The Value of Universal Eligibility in Promise Scholarship Programs

Miller-Adams, Michelle

doi:10.17848/1075-8445.18(4)-1

Cited by 12 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Colleges affected by Promise programs that were not in our treatment group (i.e., because the program was tied to more than one college) were also excluded from our comparison groups. According to the W. E. Upjohn Institute’s database, the eligible population for the programs in our sample is considerably smaller (77,138) than the eligible population for all Promise programs that are associated with community colleges (157,376; Miller-Adams et al, 2019).…”

Section: Data and Samplementioning

confidence: 94%

“…To create our national sample of Promise programs, we used data from the W. E. Upjohn inventory of Promise programs (Miller-Adams et al, 2019), as well as the Penn AHEAD inventory (Perna & Leigh, n.d.) and Billings’s (2018) dissertation.…”

Section: Data and Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These programs have existed across the United States since at least the late 1990s but have garnered greater attention in recent years as they have been proposed by U.S. presidential candidates (Mangan, 2019; Mishory, 2018). An exact count of Promise programs is unknown, since these programs are diffusing rapidly and definitions of Promise programs vary, but one inventory documented at least 144 Promise programs as of mid-2019 (Miller-Adams et al, 2019). The proliferation of Promise programs across localities and states underscores the importance of understanding these initiatives and their differentiated effects across demographic groups.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Promise for Whom? “Free-College” Programs and Enrollments by Race and Gender Classifications at Public, 2-Year Colleges

Gándara

2020

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Promise programs are proliferating across the United States, with wide variation in their design. Using national data on 33 Promise programs affecting single, 2-year colleges, this study examines program effects on first-time, full-time college enrollments of students by race/ethnicity and gender classification. Results suggest Promise programs are associated with large percent increases in enrollments of Black and Hispanic students, especially students classified as females, at eligible colleges. Promise programs with merit requirements are associated with higher enrollment of White and Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander female students; those with income requirements are negatively associated with enrollment of most demographic groups. More generous Promise programs are associated with greater enrollment increases among demographic groups with historically higher levels of postsecondary attainment.

show abstract

Section: Data and Samplementioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Data and Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Promise for Whom? “Free-College” Programs and Enrollments by Race and Gender Classifications at Public, 2-Year Colleges

Gándara

2020

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only three programs, less than 10% of our sample, were universal programs covering all students independent of academics or family need. Policy makers and social scientists tend to see universal programs as more likely to reach all segments of the highest need population without stigmatization, and in the case of promise programs, universal eligibility may underpin economic effects, such as regional population growth and family migration to promise‐covered school districts (Miller‐Adams, ).…”

Section: The Student Experience In College Promise Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining How College Promise Programs Promote Student Academic and Financial Readiness

Millett

Saunders

Fishtein

2018

ETS Research Report Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently college promise programs are proliferating in number at the local and state levels. Most promise programs provide financial resources beyond conventional state and federal student aid to students who live in designated places and meet local‐ or state‐defined eligibility criteria. There is an immense variety of models and funding designs for these programs. In this study, we conducted a rigorous content analysis of the public web sites for a diverse subsample of 35 promise programs to explore how college promise programs promote student academic and financial readiness. Although our analysis made it clear that there is more to learn about promise programs, including understanding general administrative processes and program operations, we highlight several design and implementation considerations that may increase the capacity of these programs to promote equity in higher education access and success.

show abstract

“…Rather than waiting until students from low-income communities have given up hope of paying for college, promise programs provide early notification of a scholarship offer-informing students by 9th or 10th grade, or even as early as elementary school (Andrews, 2014;Blanco, 2005Blanco, , 2009Miller-Adams, 2015;Perna & Leigh, 2018;Stransky Vaade, 2009). The hope is that if college seems more financially viable early on, students and their families may be more motivated to take the steps necessary to prepare academically for postsecondary education, and students may be more likely to continue seeing themselves as "college material" (Harris, 2013;Kelchen & Goldrick-Rab, 2015;Miller-Adams, 2011). Promise programs may also affect students' college trajectories by affecting the attitudes and behaviors of school staff.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of Failure: How High School Counselors and Administrators Make Sense of Promise Scholarship Merit Requirements

Rifelj

Kuttner

2020

Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Promise scholarship programs designed to increase college access and success are proliferating across the country. However, little research has investigated how such programs are implemented or how differences in program design, such as the inclusion of merit requirements, could affect the success of these initiatives. Project/Research Design This study is part of a randomized control trial examining outcomes of the Degree Project (TDP), a $12,000 promise scholarship for students in a Midwestern urban school district. TDP was designed with GPA and attendance merit requirements in order to understand the impact of a targeted scholarship design. Purpose We set out to understand how school staff tasked with implementing the Degree Project scholarship made sense of the program, its merit requirements, and data on students meeting those requirements and how this sensemaking may have affected the attitudes and actions of staff in ways that could alter the impact of the program on students. Data collection/Analysis Over the first two program years, we conducted interviews in over 90% of treatment schools (year 1 N = 17; year 2 N = 15). Using theories of sensemaking and attribution, we analyzed how staff used data from the merit requirements as evidence to frame the program as a success or failure. Findings We find that some school staff used data on the number of students still on track for the scholarship as evidence that TDP was succeeding or—more often—failing. Moreover, they mainly attributed this success or failure to characteristics of the students themselves and rarely to their own work practice. Staff who saw the program as failing were in schools that already had lower academic achievement, and there is evidence that they took fewer actions to support student access to TDP than did staff in higher-performing schools. Conclusions These findings raise concerns that staff sensemaking around TDP may be reinforcing low expectations of students and deficit discourses of youth from low-wealth communities of color, as well as stratification of access to college-related support. Additionally, it raises important implementation and equity concerns about both promise programs’ use of merit requirements and data use in schools in general.

show abstract

The Value of Universal Eligibility in Promise Scholarship Programs

Cited by 12 publications

References 2 publications

Promise for Whom? “Free-College” Programs and Enrollments by Race and Gender Classifications at Public, 2-Year Colleges

Promise for Whom? “Free-College” Programs and Enrollments by Race and Gender Classifications at Public, 2-Year Colleges

Examining How College Promise Programs Promote Student Academic and Financial Readiness

Evidence of Failure: How High School Counselors and Administrators Make Sense of Promise Scholarship Merit Requirements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About