K-12 Education: Public High Schools with More Students in Poverty and Smaller Schools Provide Fewer Academic Offerings to Prepare for College
Released: 2018-10-26T00:00:00

Letter

Background

Poverty in U.S. High Schools

Poverty can adversely affect academic and other outcomes in profound ways. Specifically, living in poverty is linked with negative conditions for children at home, in schools, and in neighborhoods and communities, and can include substandard housing, homelessness, inadequate nutrition and food insecurity, inadequate home-based child care, increased health care costs, and unsafe neighborhoods. Poverty has a particularly adverse effect on the academic outcomes of children that starts in early childhood and continues through the academic pipeline. Chronic stress associated with living in poverty has been shown to adversely affect children’s concentration and memory which may impact their ability to learn. Census data from 2014 show a relationship between the rate at which students dropped out (left school without obtaining a high school credential) and family income. The dropout rate of students from high- income families was 2.8 percent, while the dropout rate for individuals from low-income families was 11.6 percent.

Our prior work describes how the nation’s schools have become increasingly comprised of students in poverty. In school year 2015-16, of the 12.5 million students in public high schools (schools with grades 9- 12), over 5 million (40 percent) attended schools where at least half of the students were experiencing poverty, as indicated by eligibility for free or reduced-priced lunch. Nearly 1.8 million (over 14 percent) attended schools where at least three-quarters of the students were experiencing poverty (see table 1).

Our prior work has also discussed the association between poverty and race or ethnicity. High schools with a relatively large proportion of students in poverty also tend to have a higher proportion of minority students, students with disabilities, and English learners. The link between racial and ethnic minorities and poverty is long-standing, and studies have noted concerns about this segment of the population that falls at the intersection of poverty and minority status in schools and how this affects their access to quality education.

Characteristics of U.S. High Schools and the College Preparation Process

Of the roughly 12.5 million students who were enrolled in public high schools during the 2015-16 school year, about 87 percent attended traditional public schools, according to Education data; the remaining students were enrolled at charters, magnets, and other types of public schools (see table 2).

While not all students will decide to pursue college, those who do generally must prepare for and navigate the college admissions process while in high school. This process can involve multiple administrative and financial steps, according to information from Education and college advising organizations. (See figure 2 for more information on the college application and admissions process.)

U.S. Department of Education College Readiness Initiatives

The Department of Education plays a role in helping students be prepared for college through initiatives in several of its offices. For example, Education’s Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE) administers several discretionary grant programs designed to increase college readiness among students from disadvantaged backgrounds, such as the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP). GEAR UP aims to increase the number of low- income students who are prepared to enter and succeed in postsecondary education. In 2016, OPE awarded approximately $323 million in grants through GEAR UP. In addition, Education’s Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE) provides grants and technical assistance to states and districts to encourage advanced course opportunities and college and career readiness initiatives. OESE also oversees states’ and districts’ use of Title I, Part A funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended. These funds provide financial assistance to school districts and schools with high numbers or high percentages of children from low-income families to help ensure that all children meet challenging state academic standards, and can be used to provide additional courses and college readiness programs in schools. Finally, Education’s Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) is responsible for managing the student financial assistance programs authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965. These programs provide grants, loans, and work-study funds to students attending college or career school. FSA also publishes guidance and other resources related to federal student aid and college costs. These resources are designed for students and parents who are navigating the college application and financial aid processes. (For more information on Education’s grant programs relevant to college readiness, see appendix II.)

Federal Efforts to Promote Equitable Access to Educational Resources

Education and the Department of Justice (Justice) promote equitable access to education resources as part of their missions in two key ways: (1) conducting investigations of discrimination complaints; (2) issuing guidance on ways to address potential disparities; and (3) providing technical assistance. Education and Justice are responsible for enforcing a number of civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in public schools on the basis of race, sex, disability, color, and national origin. (For examples of cases resolved by Education and Justice related to access to college preparation resources, see appendix IV.)

To enforce relevant civil rights laws, Education carries out complaint- driven and agency-initiated investigations, which are called compliance reviews and which target problems that Education has determined are particularly acute. For example, in a recent review, Education’s OCR reviewed whether Black students in a Virginia school district had the same access to educational opportunities as other students. OCR found a significant disparity between the numbers of Black and White high school students who take AP, advanced courses, and dual credit programs. These discrimination cases can be resolved through several means, including voluntary resolution, dismissal, or closure due to insufficient evidence. Education may also terminate federal funds if Education determines that a recipient is in violation of civil rights laws and the agency is unable to reach agreement with the parties involved.

Justice has the authority to file suit in federal court to enforce the civil rights of students in public education. Specifically, Justice investigates discrimination in school resources based on complaints filed under federal civil rights laws and monitors and enforces open federal school desegregation orders where Justice is a party to the litigation. For example, in 2015 Justice entered into a court-approved agreement with a Louisiana city school board after finding that more college preparatory courses were offered in schools that predominantly serve White students than in schools that predominately serve Black students. This agreement required, among other things, that the district ensure that all students were given the opportunity to take all courses offered in the district.

In addition to enforcement actions, Education and Justice help promote equitable access to education resources by issuing guidance and providing technical assistance. For example, in 2014, OCR issued guidance addressing equitable access to educational resources, in part, to address chronic and widespread racial disparities in access to rigorous courses, academic programs, and extracurricular activities which can hinder the education of students of color. In this guidance, OCR describes proactive ways to address potential disparities in academic and extracurricular programs that are differentiated based on academic rigor (e.g., gifted and talented or college preparatory programs) or content (e.g., business, music, art, or career and technical education programs). This guidance includes the following steps that states and school districts can take to help ensure equal access to educational resources: designating an employee to review policies governing how resources are distributed to and within schools; evaluating resource access across and within schools; notifying parents, students, and community members of avenues to raise concerns about resource access; and taking proactive steps to identify disparities in access to resources.

Education also offers technical assistance, through various means, such as conducting webinars, sponsoring and presenting at conferences, and disseminating resource guides to schools and school districts.

High-Poverty Schools Offer Fewer of the Courses That Prepare Students for Public 4- Year College

At a Glance: Student Access to College Preparation Courses and Admissions Expectations

Poverty and Student Demographics

Schools with the highest concentration of poor students were predominantly comprised of Black and Hispanic students.

Access to more advanced math and science courses (e.g., calculus and physics) decreased as the level of school poverty increased.

Larger high schools offered more advanced math and science courses than smaller schools, regardless of poverty level.

Charter schools offered fewer advanced math and science courses than traditional and magnet schools, regardless of poverty level.

Public 4-year colleges generally expect applicants to have completed three or four math and three or four science credits in high school, but we found that the percentage of schools offering these recommended courses decreased as poverty level increased.

High-Poverty High Schools Largely Comprised of Black and Hispanic Students

Our analysis of Education data for school year 2015-16 showed that high- poverty high schools were predominately comprised of Black and Hispanic students, while low -poverty schools had a higher proportion of White students. Specifically, roughly 80 percent of students attending high-poverty schools were either Black or Hispanic, but were less than 20 percent of students enrolled in low-poverty schools (see fig. 3).

Access to Advanced High School Courses Varies Based on School Poverty Level, Size, and Type

Poverty Level

Our analysis of Education data for school year 2015-16 showed that students’ access to more advanced high school courses decreased as the level of school poverty increased. High-poverty schools represented 17 percent of all high schools in 2015-16.

College Admissions Perspective Admissions officials from all four public, 4- year universities we interviewed reported that they look for students to take advanced coursework in high school in order to be more competitive applicants. Some college admissions officials and college advising organizations reported that students face academic difficulties when they get to college if they did not take advanced courses that help prepare for the rigor of college. A college admissions official we interviewed reported that over 90 percent of the university’s incoming freshmen took courses in high school that could earn college credit, such as Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), or dual enrollment courses.

Across all poverty levels, almost all schools offered the basic math courses (algebra I and geometry); however, disparities in offering advanced math courses grew as school poverty level increased (see fig. 4). For calculus in particular, the percentage of schools offering the course decreased as school poverty level increased, with the gap between low- and high-poverty schools widening to nearly 35 percentage points (85 percent of low-poverty schools versus about 50 percent of high-poverty schools). Generally, a similar pattern emerged for science courses. Again, the majority of all schools, at least 90 percent across all poverty levels, offered biology; but for chemistry and physics, disparities grew as poverty increased. For example, almost 90 percent of low- poverty schools offered physics, with the percentage decreasing steadily to 62 percent for high-poverty schools.

For courses that allow students to earn college credit and that can help make students more competitive applicants (see text box), our analysis showed a similar trend, with disparities that deepened as school poverty increased. For Advanced Placement (AP) courses overall, our analysis showed that the gap in courses offered was widest between the lowest and highest poverty schools—with over 80 percent of low-poverty schools offering at least one AP course compared to about 60 percent of high- poverty schools. We found a similar pattern for AP math and science courses. Among schools that offered any AP courses, nearly all low- poverty schools offered AP math compared to 75 percent of high-poverty schools, a nearly 20 percentage point gap (see fig. 5).

Advanced Placement courses: Upon successful completion of the course and a standardized AP exam, a student may be qualified to receive college credit and/or placement into advanced college courses. International Baccalaureate courses: The International Baccalaureate (IB) courses are designed as an academically challenging and balanced program of education, with final examinations, that prepares students, usually aged 16 to 19, for success in college. Dual Enrollment/Credit programs: Dual enrollment/dual credit programs provide opportunities for high school students to take college-level courses offered by colleges, and earn concurrent credit toward a high school diploma and a college degree while still in high school.

Across all poverty levels, larger public high schools offered more advanced math and science courses than smaller schools, according to our analysis of Education’s school year 2015-16 data. As illustrated in figure 7, this pattern held true for all math and science courses. In particular, among high-poverty schools, 90 percent of large schools offered calculus, compared to 54 percent and 11 percent of medium and small schools, respectively. Similarly, among high-poverty schools, over 90 percent of large schools offered physics compared to about two-thirds of medium and about a third of small schools.

A similar pattern was evident for AP courses (see fig. 8). Among high- poverty schools, 97 percent of large schools offered AP courses compared to 68 percent of medium and 11 percent of small schools.

Across all poverty levels, access to advanced courses differed by school type. We found that, in general, fewer charter schools, across all poverty levels, offered math, science, and AP courses, compared to traditional and magnet schools, according to our analysis of Education’s school year 2015-16 data (see fig. 9). Further, a higher percentage of magnet schools offered advanced courses (such as physics and AP courses), compared to traditional schools. We also analyzed alternative schools and special education schools. When analyzing Education’s data by school type, these schools had the lowest percentage of schools offering college preparatory courses. We focused our analyses in the body of the report on traditional, magnet, and charter schools, the school types with larger enrollments. Alternative and special education schools enroll fewer than 1.5 percent of high school students. See appendix V for full data tables, which include breakouts for alternative and special education schools.

For AP courses, across all poverty levels, a lower percentage of charter schools offered these courses compared to traditional and magnet schools (see fig. 10). In particular, among high-poverty schools, 33 percent of charter schools offered any AP courses compared to 71 percent of traditional and 94 percent of magnet schools.

We also analyzed high school course offerings based on whether schools were located in an urban, suburban, or rural location, but our regression model did not find a consistent association between school locale and course offerings. For example, a lower percentage of high-poverty schools in rural areas offered advanced math and science courses compared to high-poverty urban or suburban schools. However, a higher percentage of low-poverty rural schools offered advanced math and science courses than did low-poverty urban schools. For full results by school locale, see appendix V.

High-Poverty Schools Were Less Likely to Offer Math and Science Courses Needed for College Admission

Colleges often look for students to have completed multiple credits of a subject in high school, such as math or science; however, our analysis suggests that some high-poverty schools may not offer the math and science courses needed to meet basic admission expectations for public 4-year colleges. Based on our analysis of a generalizable sample of U.S. public 4-year college websites, an estimated 95 percent of colleges expected applicants to have completed three or four credits of math (see text box). Further, a majority of public 4-year colleges specifically recommended that applicants take algebra I, geometry, and algebra II. With respect to science an estimated 76 percent of colleges expected students to have completed three or four credits of science, with many specifically recommending biology, chemistry, or physics. (See fig. 11).

Our analysis of Education data for school year 2015-16, however, found that the percentage of schools offering these recommended math and science courses decreased as poverty level increased. With respect to math courses, 7 percent of low-poverty schools did not offer the recommended math courses (at least algebra I, geometry, and algebra II), compared to 17 percent of high-poverty schools that did not offer these courses. Further, while 12 percent of low-poverty schools did not offer the recommended science courses (at least biology, chemistry, and physics), 41 percent of high-poverty schools did not. (See fig. 12).

Odds of offering at least algebra I, geometry, and algebra II Generally, no statistically significant association.

Odds of offering at least biology, chemistry, and physics Higher poverty schools were associated with lower odds of offering these courses compared to lower poverty schools.

Odds of offering any AP courses Higher poverty schools were generally associated with lower odds of offering any AP courses, compared to lower poverty schools.

Race

Higher levels of Hispanic or Asian students were associated with lower odds of offering these courses.

Higher levels of Black, Hispanic, or American Indian/Alaskan Native students were associated with lower odds of offering these courses.

Generally, no statistically significant association.

School Size

Smaller schools were associated with lower odds of offering these courses, compared to larger schools.

Smaller schools are associated with lower odds of offering these courses, compared to larger schools.

Smaller schools were associated with lower odds of offering AP courses, compared to larger schools.

School Type

Alternative schools were associated with lower odds of offering these courses compared to traditional schools; however, the results were not statistically significant for other school types.

Charter schools and alternative schools were associated with lower odds of offering these courses compared to traditional schools.

Charter schools were associated with lower odds of offering any AP courses and magnet schools were associated with higher odds of offering any AP courses, compared to traditional schools.

Officials from All 12 High-Poverty Schools Stated That Their Students Face Multiple, Complex Challenges to Prepare for College, and Some Had Efforts in Place to Help

Students in High-Poverty Schools Confront Complex Challenges to Prepare for College

Across the three selected states, officials representing the 12 high- poverty schools we visited consistently reported that students confront multiple challenges to being prepared to attend college. They cited a range of academic roadblocks to college, including that students are behind academically before they get to high school; that the schools they attend lack rigorous courses, such as AP courses; and that students struggle to attain grade point averages (GPA) high enough for admission to some 4-year colleges. Officials explained that family challenges and obligations can compound the academic challenges and make navigating the college admissions and enrollment process difficult for their students.

Students have not made sufficient academic progress to be admitted to college, according to officials we interviewed at 12 high-poverty schools (see fig. 13). Officials representing most of these schools (10 of 12) reported that their students were often academically behind. For example, at one urban and predominantly Black Wisconsin high school, officials said that 80 percent of 9th graders were performing below grade-level targets for reading and math, and at a Georgia high school where nearly all of the students were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, officials said that over 30 percent of freshman students in school year 2016-17 had to repeat the 9th grade.

Insufficient academic progress can be compounded by challenges high- poverty schools face in offering advanced coursework. For example, officials at five schools said they did not offer calculus; officials at three of these schools noted this was because most students typically did not take algebra I in middle school and, therefore, did not have the time to progress to calculus. Officials at a high school with over 900 students reported they did not offer calculus or AP math courses due to low student demand and that they must weigh the cost of providing a course with the number of students who would benefit. Two high-poverty high schools we visited that did not offer calculus courses were exploring offering the courses to students through videoconference. However, an official from one school district we interviewed said the district uses videoconference as a last resort because they have found students learn better with a teacher physically present allowing for more exchange of dialogue. In addition, the challenge of finding and retaining high-quality teachers can exacerbate the difficulties high-poverty schools face in offering advanced courses, according to state educational agency officials in two of the states we visited. Offering advanced courses is important to providing challenging opportunities for students and avoiding remedial coursework once in college, according to college and high school officials we interviewed. Officials we interviewed stressed that taking advanced courses provides students with challenging academic opportunities that help to prepare students for the rigor of college courses, whether they pass their AP exams or not. A representative of a college advising organization said that while it is possible to get into college without higher-level math courses, these courses often determine if a student needs remedial math in college. Officials from two college advising organizations said that when students are required to take remedial courses in college, it can have a detrimental effect. They said remedial courses generally cost money but do not provide credits towards graduation and can delay graduation, and sometimes can contribute to students leaving college without a degree.

School officials for almost all the schools we visited (11 of 12) also said that students often had low GPAs and SAT or ACT scores, which made them less competitive applicants for admission or scholarships to 4-year colleges. For example, the average GPA for 11th grade students at three Wisconsin high schools we visited was below 2.0; officials at one school told us that last year’s valedictorian had a 3.0 GPA. Further, officials at multiple schools said students feared they would not do well on the ACTs or SATs; and one counselor said this means that many students did not even try. Low GPAs and college entrance exam scores may be a particularly acute roadblock to 4-year college in areas where the state university system has grown increasingly competitive due to high demand, according to a counselor at one predominantly Hispanic California high school who said the state system is looking for students with 4.0 GPAs.

Difficult Life Circumstances

In addition to insufficient academic progress, a confluence of family, financial, and social-emotional challenges often confronts students in high-poverty schools, making it difficult for them to prepare for college, according to our interviews with school officials (see fig. 14).

School and state education officials said that a range of stressors can compound the difficulties poor students face with learning and academic achievement. Officials at most of the schools (9 of 12) we visited and one state educational agency cited adverse conditions associated with poverty––such as hunger, homelessness, living in foster care, witnessing or experiencing violence or abuse—that made it hard for students to focus on school work. In one high school, officials reported that a school staff member handed out care packages to students every Friday to ensure students had something to eat on the weekend. Officials also reported that students demonstrated behavioral and emotional issues in their schools. Officials at one Wisconsin school said they have noticed a large increase in anxiety among students. This anxiety can be paralyzing for some students and, for others, can result in explosive and violent behavior that affects other students’ ability to learn, according to the school officials.

Officials in 11 of the high-poverty schools we visited said that going to college often conflicts with a student’s need to help support their families or that the cost of college can be prohibitive. Some students provide an important source of income for their family or are the caregiver for family members, according to officials in nine schools. Family obligations can also affect students’ decisions about whether to take college preparation courses, according to one school administrator. For example, the principal of a California charter school said a high-performing student dropped an AP course because the demands from family were so great. In addition, officials in six schools said that the cost of college can deter low-income students. One of these officials reported that even with financial aid and scholarships, their students may not be able to cover even small gaps in funding. According to one high school counselor, the cost of going to college plus the practicalities of getting to and from school and figuring out how to pay for meals during breaks if dorms or the cafeteria are closed, are concerns for low-income students.

Parents struggling with poverty may not expect their children to go to college, according to college advising officials and officials at most schools (10 of 12) we visited. For example, officials at one Georgia high school said that many students are aiming to be the first in the family to graduate high school (first generation high school graduates), and do not prioritize college. Similarly, at another school, officials said parents and students do not have the expectation of going to college because the parents had not been to college themselves. Students from high-poverty schools may continue to harbor low expectations upon admission to college because they feel they do not belong, according to a principal and a college advising official. In addition, first generation students usually do not have the family support and knowledge to feel confident in their abilities to navigate college life, as a college admissions official noted. School officials at one high school we visited said their students, who attend high school in a highly segregated area, have felt overwhelmed and intimidated trying to transition to a college with a predominately white student population.

Barriers to Navigating College Processes

A variety of factors—from the availability of high school counselors to taking college entrance exams—can make the college admissions and enrollment processes difficult for students in high-poverty schools, according to school, college, and college advising organizations in the communities we visited (see fig. 15).

College admission officials in two of the states we visited noted the importance of the high school counselor in navigating the college admissions process, such as taking students to college fairs and building relationships with colleges. However, counselors often face high caseloads and competing priorities, such as getting kids to graduate and handling emotional and social issues, according to multiple school officials and local college advising organizations. In one rural school we visited, one counselor handled the needs of about 400 students and was also the bus driver and occasional substitute nurse. Taking the SAT and ACT exams can also pose challenges for students. For example, according to administrators at one school, the cost of the exams may be a deterrent. At another high school, counselors noted that students may lack transportation to the test site and, at another school, officials said weekend jobs kept students from taking the tests.

Applying for financial aid can also be challenging for students from high- poverty schools, according to school and college advising organization officials. At six of the schools we visited, officials said that sometimes parents are reluctant to report their income, because they are undocumented or because the process is unfamiliar. In addition, some school officials told us that even families with legal immigration status can be reluctant to submit personal information to government websites because they distrust how the information will be used. College advising officials we interviewed in two states said that complicated family financial situations, such as when a student cannot obtain income information from a parent, can also make the financial aid process difficult. In addition, officials from two college advising organizations said that financial aid award packages can be difficult to understand. For instance, they said that these packages may not clearly explain what amount the student is responsible for paying. Further, the aid letters may not indicate the additional cost associated with room and board, books, and transportation, according to one of these officials.

Finally, even after a student has been admitted to college, they still may experience obstacles before classes begin, according to our interviews. Four officials reported that lack of college advisement over the summer after high school graduation has led to “summer melt,” when students do not attend college as planned. Officials from a college advising organization said that sometimes students missed a step in the enrollment process, such as paying deposits or tuition balances before the semester begins.

Some High-Poverty Schools Are Trying to Ease Roadblocks to College

Officials representing selected state educational agencies, school districts, and high-poverty schools we visited reported that they try to mitigate the barriers students in high-poverty schools face in being prepared to attend a 4-year college, despite resource challenges.

Free access to college courses. Providing students with free access to college courses was one way some states and schools have been able to help students prepare for college. For example, Georgia’s dual enrollment program allows high school students to earn college credit for free while working on their high school diploma. The program covers tuition, mandatory fees, and books. Administrators at a Georgia high school reported that the program has allowed some students to earn an associate’s degree upon graduation from high school, helping to ease the cost burden of college. A charter school we visited in California partners with local colleges and covers tuition, text books, and transportation for college courses. The school principal said that the school does not offer calculus, but students can take it at a local community college and receive college credit.

Outside supports for college advising. In Georgia, officials from a college advising organization reported helping with the college admission process in selected schools, including registering students to take the ACT or SAT, organizing college visits, helping students research colleges, and helping students and parents apply for financial aid. They also said they used text messages as a way to reach out to students and remind them to complete certain steps in the enrollment process. In addition, officials from half of the schools we visited (6 of 12) reported their schools had, or previously had, federal grants that supported college readiness activities for disadvantaged students. For example, one Wisconsin high school where most students are eligible for free or reduced-priced lunch (90 percent) and are Black (82 percent) or Hispanic (14 percent) had a GEAR UP grant that supported students in the classes of 2017 and 2018 since middle school, according to the school administrators.

Strategies to exhibit a college-going culture. To help encourage students to consider college as a possibility, officials at some high-poverty schools we visited reported using strategies to exhibit a “college-going culture” within the school. For example, based on our site visit interviews and observations, schools displayed college banners; opened college and career counseling centers; provided incentives, such as prizes, to complete financial aid applications; and posted testing and scholarship information in prominent locations (see figs. 16 and 17). At one urban high school we visited in Georgia, teachers displayed their alma maters on their classroom doors and the school held “College Fridays” so students could learn about different colleges, according to school administrators.

All-hands-on deck approach. One California school reported using an “all-hands-on-deck” approach to getting students through the college admission process. Teachers, counselors, and administrators work together to track and follow up with students to ensure they take the needed coursework and do not miss a step in the admissions process. Officials reported that school staff built personal connections with the students and with the community outside of the school to encourage buy- in surrounding the college application process. At a high school in Georgia where 100 percent of students were eligible for free or reduced- priced lunch, school officials said they also used an all-hands-on-deck approach to help students persevere through personal challenges they face, such as balancing work and school or dealing with trauma. The school provides a team of administrators and counselors for each grade level to better identify when a student may be struggling and help support students’ college preparation goals, according to school administrators.

Alignment of graduation requirements and college admission requirements. Wisconsin officials reported that the state made changes to better align high school requirements with college and career readiness expectations, and universities’ expectations by increasing its math and science graduation requirements from two units to three units of each, starting with the 2017 graduating class. According to a 2014 analysis by the Education Commission of the States, 18 states have complete or partial alignment between state high school graduation requirements and statewide higher education minimum admission requirements. In addition, the University of California and the California State University systems have established a uniform minimum set of courses, known as A-G requirements, required for admission as a freshman. These courses, offered in California high schools and online schools, are designed to ensure students have attained a body of general knowledge for more advanced study, according to information from the University of California. Even though it is not a state requirement, one Georgia school district reported that it requires two units of foreign language because it is a requirement of the University System of Georgia.

Free college admission tests. In two of the states we visited, officials reported that students may take select college entrance exams or preparatory exams during a school day free of charge. Georgia pays for all 10th graders in public schools to take the Preliminary SAT (PSAT). Wisconsin officials reported that the state requires and provides the funding for all 11th graders in the state to take the ACT. A school district in California we visited noted that it covers the cost of the PSAT for 9th, 10th, and 11th graders in the district, as well as the SAT for 11th graders. In addition, officials at several schools said they offer students free online test preparation tools.

College initiatives to improve access and retention. Officials at colleges in all three states we visited reported having initiatives that helped increase admissions or ease the transition to college for low- income or first-generation students. For example, officials at the University of Georgia said the college guarantees admission to the valedictorian of every accredited high school in the state. Admissions officials said this helped students with fewer educational opportunities to be competitive for admissions. California State University (CSU)–Los Angeles, as well as other CSU campuses, has a program to help improve access and retention of low-income and educationally disadvantaged students. Under the program, the university accepts a limited number of students who do not meet regular admission criteria and provides academic, and in some cases financial, assistance to these students. The university also offers a 6-week “summer bridge” program for first generation students since they are most in danger of dropping out between high school graduation and the first day of college classes in the fall. At the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, an admissions official said the university develops transfer plans for students who start at a 2-year community college, to ease the transition to a 4-year college.

Agency Comments

We provided a draft of this report to the Departments of Education and Justice for review and comment. These agencies provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the report date. At that time, we will send copies to the appropriate congressional committee, the Secretary of Education, the Attorney General, and other interested parties. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at (617) 788-0580 or nowickij@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are listed in appendix VIII.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Overview

The objectives of this report were to (1) examine the extent to which high schools of different poverty levels offer courses to prepare students academically for college and (2) describe challenges that students in high-poverty schools face in being prepared to attend college.

For our first objective, we analyzed federal data on college preparatory course offerings by school poverty level quartiles; and within these quartiles, we analyzed the demographic composition of students in those schools. We also analyzed course offerings of schools in each poverty quartile by school type, size, and locale. Further, we reviewed college admissions expectations for a generalizable random sample of public 4- year colleges and compared course offerings from schools in each poverty quartile to these expectations. Lastly, we conducted a regression analysis to explore whether and to what extent certain school-level characteristics were associated with higher rates of college preparatory course offerings.

For our second objective, we visited selected high-poverty high schools in three states to provide illustrative examples of challenges students face in being prepared for college. In those states, we also interviewed officials from state educational agencies, school districts, college advising organizations, and public 4-year colleges. We focused on public 4-year colleges because these institutions offer a bachelor’s degree and are generally a more affordable 4-year option, compared to private colleges. The following sections contain detailed information about the scope and methodology for this report.

Analysis of College Preparatory Courses National Data

To determine the extent to which schools offer courses to prepare students academically for college, we conducted statistical analyses using the U.S. Department of Education’s (Education) Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) and the Common Core of Data (CCD). Specifically, the CRDC is a biennial survey that is mandatory for every public school and district in the United States. Conducted by Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the survey collects data on the nation’s public schools (pre-K through 12th grade), including course offerings, student characteristics and enrollment, and disciplinary actions. The CRDC collected data from nearly every public school in the nation (approximately 17,000 school districts, 96,000 schools, and 51 million students in school year 2015-16). The course offering variables we used in our analysis are for those courses typically associated with and reported by high schools. As a result, our analysis only includes high schools that have all grades 9, 10, 11, and 12 (a total of 14,111 high schools). We thus excluded schools that had any grades K-8. Further, we excluded juvenile justice facilities—because the provision of educational offerings may function differently in those schools—and schools with fewer than 10 students. Our analysis was conducted using the public-use data file of the CRDC for school year 2015-16, the most recent data available at the time of our analysis. We matched schools in the CRDC for school year 2015-16 to schools in the CCD for school year 2015-16 to enable us to perform certain analyses based on variables that are unique to the different datasets, and excluded schools for which there was not a match. CRDC data are self-reported by districts and schools, and consequently there is potential for misreporting of information. Although our analyses of these data showed disparities, taken alone, these disparities do not establish whether unlawful discrimination has occurred.

The 2015-16 CRDC survey collected data on several math and science courses that are considered by Education to be college-preparatory courses. The college-preparatory math courses included in the CRDC are: algebra I; geometry; algebra II; advanced mathematics; and calculus. The college preparatory science courses included in the CRDC are: biology; chemistry; and physics. The CRDC also collected data on a number of variables related to Advanced Placement (AP) course offerings as well as other course offerings that potentially offer students college credit. See table 4 for full definitions of key variables.

Analysis by Poverty and Student Demographics

To analyze course offerings by the poverty level of the school, we pulled in data on free or reduced-price lunch (FRPL) eligibility from the 2015- 2016 CCD, and matched it to our universe of 14,111 high schools in the 2015-16 CRDC, given that the CRDC does not collect FRPL eligibility data. The CCD is administered by Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), and annually collects nonfiscal data about all public schools in the nation. A student is generally eligible for free or reduced-price lunch based on federal income eligibility guidelines that are tied to the federal poverty level and size of the family. State educational agencies supply these data for their schools and school districts.

We then sorted high schools into poverty quartiles based on the percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch as follows: schools with 0 to 24.9 percent of students that are FRPL eligible, which we call low-poverty schools; schools with 25 to 49.9 percent of students that are FRPL eligible; schools with 50 to 74.9 percent of students that are FRPL eligible; and schools with 75 to 100 percent of students that are FRPL eligible, which we call high-poverty schools (see table 5). The poverty thresholds and measure of poverty discussed here and throughout this report were commonly used in the literature and also aligned with how Education analyzed its data. Further, to understand which students attend schools in the different poverty quartiles, we analyzed student demographic composition for each group of schools.

Beginning in the 2014-15 school year, the National School Lunch Program included a new provision for providing free meals to all students in the school, without needing to collect individual applications from students to determine eligibility. This provision—known as the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP)—was implemented to expand access to free meals to all students and decrease household and administrative burdens for participating schools. We assessed whether the CEP variable had the potential to make sorting schools into quartiles based on the percentage of students eligible for free or reduce-price lunch unreliable. Our analysis showed that the number of schools in each poverty quartile remained roughly the same as in prior years and thus, we concluded the reported FRPL data was reliable for our purposes.

Analysis by School Size

To analyze course offerings by the size of public school a student attended, we sorted the 14,111 high schools in our universe into three groups, based on the number of students enrolled in the school, according to the 2015-16 CRDC data (see table 6). We excluded schools with fewer than 10 students because (1) schools of this size likely do not have the resources or infrastructure to offer advanced courses and (2) to prevent minor fluctuations in the data from having large effects on our results.

We grouped schools into one of three size categories based on the number of students enrolled. The Department of Education and the CRDC do not have classifications of schools by size, so we determined reasonable size categories based on our analysis of the data. To arrive at these categories, we looked at average number of advanced course offerings by school size strata in groupings of 100 students. This analysis led to three categories based on the distribution of the data: 1 to 200 students (small schools); 201 to 1000 students (medium schools); and 1,001 or more students (large schools).

Analysis by School Type

To analyze course offerings by the type of public school a student attended, we sorted the 14,111 schools in our universe into mutually exclusive categories using the self-reported school type variable in the CRDC. The CRDC allowed schools to self-identify as special education, magnet, charter, and alternative schools (see table 7).

The categories of public schools in the CRDC were not mutually exclusive; that is, schools could select multiple school types to describe their schools, such as a charter school that was also an alternative school. To create mutually exclusive categories for analytical purposes, we applied the following criteria:

Alternative school: all schools that selected “alternative” as the school type in the CRDC, even if they selected other types as well.

Special education school: schools that selected “special education” as the school type in the CRDC, except those schools that also selected the alternative school type.

Charter school: schools that selected “charter” as the school type, except those schools that also selected the alternative school type or the special education school type.

Magnet school: schools that selected “magnet” as the school type, except those schools that also selected the alternative school type, the special education school type, or the charter school type.

Traditional school: schools that did not select any other school type in the CRDC.

Table 8 provides the breakdown of students and schools captured in the 2015-16 CRDC after applying these criteria.

Analysis by School Locale

To analyze courses offerings by the locale of public school a student attended, we pulled in the school locale variable from the 2015-16 CCD and matched it to schools in the CRDC, which did not collect data on school locale. The locale variable in the CCD is primarily based on a school’s location relative to populous areas. The locale variable is divided into four main types: City, Suburb, Town, and Rural. For the purposes of our analyses, we combined the Town and Rural variables into one Town/Rural variable because they are defined similarly (see table 9).

Table 10 provides the breakdown of students and schools captured in the 2015-16 CRDC after applying the GAO Categories above.

CRDC and CCD Data Reliability

We determined that the data we used from the CRDC and CCD were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report by reviewing technical documentation, conducting electronic testing, and interviewing officials from Education’s OCR and NCES. Past releases of the CRDC have subsequently been updated by Education to correct errors and omissions in the data. For our analysis of the 2015-16 CRDC, we used the data file that was publically available as of April 24, 2018.

Regression Analysis

We conducted a generalized linear regression with a logistic regression model using the 2015-16 CRDC and CCD data to explore whether and to what extent certain school-level characteristics were associated with higher rates of college preparatory course offerings, while controlling for other factors. Such a model allowed us to test the association between the offering of college preparatory courses and school characteristics, including poverty, while holding other school characteristics constant (school type, school size, school locale, student demographics). Table 11 lists the variables we included in our regression model. We conducted a separate regression for each of the course offerings or sequence of offerings listed as an outcome variable.

Our regression model used the same universe of 14,111 schools as our descriptive analysis of the CRDC data. Since the regression model is based on observations across all independent variables, and some variables had a small number of missing data points, our final model had 13,278 observations.

All regression models are subject to limitations and for this model the limitations included:

Data we analyzed were by school rather than student. Consequently, we were not able to describe the association between our independent variables and a student’s access to college preparatory courses, while controlling for characteristics of an individual student, such as sex, race or ethnicity, disability status, or grade level. Instead, the school-level nature of the CRDC data limited our description of the associations between school characteristics and course offerings to whether there was an increase, decrease, or no effect on course offerings for schools with a given characteristic, controlling for other characteristics of the entire school’s population, such as school type.

Some variables that may be related to student access to advanced courses are not available in the data. For example, in this context, it could be that parent education level or household type (single- versus multiple-headed household) could be related to course access.

Results of our analyses are associational and do not imply a causal relationship.

Typically, a logistic regression model, which is a generalized linear regression model, is appropriate when the model assumption of normality is not appropriate, as is the case with a binary (yes/no) outcome. A logistic regression model provides an estimated odds ratio, where a value greater than one indicates a higher or positive association, in this case, between whether a course is offered and the independent variable of interest, such as being a charter school or having a higher percentage of Black students. An estimated odds ratio less than one indicates lower odds of offering a given college preparatory course when a factor is present.

Given the limitations of our model as described above, we present the results of our regression model in tables 12, 13, and 14 by describing the direction of the associations, rather than the estimated odds of outcome variables. For categorical variables in these tables, we provided the comparison school characteristic in brackets. For example, the results in these tables should be interpreted as charter schools were significantly less likely than traditional schools to offer AP courses, because the association is negative. For continuous variables (i.e., those starting with “Percent”), the results in these tables should be interpreted as the likelihood of offering courses decreased, if the association was negative, as the percentage of students in the school with a given characteristic increased. For example, as the percentage of Black students increased, we found that the likelihood of offering the sequence of at least three science courses decreased.

Review of College Admission Criteria

To determine which academic courses colleges expect applicants to take while in high school, we reviewed websites from a generalizable stratified random sample of 100 public 4-year colleges in the United States. The sample was selected from Education’s 2015-16 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), which contains data for colleges that participate in federal student aid programs authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. Our sampling frame consisted of all public 4-year degree granting colleges that participated in Title IV federal student aid programs, predominately award baccalaureate degrees, have full-time first-time undergraduate students, and that are located in a U.S. state or the District of Columbia, yielding a universe of 555 colleges. We stratified the sample by groupings colleges based on admission rates into four strata. We computed the sample size of 100 schools to achieve a precision of at least plus or minus 10 percentage points for an estimate of a population proportion at the 95 percent confidence level. We then proportionally allocated the sample size across the defined strata. This sample allowed us to make national estimates about the admission criteria for expected high school coursework at public 4-year colleges.

To review comparable information across the sampled schools, we developed a standardized web-based data collection instrument that we used to examine the admission criteria for first-time freshman applicants posted on each college’s website. Specifically, we attempted to identify the minimum required or recommended units of math, science, social studies, English, Foreign Language, and Fine Arts courses applicants are expected to take in high school to be considered for admission to the college. For math and science courses, we also attempted to identify any specified courses the colleges provide to meet the required or recommended units for those subject. We also collected information on whether or not each college required students to submit SAT or ACT exam scores to be considered for admission. We reviewed websites from September 2017 through November 2017. One analyst recorded information in the data collection instrument. The information was then checked and verified by another analyst. We collected complete information for all 100 colleges in our sample. We then analyzed the information across colleges. We did not, as part of our review of college websites, assess whether the information provided on the website accurately reflected the current admission policies of the college. Instead, this review was intended to better understand the courses that colleges expect students to take in high school.

High School Site Visits

To obtain information on the challenges students attending high-poverty high schools face in being prepared to attend public 4-year colleges, we selected three states—California, Georgia, and Wisconsin—and conducted site visits to four high schools in each of the states (for a total of 12 high schools). To select states for our site visits, we used the 2013- 14 CRDC data—the most recent available at the time of our selection—to sort states based on the percentage of their schools offering courses commonly associated with college readiness. We selected states that fell below the national average in percentage of schools offering Algebra II. We also considered states that were at or above the national average in percent of high-poverty schools offering two or fewer math and science courses. We also selected states providing us with a mix of state policies on college readiness and geographic diversity.

Within each of the three states we used 2013-14 CRDC data to select high schools to visit that had greater than 75 percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (FRPL) and that offered a range of math and science courses. We also considered the number of AP courses offered by the school. As secondary criteria, we selected schools to achieve variation in school size, school type, and locale, to gather perspectives from officials in a diverse array of high-poverty schools. At each of the 12 schools, we interviewed the principal and other key leadership staff, and high school counselors.

To supplement our site visits, we interviewed by phone state educational agency officials in each of the three states, as well as school district officials for most of the schools we visited. We interviewed officials from at least one local college advising organization in each of these states. In addition, we interviewed officials from at least one public 4-year university in each of the three states, for a total of four public 4-year universities. We selected universities that admit a high percent of in-state students, to attempt to talk to officials who were familiar with the high schools that we selected. These interviews provided us with information about what college admission officers view as challenges in admitting students from high poverty schools and the challenges students face in being successful in completing college.

Because we selected the schools judgmentally, based on our criteria, the findings about the challenges these schools reported or the strategies they used to help students address those challenges cannot be generalized to all schools nationwide.

Additional Interviews

In addition to interviews in our site visit states, we interviewed officials from the Education Commission of the States, National Association for College Admission Counseling, and the College Board. We also held interviews and reviewed documentation from the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice to gather information on their programs supporting access to college preparation opportunities. We also reviewed relevant literature, as appropriate.

We conducted this performance audit from May 2017 to October 2018 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Appendix II: U.S. Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs to Increase College Readiness in K-12 Students

Appendix III: Federal Agencies Responsible for Enforcing Civil Rights Laws in Public Schools

Appendix IV: Selected Federal Civil Rights Enforcement Cases Related to Access to College Preparation Courses and Programs

Department of Education

According to administrative data from the U.S. Department of Education (Education), the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) received over 480 civil rights cases related to college and career readiness and resource comparability from FY 2011 through 2017. Some of these cases were initiated by external complaints and other reviews were initiated by Education. In the selected cases described below Education found underrepresentation of minority students or English learners in advanced, honors, or Advanced Placement (AP) middle and high school courses or in other types of college preparatory programs. This selection of cases is not generalizable, and was selected for illustrative purposes only.

Education Case 1: Equitable Access to Advanced Courses for Black Students in an Ohio School District. In a 2016 investigation, OCR identified a number of potential Title VI compliance concerns regarding equitable access to certain resources for Black students at some schools. Specifically, OCR found that students at three schools, including two predominantly Black high schools, did not have the opportunity to take advanced courses taught live at their schools and, therefore, could not engage in-person with the course instructors. According to OCR’s investigation, students participated remotely, watching the class through a video system. When the classes first started during the 2011-12 school year, the district staffed the distance classroom with paraprofessionals to assist the students. For that year, the district reported using technology to offer greater curriculum choices to its students through distance learning, especially when a sufficient number of students did not sign up for an advanced course at a specific school. After OCR notified the district of its concerns regarding this practice, the district placed teachers in these classrooms effective the 2014-15 school year. The district reported to Education that it was also pursuing efforts that would allow students to earn college credit, increase the number of courses, and improve the courses to provide high-level course choices for students. Before OCR concluded its investigation, district school officials voluntarily entered into a resolution agreement with Education, which committed the district to take certain actions, such as implementing programs designed to ensure that equally effective and qualified teachers are equitably distributed throughout the district and ensure Advanced Placement and other higher-level college preparatory courses are taught in the district’s predominantly Black high schools, and provide students the opportunity to engage in-person with course instructors.

Education Case 2: Equitable Access to College Preparatory Programs for Black, Hispanic, and English Learner (EL) Students in a New York School District. In 2013, OCR investigated whether a New York school district discriminated against Black, Hispanic, and EL students by establishing and implementing policies and procedures that resulted in their exclusion from college and career ready programs and courses, such as honors courses and AP courses. OCR reviewed information that the district provided regarding its high school honors courses and analyzed data from the district that revealed that Black, Hispanic, and EL students were underrepresented to a statistically significant degree in high school honors courses and AP courses. OCR also reviewed information concerning the district’s gifted and talented program at the elementary and middle school levels and its advanced courses at the middle school level. Data provided by the district indicated that Black, Hispanic and EL students were underrepresented to a statistically significant degree in middle school advanced courses, as well as in some of the district’s enrichment programs. OCR noted that enrollment in these programs and courses could potentially have an effect on later enrollment in high school honors and AP courses. Before the conclusion of OCR’s investigation, the district voluntarily entered into a resolution agreement with Education. The agreement committed the district to take specific actions including hiring a consultant with expertise in addressing the underrepresentation of Black, Hispanic, and EL students in advanced and enrichment courses. According to the agreement, the consultant was to study the underrepresentation and make specific recommendations, as appropriate, for improving the district’s efforts to provide all students with equal access to and an equal opportunity to participate in its advanced courses and programs.

Education Case 3: Representation of Black Students in Advanced Courses and Enrichment Programs in a New Jersey School District. In 2014, OCR determined that Black students in a New Jersey school district were underrepresented in high school AP courses. Specifically, OCR found that Black students comprised 51.5 percent of high school students in the district, but only 18.7 percent of students in AP courses in school year 2012-13. In addition, OCR determined that in middle schools, Black students were underrepresented in the district’s advanced math courses, as well as in the math enrichment programs at certain schools in the district. Before the conclusion of OCR’s investigation, the district voluntarily entered into a resolution agreement with Education. The agreement committed the district to take specific actions including hiring a consultant with expertise in addressing the underrepresentation of Black students in college and career preparatory courses. According to the agreement, the consultant was to study the underrepresentation and make recommendations, as appropriate, for improving the district’s efforts to provide all students with equal access to and an equal opportunity to participate in its advanced courses and programs.

Education Case 4: College Preparation Opportunities for Black Students in a Virginia School District. In 2014, OCR investigated whether a Virginia school district discriminated against Black students by failing to provide them with the same resources and educational opportunities that it provided to White students to prepare them for postsecondary education or careers. As part of this review, OCR reviewed information regarding the district’s high school higher-level learning opportunities, including advanced courses, AP courses, and dual credit programs (where students enroll in courses at a local community college). In addition, OCR collected and reviewed information about other possible barriers to college and career readiness, including student discipline. OCR found a significant disparity between the numbers of Black and White high school students who take AP, advanced courses, and dual credit programs. Preliminary information provided by the district indicated disproportion in the representation of Black students in advanced math classes, gifted programs, and accelerated reading programs in elementary schools. When speaking with students about what they considered in determining whether to enroll in these courses, many students informed OCR that they took AP or advanced courses if they took advanced courses in middle school and elementary school. OCR also reviewed student discipline, particularly exclusionary disciplinary that removes students from the school setting, because, according to OCR, such removals can serve as a potential barrier to college and career readiness. Before OCR concluded its investigation, the district voluntarily entered into a resolution agreement with Education to resolve the case. The agreement committed the district to retain the services of a consultant with expertise in addressing the underrepresentation of Black students in gifted programs, elementary and middle school advanced courses, and high school AP and dual credit courses. The consultant’s role was to examine the root causes for underrepresentation and to make recommendations about what measures, if any, the district should take as part of its on-going efforts to provide all students with equal access to advanced courses and programs. According to the agreement, the consultant was to study the underrepresentation and make recommendations, as appropriate, for improving the district’s efforts to provide all students with equal access to and an equal opportunity to participate in its advanced courses and programs.

Department of Justice

Justice also investigates allegations of discrimination related to school resources in response to complaints filed under federal civil rights statutes and monitors and enforces open federal school desegregation orders where Justice is a party to the litigation. Justice sometimes partners with OCR on these cases. In September 2017, Justice officials stated that there were 172 open cases to which the agency was a party. The selected cases described below summarize Justice’s findings and the agreed upon remedies. This selection of cases is not generalizable, and was selected for illustrative purposes only.

Justice Case 1: Equal Educational Opportunities in an Alabama School District. As part of an ongoing civil rights lawsuit against an Alabama school district, in 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama approved a consent order filed by Justice and the district to reconfigure school attendance zones, improve access to quality course offerings, and address racial discrimination in student discipline, among other areas. The proposed consent order required the district to provide equal educational opportunities to Black students by revising attendance zones and growing and strengthening magnet programs to improve diversity at many of its schools. It also required the district to expand access for Black students by taking a number of steps, including expanding access for Black students to college counseling and advance course offerings such as AP and International Baccalaureate (IB). It also required the district to expand access for Black students to pre- kindergarten, gifted programs, and academic afterschool programs. The district agreed to implement measures to promote faculty and administrator diversity and to ensure that all students are aware of and can equally participate in extracurricular activities.

Justice Case 2: Equitable Access to Course Offerings in a Louisiana School District. As part of an ongoing civil rights lawsuit against a Louisiana School Board, in 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana approved a consent decree between Justice and the school board. This consent decree addressed district’s fulfillment of its desegregation obligations, terminating long-standing judicial supervision of the district in this matter. Prior to this consent decree, in 2010, the court directed the district to offer the same courses at every high school. However, 5 years later, the court found that a high school in the district, which predominantly served White students, offered 32 more courses, including college preparatory courses, than another high school, which predominantly served Black students. Similarly, across all schools in the district (elementary, middle, and high), the schools that were racially identifiable as White had far more gifted and talented course offerings than other schools. In the consent decree, the district agreed, among other things, to strive to have all courses listed in its course catalog taught at each high school. Further, if a course is ultimately not taught at a given school, students at that school would be given the opportunity to take the course at another school in the district. The district also agreed to provide free transportation, at the student’s request, and to adjust the student’s schedule and the scheduling and location of the course, as necessary, to facilitate the student’s attendance at the course.

Justice Case 3: Access to College and Career Readiness Programs and Courses for American Indian Students in a New Mexico School District. In 2017, Justice and OCR resolved a compliance review of a New Mexico school district. The purpose of the review was to determine whether the district discriminated against American Indians by excluding them from college and career readiness programs and courses, such as gifted and talented, AP, and honors courses. Justice and OCR also evaluated whether the district discriminated against American Indian parents by not providing them with information surrounding the aforementioned programs and courses in a language they understand. District staff surveyed during this review recommended ways to address American Indian student underrepresentation in college and career readiness programs and courses. On February 14, 2017, the district entered into a resolution agreement with OCR and Justice, committing to take specific actions to ensure that it is providing an equal opportunity and equal access for all students to its advanced and higher level learning opportunities. The district agreed to several actions including reaching out to an equity assistance center or consultant for technical assistance in addressing the underrepresentation of American Indian students in the college and career readiness programs and courses and improving outreach to the American Indian community.

Appendix V: Additional Data Tables

This appendix contains several tables that show the underlying data used throughout this report, as well as additional analyses we conducted using the Department of Education’s Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) and Common Core of Data (CCD) for school year 2015-16. The following tables and information are included in this appendix:

Table 17: High schools offering math and science courses, by school poverty level.

Table 18: High schools offering math and science sequences, by school poverty level.

Table 19: High schools offering Advanced Placement courses, International Baccalaureate program, and Dual Enrollment options, by school poverty level.

Table 20: High schools offering different numbers of Advanced Placement courses, by school poverty level.

Table 21: High schools offering math courses, by school size and poverty level.

Table 22: High schools offering science courses, by school size and poverty level.

Table 23: High schools offering math and science sequences, by school size and poverty level.

Table 24: High schools offering Advanced Placement courses, International Baccalaureate program, and Dual Enrollment options, by school size and poverty level.

Table 25: High schools offering math courses, by school type and poverty level.

Table 26: High schools offering science courses, by school type and poverty level.

Table 27: High schools offering math and science sequences, by school type and poverty level.

Table 28: High schools offering Advanced Placement courses, International Baccalaureate program, and Dual Enrollment options, by school type and poverty level.

Table 29: High schools offering math courses, by school locale and poverty level.

Table 30: High schools offering science courses, by school locale and poverty level.

Table 31: High schools offering math and science sequences, by school locale and poverty level.

Table 32: High schools offering Advanced Placement courses, International Baccalaureate program, and Dual Enrollment options, by school locale and poverty level.

Appendix VI: Additional Figures

Appendix VII: College Admission Website Review

As described in Appendix I, we reviewed websites from a nationally- representative sample of 100 public 4-year colleges in the United States to determine which academic courses colleges expect applicants to take while in high school. Our sampling frame consisted of all public 4-year degree granting colleges that participated in Title IV federal student aid programs, predominately award baccalaureate degrees, have full-time first-time undergraduate students, and that are located in a U.S. state or the District of Columbia, yielding a universe of 555 colleges. Based on our review, an estimated 88 percent of public 4-year colleges posted recommended or required high school coursework as admission criteria for applicants. Of the colleges that had coursework criteria posted on their websites, the results are shown in table 33 below.

Appendix VIII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Staff Acknowledgments

In addition to the contact named above, Sherri Doughty (Assistant Director), Cady Panetta (Analyst-in-Charge), James Ashley, James Bennett, David Dornisch, Holly Dye, Alison Grantham, Connor Kincaid, Grant Mallie, Benjamin Sinoff, Walter Vance, and Sonya Vartivarian made key contributions to this report. Also contributing were Deborah Bland, Aaron Karty, Sheila R. McCoy, and Margie Shields.