, the university has to create opportunities for students to  connect to the campus via the classroom. The required freshman and  sophomore courses are comprised of 35-40 students who meet as a whole  with faculty and in smaller mentor sessions, led by upper-level or graduate  students. Officials told us they think the upper-level students who serve as  peer mentors for the freshman classes are particularly helpful for many  first-generation college students who attend the university and may find  college more difficult to navigate.
Officials at both universities reported positive outcomes for these learning  programs. Specifically, at Texas A & M students withdrew from the large  lecture courses at lower rates and had higher grades in these courses  when taken as part of the learning community. They also attributed  retention rates for first-year minority students that are on par with other  first-year students to the learning communities. At Portland State, officials  attributed increases in retention from the freshman to sophomore year, as  well as from the sophomore to junior year, to its University Studies  program.
Using service learning. Connecting classroom learning to the  community is another approach colleges are taking to enhance the  learning experience and create a sense of belonging. The Regional  Ecosystem Applied Learning Corps was established in 1997 through  partnership between Southern Oregon University in Ashland, Oregon, and  community and government organizations. This AmeriCorps program  engages students in the classroom and through community-based projects  dealing with land management issues. One student, who went to college  directly from high school but left after 2 years, told us that the Regional  Ecosystem Applied Learning Corps played a large part in his decision to  finish his bachelor’s degree because it allowed him to connect his studies  to the community while working. He noted that it was difficult to return  after a 4-year break because college life felt unfamiliar to him.
Providing residential learning opportunities. For those students who  live on campus, some colleges are aiming to improve the learning  experience by enhancing educational opportunities available to students  in the residence halls. Florida State University in Tallahassee, Florida,  instituted its first “living-learning community” in a residence hall in the fall  of 1997 as a way to provide freshmen with a smaller community that  would facilitate connections with faculty and students. An official at the  institution told us that the size of the institution is an obstacle in retaining  students because it is easy for students at a large research university with  over 36,000 students to feel lost. Students live in a residence hall together  and have to take at least one class in the building. Required weekly  meetings help students navigate services available to them on the campus.  Florida State reported that 5 years after the freshman class of 1997 entered  the institution, 77 percent of students who participated in the first living- learning community had graduated, while the graduation rates of other on- campus students and those living off campus was around 60 percent.
Promoting Scholarship. The University of Maryland-Baltimore County  established the Meyerhoff Scholars Program to increase the numbers of  minorities pursuing doctoral study in math, science, engineering, and  computer science. In addition to the academic requirements, the scholars  participate in activities designed to expose them to scientific careers, such  as field trips and research experiences. University officials credit the  program with much of the success the university has had with minority  students—the 6-year graduation rate is higher for black students than for  white. Officials attribute part of this success to the role Meyerhoff scholars  play in motivating other minority students at the institution.
section_title: Strengthening Support of Students
paragraphs: All of the colleges and universities we visited were engaged in efforts to  strengthen support of their students to ensure their academic success and  retention. Colleges support their students by providing services such as  academic advising, financial aid counseling, and academic support  services such as tutoring. Colleges also provide supports designed to ease  the transition from high school or community college to a 4-year  institution. In some cases, colleges are changing how they deliver support  services to ensure the needs of students are met. For example, colleges  may colocate many of their support services to make it easy for students  to access them.
Colocating support services. During our site visits, we found that  several of the institutions we visited are colocating support services to  make it easier for students to access those services. In 2000, Prairie View  A & M University, a historically black institution in Prairie View, Texas,  implemented a comprehensive support system for freshmen. By groups of  100-125 students, freshmen are assigned to 1 of 12 academic teams. These  teams consist of a professional adviser, residence hall staff, and a faculty  fellow. The groups generally live together in residence halls close to all the  services they might need, such as advising, academic support services  such as tutoring, and financial aid counseling. Advisers work closely with  the learning community manager and two community assistants,  professional staff who reside in each hall. Officials think having advisers  and residence hall staff working together provides many opportunities to  intervene with students in time to get them connected with the services  they need.
Consolidating offices. Some of the institutions have also made  organizational changes to ensure that most of the offices providing  support to students are working together. The University of Central  Florida, for example, merged the student affairs office with the enrollment  management office and, according to officials, having this one office  responsible for recruitment and retention ensures that a wide range of  efforts can be coordinated across the cycle of student life.
Improving academic advising. Most of the colleges we visited had made  changes to improve academic advising services provided to students with  the idea that students need consistent and accurate advisement to stay on  the path to graduation. To respond to student complaints that advisers in  their majors did not know enough about general graduation requirements,  Florida State University centrally hired a total of 40 full-time advisers to  work in the individual departments. According to one official, when  individual departments hired advisers, the amount of time spent advising  students declined over time as other responsibilities were assigned to  those advisers. Retaining central control of the advisers ensures that  advising is consistently available to students and that students receive  advisement on both departmental and nondepartmental issues. Portland  State University developed a system that allows students to stay abreast of  where they are in terms of graduating. Advisers can use the system to help  students develop a course plan and identify any remaining coursework  they need for graduation.
Using proactive intervention strategies. Many of the institutions we  visited have approaches designed to proactively intervene with students in  an effort to retain them to graduation. Several of the institutions reported  that they have a warning system in place to identify students whose mid- term grades or cumulative grade point averages drop below a certain level.  These students are contacted and encouraged to meet with an adviser and  to make them aware of the different services available to help them.  Contacting students by telephone is an approach some of the smaller  institutions we visited employ to intervene with students. For example,  Southern Oregon University, in Ashland, Oregon, is proactive in calling  students who are not attending classes based on faculty reports. To  improve its 6-year graduation rate, Coppin State College, an historically  black institution, in Baltimore, Maryland, has been contacting those  students who have not pre-registered for the fall semester, but are within  reach of graduating within 6 years of when they started. Officials believe  calling students lets them know that someone at the college is interested  in them as an individual and reinforces their commitment to return.
Providing academic support services. Most institutions cited academic  support services as an approach to retaining students. Examples of these  services include tutoring, walk-in centers that provide assistance with  areas like writing and math, and programs that support special  populations such as low-income and first-generation college students.  Over half of the institutions we visited provide these types of services to  students before they have enrolled in college to ease the transition from  high school to college. In these summer bridge programs, students  typically take a couple of courses, along with seminars that cover topics  designed to help them succeed in college, such as time management and  study skills. Generally, fewer than 100 students participate in these  programs, which allows the institution to provide more intensive and  personalized services. Institutions generally reported that the retention  rate from the freshman to sophomore year for these students is  comparable to or higher than the general population. A couple of  institutions reported higher graduation rates for these students, but some  officials noted that their 6-year graduation rates may lag because some of  these students take longer to graduate.
Easing the transition for transfer students. Some institutions are  engaged in efforts to encourage and ease the transition of students from a  2-year institution to a 4-year institution. For example, the University of  Central Florida has forged relationships with area community colleges and  has established satellite campuses at community colleges in Orlando and  the surrounding area. The university’s satellite campuses are designed for  those students for whom transferring to a 4-year college may be difficult  because of work and family commitments. The university has dedicated  faculty and staff at these satellite campuses to ensure students receive the  same education and services they would at the main campus. Advisers  who travel among the satellite campuses ensure that students can obtain  academic advising without traveling to the main campus.
section_title: Education Has Programs to Foster College Completion, but No Systematic Efforts to Identify and Disseminate Information on Promising Practices
paragraphs: Education fosters bachelor’s degree completion through programs that  provide financial and academic support to students, but little is known  about the effects of these programs on college completion. Education has  also established goals for increasing college completion and strengthening  the accountability of colleges. While Education has some dissemination  efforts—mainly through its academic support programs and through its  Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education program—it does  not have systematic efforts in place to identify and share promising  practices in the areas of retention and graduation with states and colleges  that are looking for strategies to help them better retain their students.
subsections: section_title: Programs Provide Financial Resources and Academic Support to Students, but Little Is Known about Their Effectiveness
paragraphs: In order to help students pay for a college degree, the federal student aid  programs provide billions of dollars to help students finance college with  the objective that students will complete their programs. The Federal  Family Education Loan Program and the William D. Ford Federal Direct  Loan Program, two major federal student loan programs authorized in  Title IV of the Higher Education Act, together provided student borrowers  with about 9 million new loans totaling $35 billion in fiscal year 2001. The  Pell Grant Program, designed to help the neediest undergraduate students,  expended $8 billion to provide grants to nearly 4 million students in   2000-2001. To be eligible for these programs, students must be enrolled in  a degree- or certificate-granting program. While Education has made these  funds available, we reported in September 2002 that little information is  available on the relative effectiveness of Title IV grants and loans in  promoting postsecondary attendance, choice, and completion, or their  impact on college costs. Among other things, we noted that data and  methodological challenges make it difficult to isolate the impact of grants  and loans.
Education administers three academic support programs aimed at  students who are low-income, first-generation, or disabled that have  college completion as a primary goal. Student Support Services provides  academic support to students at the college level, while the Upward  Bound program and Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for  Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) serve students before they enter  college. GEAR UP differs from Student Support Services and Upward  Bound, which identify and invite individual students to participate. GEAR  UP serves an entire grade of students at participating schools beginning no  later than the seventh grade and follows them through high school.  According to program officials, the program begins no later than the  seventh grade because high school is too late to begin working with  students on the preparation that leads to college. Table 1 provides an  overview of the three programs.
In 2001, Student Support Services added a financial assistance component  as a tool to increase retention and graduation of student participants.  Specifically, Student Support Services permits the use of grant aid for  current Student Support Services participants who are already receiving  federal Pell Grants. These funds are intended to increase retention and  graduation by reducing the amount of financial need or money eligible  participants have to borrow in their first 2 years of study.
Student Support Services is the only program for which information on the  effectiveness of the program on college completion is available.  Specifically, a preliminary evaluation of the program found that  participants had higher bachelor’s degree completion rates as compared to  a control group of similar students not receiving those services. However,  it is too early to determine the impact of the grant aid component of the  program, given that it was first implemented in the 2001-2002 academic  year. According to Education officials, it is also too early to determine the  impact of Upward Bound and GEAR UP on college completion because  students are not expected to have completed college yet.
section_title: Education Has Identified Priorities for Increasing College Completion and Strengthening Accountability of Institutions
paragraphs: In its 2002-2007 strategic plan, Education has established goals of reducing  the gaps in college participation and completion among certain student  populations and increasing completion rates overall. Education has  identified some strategies for meeting these goals, such as focusing on  improving the K-12 system, improving the readiness of low-income and  minority students for college, and improving the effectiveness of support  services for low-income and minority students. The performance  measure—institutional graduation rates—Education uses for assessing its  progress toward the goal of increasing completion rates understates the  percentage of students who actually complete bachelor’s degrees, because  the measure does not account for students who transfer and complete  their degrees at institutions different from where they started. However,  this is the only information available on an annual basis. Other  longitudinal studies, such as BPS, provide more information but are costly  to administer. Education has not established other performance measures  for assessing progress toward its college completion goal.
Education has also established a goal for strengthening accountability of  postsecondary institutions in its strategic plan. Specifically, Education is  looking to ensure that colleges are graduating their students in a timely  manner. Education thinks making information on student achievement  and attainment available to the public is one way to hold institutions  accountable for their performance because prospective students can use  this information to make informed choices about where to attend college.  Education has begun to discuss this issue with the higher education  community and asked the community for ideas on how to strengthen  accountability of postsecondary institutions. As part of its efforts,  Education has held panel discussions with student financial aid experts,  state officials, and business leaders, among other participants, about  improving accountability. Additionally, Education is considering  “performance-based grants” to provide incentives to colleges for timely  graduation. In one state, however, where this was tried, there were  concerns that the grant created perverse incentives to increase graduation  rates, such as reducing the number of credits required for graduation.
section_title: Education Has Some Evaluation and Dissemination Efforts
paragraphs: Education has some efforts to disseminate information on retention and  completion; however, it does not have a systematic effort in place to  identify and disseminate promising practices in these areas. Education has  commissioned studies on the factors that affect college completion, and it  has some evaluations on student retention—for example, one study  dealing with retention strategies for students with disabilities and one on  Hispanic students. It has not, however, systematically conducted research  to determine what strategies have been effective in helping colleges and  universities retain their students. Additionally, Education has some  retention and completion dissemination efforts in place. For example,  GEAR UP and TRIO grantees have the opportunity to share information  with each other at annual conferences organized by private groups.  Education facilitates information sharing through the TRIO Dissemination  Partnership Program, which provides funding for TRIO grantees with  promising practices to work with other institutions and community-based  organizations that serve low-income and first-generation college students  but do not have TRIO grants. The program is intended to increase the  impact of TRIO programs by reaching more low-income, first-generation  college students. Only a small number of grantees are disseminating  information through this program—in fiscal year 2002, Education provided  $3.4 million to 17 grantees. In these instances, only institutions and  organizations that formally partner with grantees are likely to have the  opportunity to learn about promising practices. Furthermore, promising  practices that are employed by institutions outside these programs are not  captured.
According to agency officials, another effort in which dissemination  occurs is within the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary  Education’s Comprehensive Program. This 30-year old program seeks to  help improve access and quality of postsecondary institutions by funding  small promising practices grants. According to an official of the  Comprehensive Program, the grants are for a 3-year period, with an  average annual award amount of between $50,000 and $200,000. Last year,  the program awarded $31 million for grant activities—including new  awards of about $10 million. The grants cover all aspects of postsecondary  improvement, and within the areas of retention and completion there are  grants for, among other things, creating learning communities, reviewing  remedial and introductory courses to find more effective approaches, and  developing innovative methods of delivering support services.  Dissemination efforts include a searchable project database on its Web  site; four published volumes of promising practices (the most recent  publication was in 2000); specific dissemination grants expressly aimed at  replicating particularly promising practices for retention and completion;  dissemination plans built into the actual grants; and annual meetings  where project information is shared. Each grant has an evaluation  component and the Comprehensive Program is currently being reviewed  for, among other things, the efficacy of these evaluation efforts.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: As policymakers and others consider what is necessary to ensure  accountability in higher education, the issue of how to measure  performance becomes more important. While some states have used  graduation rates to promote accountability, such measures may not fully  reflect an institution’s performance. Graduation rates do not capture  differences in mission, selectivity, programmatic offerings, or student  learning outcomes. Nor do they account for another goal of higher  education, increasing participation. In other words, a college or university  could have a low rate of completion, but still be providing access. As  policymakers consider ways to hold colleges and universities accountable  for their performance, it may be possible to use multiple measures that  capture an institution’s performance in regard to how well its students are  educated through the use of student learning outcomes, in addition to its  performance in graduating them.
States, institutions of higher education, and Education are engaged in a  variety of efforts to retain and graduate students. Education does have  some efforts to evaluate and disseminate information related to retention  and completion; however, it does not systematically identify and  disseminate information on those practices that hold promise for  increasing retention and graduation rates across all sectors of higher  education. Such information could benefit colleges and universities that  are looking for new approaches to better serve their students and seek to  avoid duplicating unsuccessful efforts. As policymakers consider new  ways to hold postsecondary institutions accountable for retaining and  graduating their students, it becomes more important to widely  disseminate promising practices in these areas. Having Education identify  and disseminate promising practices in the areas of retention and  graduation would help ensure that all colleges and universities have  access to the same level of information and can readily draw on those  practices they think might help them better serve their students.
section_title: Recommendations
paragraphs: As Education moves forward with its plan to hold colleges and universities  accountable for their performance in graduating their students, we  recommend that the Secretary of Education consider multiple measures  that would help account for other goals of higher education, such as  increasing participation, as well as differences in mission, selectivity, and  programmatic offerings of postsecondary institutions. Education should  work with states and colleges to determine what would be most helpful  for strengthening the accountability of institutions and ensuring positive  outcomes for students.
We also recommend that the Secretary of Education take steps to identify  and disseminate information about promising practices in the areas of  retention and graduation across all sectors of postsecondary education.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: In written comments on a draft of this report, the Department of  Education agreed with our recommendations but had some concerns  about certain aspects of the draft report. Education commented that we  could have included trend data on, for example, whether retention and  completion are increasing or decreasing. While such information might  have been interesting to include, we were specifically focusing on the  current status of college completion. Education suggested in its letter that  we could have used its two BPS studies for such an analysis. It would not  be appropriate to use these two studies for identifying trends because they  covered different time periods. For example, using the first BPS study— which tracked students for 5 years—Education reported that 53 percent of  students who began at a 4-year institution in 1989-90 earned a bachelor’s  degree. Using the second BPS study—which tracked students for   6 years—we reported that 59 percent of students who began at a 4-year  institution in 1995-96 earned a bachelor’s degree. While the increase in  graduation rates might have resulted from any number of factors, the most  likely reason is because an additional year was included in the calculation.
The Department correctly noted that we did not address student financial  aid in our analysis. We have addressed this issue in our discussion of the  report’s objectives, scope, and methodology section (see app. I).
With respect to Education’s comment about how the effects of being  disadvantaged are accounted for in our analysis, we agree that performing  a more sophisticated analysis to account for the indirect effects of being  disadvantaged on completion may have yielded a more complete picture  of college completion. However, our analysis was designed to provide  overall descriptive information on completion rates while taking into  account certain differences among students.
Education had concerns that our report did not sufficiently recognize the  role of its Graduation Rate Survey (GRS). While we did not directly  discuss GRS, we did explain the legislative requirements regarding  institutional reporting of graduation rates. Education developed GRS to  help institutions comply with this requirement. Additionally, with respect  to GRS, we sought clarification of Education’s statement that GRS is the  basis for state efforts to track graduation rates; however, officials did not  provide us with information that would support this statement. In looking  at this issue, it is clear that the type of data states collect is different from  the GRS data. Specifically, GRS collects only summary data from  institutions on graduation rates, whereas by using data on individual  students, the states we highlighted have the ability to not only calculate  graduation rates but to track student transfers across the state.  Furthermore, officials in two states we visited told us that they have had  the ability to track individual students for over 10 years, long before  information from the GRS would have been available—making it  impossible for GRS to be the basis of these systems as Education  suggested. We also believe that Education’s statement that we do not  acknowledge the limitations of the state systems with respect to tracking  student transfers is inaccurate. Our draft clearly stated that tracking is  limited to student transfers within the state.
Finally, with regard to Education’s concern that our report does not  recognize its efforts to identify and disseminate information on retention  and completion, we believe Education may have misunderstood our  discussion about their efforts. We clearly highlight Education’s efforts to  identify and disseminate information through studies on the factors that  affect retention and completion. However, we conclude that Education  does not systematically identify and disseminate information on those  practices that hold promise for increasing retention and graduation rates  across all sectors of higher education.
Education also provided technical comments, which we incorporated  where appropriate. Education’s comments appear in appendix IV.
As arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce its contents  earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days from its  issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to appropriate  congressional committees, the Secretary of Education, and other  interested parties. Copies will also be made available to others upon  request. In addition, this report will be available at no charge on GAO’s  Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you have any questions about this report, please contact me on   (202) 512-8403. Other contacts and acknowledgments are listed in  appendix V.
section_title: Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: You asked us to determine (1) the extent to which students—including  those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds—who enroll in a 4-year  college or university complete a bachelor’s degree and the factors that  affect bachelor’s degree completion; (2) what states and 4-year colleges  and universities are doing to foster bachelor’s degree completion and what  is known about the effectiveness of these efforts; and (3) what the U.S.  Department of Education is doing to foster bachelor’s degree completion.
To determine the extent to which students—including those from lower  socioeconomic backgrounds—who enroll in a 4-year college or university  complete a bachelor’s degree and to identify the factors that affect  bachelor’s degree completion, we analyzed Education’s 1995-96 Beginning  Postsecondary Students (BPS) study. BPS is a longitudinal study that  followed the retention and degree completion of students from the time  they enrolled in any postsecondary institution over a 6-year period. It is  based on a sample of students who were enrolled in postsecondary  education for the first time in 1995-1996 and participated in Education’s  1995-96 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96). NPSAS:96  consisted of a nationally representative sample of all students enrolled in  postsecondary education during the 1995-96 academic year. Information  for NPSAS:96 was obtained from more than 830 postsecondary institutions  for approximately 44,500 undergraduate and 11,200 graduate and first- professional students. The sample of undergraduates represented about  16.7 million students, including about 3 million first-time beginning  students, who were enrolled at some time between July 1, 1995 and June  30, 1996. This BPS study began with a sample of approximately   12,000 students who were identified in NPSAS: 96 as having entered  postsecondary education for the first time in 1995-1996. Education  followed up with these students via computer-assisted telephone  interviews in both 1998 and 2001. In addition to obtaining data from  students through these interviews, data were obtained from other sources,  including institutions and the Educational Testing Service, which  administers standardized tests, such as the SAT I and Advanced Placement  tests. Education has published reports that provide information about  student enrollment and the rates of persistence, transfer, and degree  attainment for students.
For our purposes, we analyzed a subset of these data. We only included  students who in 1995-96 were enrolled in a 4-year institution or were  enrolled at another type of institution, but transferred to a 4-year  institution at some point during the 6-year period. Our analysis excluded  other types of students, such as community college students who did not  transfer to a 4-year institution because the focus of our study was on  bachelor’s degree completion. We first grouped students into three  categories: those who, after 6 years (1) had completed a bachelor’s degree;  (2) had not completed a bachelor’s degree, but were still enrolled in a   4-year institution; and (3) had not completed a bachelor’s degree and were  no longer enrolled in a 4-year institution. We then calculated the  percentage of our population in each group overall and by various  characteristics relating to personal background, academic preparation and  performance, college attendance and work patterns, and social integration  as shown in appendix II.
We focused on factors that affect whether or not students completed a  bachelor’s degree by the end of the 6-year period and looked at the effect  of the various characteristics mentioned above on college completion. We  did not include student aid variables in our analysis. Resource constraints  and the timing of the release of the BPS data made it difficult to examine  the effect of student aid variables given their complexity and year-to-year  variation. We first examined the independent effect of each characteristic  on completion without controlling for differences among individuals. Each  of these independent effects, with the exception of delaying entry into  college, was statistically significant. However, because of the strong  relationships among these characteristics, it is more accurate to explain  the variance in completion rates using multivariate analysis, which tests  the effect of each characteristic on completion while controlling for the  effects of all the other characteristics.
Logistic regression is a standard procedure used to estimate the effect of a  characteristic on a particular outcome. The model uses odds ratios to  estimate the relative likelihood of completing a bachelor’s degree within   6 years of beginning postsecondary education. The odds ratios for various  characteristics are shown in appendix III. For a particular characteristic, if  there were no difference between students who completed within 6 years  and those who did not, the odds would be equal, and the ratio of their odds  would be 1.00. The more the odds ratio differs from 1.00 in either  direction, the larger the effect on completion. For example, an odds ratio  below 1.00 indicates a lower likelihood of completion for a student with  that particular characteristic, all else being equal. The odds ratios were  generally computed in relation to a reference group; for example, if the  odds ratio refers to being a dependent student, then the reference group  would be independent students. Some characteristics, such as grade point  average and age, are continuous in nature. In these cases, the odds ratio  can be interpreted as representing the increase in the likelihood of  completing college given a 1-unit increase in the continuous variable. An  odds ratio that is statistically significant is denoted with the superscript a.  The characteristics we used in our model explain 38 percent of the  variance in bachelor’s degree completion.
Because the estimates we use in this report are based on survey data,  there is some sampling error associated with them. This occurs because  observations are made on a sample of students rather than the entire  student population. All percentage estimates we present from the BPS  data have sampling errors of ±3 percentage points or less, unless  otherwise noted. Furthermore, tests of statistical significance were  performed using software to take into account the complex survey design  and sampling errors. In addition to the reported sampling errors, the  practical difficulties of conducting any survey may introduce other types  of errors, commonly referred to as nonsampling errors. For example,  differences in how a particular question is interpreted, in the reliability of  data self reported by students, or the types of students who do not  respond can introduce unwanted variability into the survey results.
To identify what states and 4-year colleges and universities are doing to  foster bachelor’s degree completion, we conducted a survey of the 59 state  higher education executive officer agencies in all 50 states, the District of  Columbia, and Puerto Rico and visited 5 states and 11 public colleges and  universities within those states. We received completed questionnaires  from 48 of the 52 states and territories we surveyed, a response rate of   92 percent. We took steps in the development of the questionnaires, the  data collection, and the data editing and analysis to minimize nonsampling  errors. For example, we pretested the questionnaire with 3 states to refine  the survey instrument, and we called individual respondents, if necessary,  to clarify answers.
We conducted site visits in Florida, Maryland, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia.  We chose states and colleges to visit based upon our discussions with  experts and preliminary information from our survey. Additionally, we  selected these states and institutions based on geographic dispersion and  the variety of efforts reported to us by experts and in the survey. In each  state, we met with state higher education officials to discuss college  completion in general and specific efforts taking place in their states. In  each of these states, we also visited colleges that were viewed by state  officials as doing particularly well in working with their students to help  them complete a bachelor’s degree. We met with college officials to  discuss their efforts to improve retention and help students attain a  bachelor’s degree.
To identify what Education is doing to foster bachelor’s degree  completion, we talked with Education officials and reviewed program and  planning documents. We conducted our work between April 2002 and May  2003 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  practices.
section_title: Appendix II: Bachelor’s Degree Completion Status of 1995-96 Beginning Postsecondary Students 6 Years after Enrolling
paragraphs: No bachelor’s,  still enrolled at  4-year  Student dependency status for federal financial aid during 1995-96. Students age 23 or younger  were assumed to be dependent unless they met the independent student criteria, including being  married or having legal dependents, other than a spouse.
Student’s SAT I combined score. This variable was derived as either the sum of SAT I verbal and  mathematics test scores or the ACT Assessment (American College Testing program) composite  score converted to an estimated SAT combined score using a concordance table. The primary source  of data were from a match with the SAT files from the Educational Testing Service and the ACT test  files of the American College Testing programs, supplemented by postsecondary institution reported  and student-reported information. The quartiles were derived from the distribution of the test scores  among the BPS cohort sample students.
Indicates whether student delayed enrollment in postsecondary education, as determined by receipt  of a high school diploma prior to 1995 or reaching the age of 20 before December 31, 1995.
section_title: Appendix III: Results of Regression Models for Bachelor’s Degree Completion within 6 Years of Beginning College
paragraphs: Lowest quartile (<800)  Middle quartiles (800-1100)  Highest quartile (>1100)  > 3.0  2.0 to 2.9  < 2.0  Work & attendance patterns  Delayed college after high school  Part-time or mix of part- and full- time  Full-time  Did not work  Worked Less than 10 hours  Between 10 and 19 hours  Between 20 and 31 hours  Full-time (32 hours or more)
Social integration  Participated in study groups  denotes referent category.
section_title: Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Education
section_title: Appendix V: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: Contacts
section_title: Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to those named above, Rebecca Ackley, Avrum Ashery, Patrick  diBattista, Kopp Michelotti, John Mingus, Luann Moy, Doug Sloane, and  Wendy Turenne made important contributions to this report.