Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Liu, Y. T. (2017). Essays on the economics of higher education: The academic and labor market outcomes to four to two-year transfer, summer enrollment, and year-round Pell (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Columbia University, New York, NY. doi: 10.7916/D8M90N11
Highlights
- The study’s objective was to examine the impact of receiving year-round Pell (YRP) funding on community college students’ enrollment, credit accumulation, degree completion, employment, and earnings.
- The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the effects of receiving the YRP funding on outcomes for those in the treatment group versus those in the comparison group.
- The study found that students who received YRP were significantly more likely to enroll in summer courses that year, earn more credits during the semester, and earn more money three years later.
- The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is moderate because it was based on a well-implemented nonexperimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the YRP, but other factors might also have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Year-Round Pell (YRP) funding
Features of the Intervention
Federal Pell Grants are awarded to high need families based on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and cover college tuition for two semesters of full-time credit. Through the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008, the year-round Pell (YRP) program was established to increase the likelihood of degree completion. The purpose of the YRP program was to allow eligible students to receive a second Pell grant in the same fiscal year to pay summer tuition. Students were eligible for a second Pell grant only if they had completed at least 24 credits prior to the summer semester covered by the YRP and also enrolled in at least 6 credits in the last term of the academic year.
Features of the Study
The study used a difference-in-differences approach to compare the outcomes of students who received YRP funding to those who did not. The author used three years of data from transcripts, financial aid records, the National Student Clearinghouse, and employment and earnings records. The study participants included 26,598 students at a community college in an anonymous location in the United States. The sample consisted of four cohorts of first-time degree seeking students who entered the community college system in the fall semesters of 2006-2009. Only one cohort (Fall 2009) was eligible for YRP because of federal policy changes. The other cohorts (Fall 2006-Fall 2008) served as the comparison group.
Findings
Education and skills gain
- The study found that summer enrollment rates were significantly higher for students who received YRP than students in the comparison group, with an 8.3 percentage point difference in enrollment.
- The study also found that students who received YRP earned significantly more credits during the summer, with program participating students earning 0.7 credits more during the summer semester than students in the comparison group. The study did not find a significant difference between the groups on credit accumulation in the fall or spring semesters.
- The study did not find a significant difference between the groups on diploma, certificate, or associate degree completion.
Earnings and wages
- The study found that students who received YRP earned significantly more money three years later, with YRP program participating students earning $681 more than students in the comparison group. The study did not find a significant difference between the groups on earnings in the first or second year.
Employment
- The study did not find a significant difference between the groups on employment rates in the first, second, or third year.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The recession in 2008 could have impacted the composition of the cohort enrolling in the fall of 2009. In addition, the study compared outcomes of full-time students (those who were eligible for YRP) to part-time students (those who were not eligible). These two factors could result in the treatment and comparison groups being fundamentally different; however, the author found few differences between the treatment and comparison groups at baseline, and several demographic characteristics and time varying trends were controlled for in the analyses.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is moderate because it was based on a well-implemented nonexperimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the YRP program, but other factors might also have contributed.