Search News


Browse Archives

News

(Not) Crossing the Finish Line

September 9, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

America's flagship public universities are failing to graduate enough students in four (or even six) years and are doing too little to improve the completion rates of low-income and minority students, especially black males, according to a much awaited book being released today.

Crossing the Finish Line: Completing College at America's Public Universities is based on a database tracking what happened to students who entered 21 flagship universities in 1999, as well as a comparative database with information on several statewide higher education systems. The information available for the study was detailed enough for the authors to track not only graduation rates, but many other issues. For instance, the book raises questions about the value of the six-year emphasis of the federal rate, the inability of public universities to do a better job of graduating some subsets of their students, the role of standardized testing, the use of merit aid and the ability of community college students to transfer.

The authors of the book -- published by Princeton University Press -- are William G. Bowen, president emeritus of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Princeton University; Matthew M. Chingos, a Ph.D. student in government at Harvard University and a research associate at Mellon; and Michael S. McPherson, president of the Spencer Foundation and former president of Macalester College.

While the authors include the former presidents of two private institutions, and the book notes the relative success of private, residential colleges in graduating students, the authors are emphatic that the United States cannot improve overall educational attainment unless there are significant changes in public higher education -- because that is where most students enroll. "Public universities have to be the principal engines," the book says. And the "only way" they can succeed at this task, the authors write, is through a renewed push to close gaps in graduation rates that exist among racial, ethnic and economic groups.

At the same time, the authors are calling for attitudinal changes -- by students and those who run universities -- so that four-year graduation is seen as the standard all are expected to meet. In fact, the study found that at less selective flagships, only about a third of students are graduating in four years, and that totals in less selective university systems are about one quarter.

In an interview, Bowen cited an anecdote that to him typifies the flawed culture at many institutions that considers it perfectly normal to graduate in six years. "At a very highly regarded flagship university, when you talk there to students about graduation rates, you can be told, as we were told by one person, 'graduating in four years is like leaving the party at 10 o'clock,' " he said.

Here are overall figures from the study, with both flagships and state systems divided by admissions selectivity, with the more selective on the top of each category. (A list of the flagships studied, and their selectivity grouping, may be found here.)

Graduation Rates by Selectivity

Sector Graduated in 4 Years Graduated in 5 or 6 Years Total in 6 Years
Flagships (most selective) 65% 21% 86%
Flagships (mid level of selectivity) 52% 28% 80%
Flagships (less selective) 33% 33% 66%
State systems (more selective) 54% 23% 77%
State systems (less selective) 26% 25% 51%

While the federal calculation of graduation rates is based on six years, Bowen said it was important to start to focus on the four-year rate. If programs require four years of work, he said, students should be able to get through them in four. "The costs to the higher education system and to the students are very high" of letting six years become a normal time to degree, Bowen said.

He acknowledged that the residential, private colleges that tend to have graduation rates in the 90s have the benefits of small size and the money to spend on outreach efforts to encourage graduation in four years. But he said that evidence from the databases showed that large universities that use small units to divide students, and that have significant residence life and a sense of community (as many do with honors colleges), are having more success than other larger universities at graduating students in four years.

He acknowledged that many large research universities -- especially now -- are limited in resources and won't match the per-student spending levels of elite liberal arts colleges. But he said that the question isn't of trying to become a small college, but "to find ways to mimic them."

And a big part of that is expectations, he said. "A key question is how hard does an institution push to get students through in four?"

One of the major themes of the book is of the importance of disparities -- and the need to be precise about them. For all flagships, the following table shows significant gaps among male students, and much smaller gaps among female students, with Asian-American students having the highest graduation rates for both groups, and black students the lowest rates. Asian women at flagship universities are in fact more likely to graduate within four years than are black men in six years.

Race, Ethnicity, Gender and Graduation Rates at Flagship Universities

Group Graduated in 4 Years Graduated in 5 or 6 Years Total in 6 Years
Males      
--White 42% 33% 75%
--Black 26% 33% 59%
--Hispanic 32% 34% 66%
--Asian 47% 31% 78%
Females      
--White 56% 23% 79%
--Black 45% 27% 72%
--Hispanic 48% 28% 76%
--Asian 60% 25% 85%

Selectivity adds further to the racial gaps, as this table from the book shows, in comparing black and white students, with gender breakdowns, at different groupings of flagship universities by admissions selectivity.

Black-White Gaps at Flagship Universities, by Selectivity

Group Graduated in 4 Years Graduated in 5 or 6 Years Total in 6 Years
Males      
--White at most selective 54% 22% 86%
--Black at most selective 33% 32% 65%
--White at mid level of selectivity 46% 33% 79%
--Black at mid level of selectivity 27% 32% 59%
--White at least selective 27% 38% 65%
--Black at least selective 14% 35% 49%
Females      
--White at most selective 76% 14% 89%
--Black at most selective 59% 22% 81%
--White at mid level of selectivity 61% 23% 84%
--Black at mid level of selectivity 42% 30% 72%
--White at least selective 41% 29% 70%
--Black at least selective 29% 30% 59%

Mismatch or 'Undermatch'?

The large gaps in graduation rates, especially for black men, are an issue of great concern to the authors. And they note that some might look at these figures and see evidence for the "mismatch" theory that is popular with many critics of affirmative action. That theory holds that students from various minority groups are not well served by being admitted to highly competitive colleges with grades and test scores that are lower than those of other admitted applicants. These students -- as evidenced by lower graduation rates -- don't experience academic success as they might at less competitive institutions, the theory holds.

The new book argues that it has conclusive evidence to debunk mismatch theory. The authors used data from their database to compare black men with high school grade-point averages below 3.0 who enrolled in the most selective flagships and those who enrolled in less selective flagships and the least selective flagships. What the authors found was that these students -- who mismatch theory would suggest would do better at less competitive institutions -- actually are most likely to graduate at more competitive flagships. The graduation rate for this cohort of black males at the three selectivity levels of flagships is (starting from the most selective), 46 percent, 40 percent, and 38 percent. So these black males benefit significantly from being at the more competitive institutions.

In the interview, Bowen said that this is more evidence of the powerful impact of peer expectations and institutional expectations at more competitive institutions. The message for black males (and other minority groups) is not to be scared off by alleged mismatches but to "go to the best place that will admit you."

The book also argues that the existence of programs in which black students are admitted, held to very high standards, but also given support services and a supportive environment -- and then thrive -- shows that success is possible with the right combination of factors. The Meyerhoff Scholars Program at the University of Maryland-Baltimore County is cited as an example in not only educating hundreds of black and other minority students, but in sending them off to top graduate programs in math and science.

The obvious question that the authors then pose, given the success at UMBC, is why this isn't taking place elsewhere. While the book says that the program's features "could certainly be copied," it adds that the efforts are expensive and have benefited from a strong leader in Freeman Hrabowski, UMBC's president, championing the program.

Most black students not only aren't ending up at UMBC, the book notes, but they aren't in fact ending up at the most challenging institution they could get into. Using GPA and other measures in the state systems examined, the book argues that there is considerable "undermatching" going on -- with minority students in particular not applying to the most competitive institutions that would admit them.

This is the problem, the authors argue, not mismatch. "The way to improve graduation rates and other outcomes for black men is not to discourage them from enrolling in academically strong programs.... On the contrary, more presumptively well-qualified black men should be encouraged to 'aim high' when deciding whether and where to to pursue educational opportunities after high school," they write.

Testing and Its Value

Another area that the book examines with its database is the relative predictive value of grades and standardized tests like the SAT and ACT on predicting college graduation rates. The overall conclusion of the section is that high school grades have more predictive value than do standardized tests, and that the additional predictive value from tests is quite small (although slightly greater at the most competitive institutions).

The finding could be significant for several reasons. First the authors intentionally go to a new measure of testing validity -- graduation rates -- rather than focusing on the measure used by the College Board for predictive validity of the SAT, which is first-year grades. Bowen said that since the goal should be graduation (and on time graduation), testing should be measured in that way.

While the limited value they find for testing might be seen as an anti-testing stance, the authors are careful not to go there. They say that they don't want to focus on "to test or not to test" but on how testing could or should be used. Generally, the book offers praise for the SAT II (the subject tests) and the Advanced Placement tests, noting that both of these tests are based on what students actually learn in academic areas.

Bowen said that "we're not anti-testers," but that colleges -- especially those that aren't at the most competitive levels -- need to "think about weighting" so that it's clear that "if you have done well in high school, but not on the SAT," you can enroll, he said.

What the book does suggest is wrong, however, is the use of a test like the SAT as the sole or even dominant admissions criterion. Asked about the National Merit Scholarship Program, on which semifinalist status is based entirely on PSAT scores, Bowen said that based on the evidence in the book, "I'm highly skeptical that it makes any sense."

The Transfer Route

Yet another area explored with the database (and this article leaves out still many others) is the subject of community college transfers. Here the book offers a very mixed message.

First it says that its data on student progression suggest that high school seniors who want to earn a bachelor's degree are less likely to do so if they start at community colleges than if they enroll at a four-year institution. But second, the analysis of the database finds that of those community college students who transfer to selective flagships, they graduate at the same rate as those who enrolled at those institutions as first-time freshmen. This parity is more impressive, the book notes, considering that the transfers were more likely than those who started at the universities to be from low-income families and more likely to have not had great pre-college academic credentials.

Bowen said that, from a policy perspective, the findings leave him thinking that "investing more heavily in community colleges is wise," but he added that it may not be wise to assume that community college transfers "are going to solve the B.A. completion problem." He said that he was particularly concerned about state systems -- such as California's -- where four-year campuses have not kept up with student demand. Having a strong community college system, he said, "is no substitute for providing the places in four-year institutions."

Of course California is not the only state cutting budgets -- and doing so in ways that may undercut many of the sorts of initiatives that might deal with some of the issues the new book discusses. Outreach to low-income and minority students, scholarships, academic advising, better residential facilities and more -- all of these cost money.

"I think it's very serious," said Bowen of the trends today. "I think the country is underspending on the major public universities. No question about it, and the consequences will be serious."

But he also stressed that much in the book -- especially related to expectations -- concerns philosophies that don't necessarily have price tags. "If the expectation is 'all of you who entered together are going to graduate together,' that just is different from being in a situation where there are no such expectations."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on (Not) Crossing the Finish Line

  • Posted by soc prof , Professor/Sociology at Regional U on September 9, 2009 at 6:00am EDT
  • My school has closer to a 6 year graduation rate (state-assisted regional university in south). But want to know the main reason why? Most of our students are working one 30+ hour a week job and sometimes more than that. Many are married with children. I dare the authors to complete a program in 4 years, with 2 jobs, a family life, and stay sane, and with a good GPA. Without understanding the economics of our students' lives, and the other realities of what they go through -- simply counting the years to graduation is a disservice. Where's this kind of data?

  • Time for a change
  • Posted by Tim , Professor of the Law & Policy of Higher Education at Leeds Metropolitan, U.K. on September 9, 2009 at 6:00am EDT
  • Once again the data indicates that all is not as good for all students in US universities as it is for the elite at the elite. Where to look for how to achieve change (attitudinal as well as structural)? I would suggest that the US should look at the totality of the Bologna Process - analyse, improvise, improve, adopt, change and thus move on (again) so that all students, all stakeholders (students, faculty, parents, alumini, employers, society and government at all levels) reap the benefits. Now is the time.

  • how long? and why?
  • Posted by random thoughts at Less-Selective, Non-Flagship, Public U on September 9, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • We need to see more distinctions in the reported data. At my less-selective non-flagship public university, there is typically an 18% difference between the four- and five-year graduation rates, but only a 3% difference between the five- and six-year rates. In other words, most students graduate in five years or less; very few take longer. I have not examined how many take only a single additional semester, but my impression is that the number is quite high. Without distinguishing between the four-and-a-half, five- and six-year rates (in the article, if not in the book), we lack evidence that we are "letting six years become a normal time to degree."

    In addition, we need to recognize that a change in majors often requires an additional semester or two. And many students change majors beyond their freshman year (when adjustments are easiest to make). It is actually a positive outcome when students realize, even belatedly, that a different major would better suit their goals. An additional semester (or two) to complete a more suitable major is not certain evidence that schools are not "succeeding."

  • Note on Meyerhoff Scholars Program
  • Posted by Roger Clegg , President and General Counsel at Center for Equal Opportunity on September 9, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • For the record: The Meyerhoff Scholars Program referenced in the article is open to students of all racial and ethnic backgrounds. (The article might be read as suggesting that it is open only to “black and other minority students”; this is not true and, if it were, the program would be illegal.)

  • What about the disabled?
  • Posted by kgotthardt on September 9, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • Unless I missed something, the book does not consider the disabled--especially the learning disabled--who might require more intervention and time to complete courses. There is evidence that high numbers of learning disabled students enroll in community and public colleges. Could it be this large population affects the numbers?

  • graduation rate
  • Posted by Guido Stempel , distinguuished professor emeritus. journalism at Ohio University on September 9, 2009 at 10:15am EDT
  • The program I taught in has a four-year graduatn rate of about 80%, while the rest of our university overall has a four-year graduaton rate of about 50%. Why:
    1) We get better students.
    2) We take advising seriously.
    3) We use GAs to teach very few classes.
    4) Class size for skills courses is 15 ior less.
    At msny highly-reated univeresities, student contact with regular faculty is minimal.

  • Re Mismatch "Debunk[ing]"
  • Posted by Roger Clegg , President and General Counsel at Center for Equal Opportunity on September 9, 2009 at 11:15am EDT
  • “The new book argues that it has conclusive evidence to debunk mismatch theory. The authors used data from their database to compare black men with high school grade-point averages below 3.0 who enrolled in the most selective flagships and those who enrolled in less selective flagships and the least selective flagships. What the authors found was that these students -- who mismatch theory would suggest would do better at less competitive institutions -- actually are most likely to graduate at more competitive flagships. The graduation rate for this cohort of black males at the three selectivity levels of flagships is (starting from the most selective), 46 percent, 40 percent, and 38 percent. So these black males benefit significantly from being at the more competitive institutions.”

    Now, I have not read the book, but the discussion in the article quoted above suggests that the book treats “black men with high school grade-point averages below 3.0” as fungible—that is, that the students meeting this description who go to the more selective schools are no more academically promising than those who go to the less and least selective schools. That’s very dubious: I would think that, ceteris paribus, the students who got into and chose to go to the more selective schools had something to suggest that they were more likely to succeed academically than those who did not go there.

  • Posted by Will Selling on September 9, 2009 at 12:45pm EDT
  • Soc prof brings up a good point. It sounds as though this study focuses strictly on first-year students straight out of high school. Why do we constantly tell kids they have to go to college right after high school? If they lack direction, they can work at a coffee shop or fast food restaurant for a year or two first. If they don't like it, at least it will spur them on to figure out what they do want, instead of procrastinating in life by spending years in college, only to go work in a coffee shop or foast food restaurant upon graduation.

    Also, it sounds as though Asian-Americans are not considered minorities in this study. Is that because they are successful, and do not play the role of "minority?' This article/ study focuses too much on blacks who are not successful, rather than focusing why and how Asians are successful. Emphasize the positive, not the negative.

  • Mismatch hypothesis
  • Posted by Joe at WPI on September 9, 2009 at 12:45pm EDT
  • I agree with Roger Clegg that something is off with using a GPA of below 3.0 as a cut-off to test the mismatch hypothesis. Assuming that students in this group are randomly "assigned" to the more selective and less selective colleges is questionable (to put it mildly). If a student did that in my empirical methods class he'd get a C at best. What else could separate students who got into competitive schools vs. those that did not? The leading candidate in my mind is SAT scores; second is athletic scholarships.

    A better approach would be to construct a logistic regression model with graduation in four (or six) years as the dependent variable, and have independent variables of race, gender, GPA, SAT, and selectivity of college (plus whatever else I've missed in 30 seconds of thought). You could then examine race * selectivity for an interaction effect to test the hypothesis directly, and could also report estimated marginal means as talking points.

    If a statistician sees something wrong or something cleverer, feel free to chime in.

  • Posted by Raoul Ohio on September 9, 2009 at 1:00pm EDT
  • So, what's the big deal about four years? Have they considered dual majors, changing majors, part and full time jobs, internships, etc.?

  • Mr. Clegg's argument assumes perfect information
  • Posted by Asst. Prof., H.Ed. Admin Prgm , Educational Leadership at Less Selective U in the South on September 9, 2009 at 1:00pm EDT
  • which many first generation students, regardless of race do not have. They attend less selective institutions, after being admitted to more highly selective instutions for a range of reasons such as proximity to home, presence of classmates/siblings at less selective U, perceived quality of the football program, and the like. Many of these factors have little, if anything to do with the academic side, student ability, etc. inasmuch as they have to do with not having a good grasp of the higher ed game.

  • Where are other groups?
  • Posted by Phred on September 9, 2009 at 1:15pm EDT
  • Where are the Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asians? At our institution, a majority minority land grant, those are the largest groups, and this article does not seem to speak to their situations. Since each of these has distinctive attitudes towards education and educational achievement and the smaller groups within also vary, better information would have been more helpful.

  • College is not for everyone
  • Posted by WTF on September 9, 2009 at 1:30pm EDT
  • Create higher admission standards and see how retention and completion sky-rocket soon after.

    If Johnny can't read, how can he possibly complete a college degree in 4, 5, or 6 years? He needs at least a year just to take and re-take Remedial English a few times.

    If Sally can't do basic math, how can she possibly pass College Algebra? Oh, wait, that's right...College Algebra has been watered down to Advanced Arithmetic already.

    Anyone else remember when Calculus was the required class at most colleges and universities?

    The shameful fact is that too many students who are attending schools with sketchy requirements and low standards can't even earn their credits for graduation in 6 years.

    Why do so few people want to even consider some of these students cannot and will not benefit from a college education?

  • And another thing ...
  • Posted by Roger Clegg , President and General Counsel at Center for Equal Opportunity on September 9, 2009 at 1:30pm EDT
  • Mismatch theory aside, the book’s own data suggest that the groups most likely to be given admission preferences (blacks and Latinos, especially men) graduate at significantly lower rates than the groups mostly likely to be discriminated against (whites and Asians, especially women). This, in turn, suggests that affirmative action really does lower standards. It also underscores one aspect of the unfairness of such discrimination: Slots being taken from students who, had they been admitted, would have been more likely to graduate than the students to whom their slots were given.

  • Posted by Danny on September 9, 2009 at 1:45pm EDT
  • I attended the University of Illinois as a transfer student for a single semester in 1999. The experience for me resulted was nightmarish to say the least.

    I had a fairly high GPA upon transfer, but I also spent a long time at community college making up classes I hadn't taken in high school and completing every single requirement I needed before I could transfer.

    The end result was being told by deans and academic advisors that I shouldn't have been accepted because I would be spending a total of more than my alloted total of 8-10 semesters in school, that I had wasted my time using up almost all those semesters by going to a community college. A dean gave me three choices, none of which involved sticking around to complete a degree, and I was directed to leave.

    Nothing else mattered to the University: Not my GPA, interests, goal, time I had already invested in a degree, etc. The only thing they were concerned about was the fact that I was not a qualified student because I had spent too much time at a community college. This ultimately led to me dropping out of college and never returning to finish a degree.

    Ideally, I would have loved to have finished a degree in 4 years, but a lot of things made that impossible. One of the downsides of attending a small-town community college is that you are bound by what they DO offer and when. While a full-scale university might offer a required math class 4 times a semesters, a small community college might only offer it once every few years. If a small community college cancels a class due to lack of enrollment, there is less hope that a comparable class will be available to the student. The 4-year-plan also doesn't take into account various family and financial burdens that students might have to face, too. If a student is forced to take a reduced course load for a year due to such burdens, it may keep them in school at the cost of adding on extra semesters and associated tuition and fees in the long run.

  • On Mismatch and Data Availability
  • Posted by Jane Yakowitz , Director, Project SEAPHE at UCLA School of Law on September 9, 2009 at 6:30pm EDT
  • “Conclusive evidence” of anything at all, but most especially something as controversial as the mismatch theory, requires verifiability. Here, the underlying data isn’t made available to the larger research community for replication. Proposals to use the Mellon Foundation’s databases are refereed by an advisory board, and requests for the purpose of replication “must go beyond a general desire to recheck results” (from the College and Beyond Database proposal guidelines). I’m not aware of a serious study of mismatch effects performed on Mellon Foundation data other than, of course, Mr. Bowen’s. I also noted the selection effects problem identified by other posters. I trust the analysis is not as flawed as the article made it seem.

    I’m looking forward to reading the book. I support the broader message that colleges ought to be more accountable to their students, and that the public ought to focus on outcomes rather than enrollment.

  • A Bad Book
  • Posted by Dr. Anonymous on September 10, 2009 at 5:00am EDT
  • The commenters have indicated how and to what extent the book under consideration is flawed. I add only the following: The first sentence in the article reads: "American's flagship public universities are failing to graduate enought students..." It should read: Minority students, especially Blacks, ae failing to graduate America's flagship public universities...