College Quality Compact: Case Study

Community colleges have roots dating back to the 1900’s and became more homogenous with the help of the 1960’s California Master Plan for Higher Education. In the past, community colleges were tuition-free or subsidized by local property taxes and state appropriations (Cohen, M. & Brawer, F. 2008). Currently, community college financing has been unpredictable “due to the discretionary nature of state support and the vagaries of funding initiatives” (Phelan, 2014, pg. 7). Nevertheless, colleges continue to be dependent on state appropriations and local property taxes as the primary source of revenue. Due to the instability associated with appropriations, community colleges must develop dynamic budgets that have the capacity to overcome fluctuations in revenue and enable the college to offer affordable access to higher education to its constituents.

The topic of this paper is the states’ decreasing financial support of higher education, the reaction and response from institutions who have lost funding, and the creative ways public institutions are locating additional streams of revenue. States have been the primary backer of public institutions, but since the recession states have shown less commitment financially while still heavily regulating higher education. As a result some institutions have had to change their practices while others have challenged their state’s regulations all together. Many have speculated that state funding may never return to its former highs. Rather than make an enemy of the state, some schools have discovered new and unconvential ways of raising funds for their institution.

Education these days is vital for many job titles. It can become difficult for many people to receive a job without a high school and especially a college education. Most jobs in America, from sales manager to registered nurse and even a construction worker in some cases, require an education past high school. With the cost of college, at average ten thousand dollars at state schools, not accounting for living quarters or even meals, it is leaving many students in large overbearing debt. Many have looked for the solution of this strenuous debt and one of their solution is to make the first two years debt free. By making the first two years of college debt free, it would encourage more people to attend college, expand the educational horizons of our nation, increase employment rates of America, and it could be done without causing a larger debt on America.

Abstract: This paper will discuss the Federal Pell Grant and the legislation behind it as well as the Higher Education Act of 1965 and it’s reforms since then. This appears purpose is to show the faults within these programs and to then show possible ways people have tried to reform it. The final part of this paper will be my opinion on how the legislation can be fixed along with using data and information from recent research done on the subject. It is the hopes that these recommendations will then be used to further stabilize this piece of legislation in the future.

The amount of students that attend an out-of-state university for college is about 13.7% (“Percentage of Out-of-State Students at Public Universities”). This statistic is remarkably low, considering the growing amount of young adults attending college. In-state tuition is expensive for most citizens, as out-of-state costs are completely unaffordable. Out-of-state tuition costs can easily triple the amount of in-state costs, meaning most students find themselves attending an in-state university without a second thought. The reason for these high out-of-state tuition fees is due to the state government believing that these extra costs are necessary because of tax dollars. State schools are funded by the state’s

College is a head turner, eye catcher, and attention grabber. From making the decision to even attend to selecting the perfect school, the whole experience turns out to be incredibly stressful and multiple aspects go into what seems simple at first glance. The cost of attending college is on the rise. Parents and students anxiously await scholarship letters to help with these rising costs of education. State schools usually offer a financial advantage, but a new “law” is being proposed - free in-state college tuition to those students with a 3.5 GPA or higher. Few benefits are available and numerous disadvantages are present when it comes to this recently produced regulation. A few negative factors in this situation will be covered and the explanations will go into depth to prove that this idea is too good to be true. Even though the conception of free college is enticing, the cons outweigh the pros.

Only four students went straight to the workforce, when a century ago, this was not the case. With students now consistently going straight to college after high school, state universities should be free to state residents since we have public high schools. In Kalamazoo, Michigan, students who attend high school in Kalamazoo starting in ninth grade, can have from sixty-five to one hundred percent of their tuition covered (Teicher). This is known as “The Promise.” The Promise guarantees any student from Kalamazoo a scholarship that pays either a majority or all of their tuition (Teicher). This scholarship can be used for any state school, fifteen private schools, and other state schools around the United States that are less than the highest tuition in Michigan (Teicher). Since The Promise’s first wave of scholarships, there has been definite improvements in college attendance. For black students, there has been a three percent rise in college attendance and overall forty-eight percent of scholarship recipients graduate college (Teicher). While this has shown an impact, there certainly are other factors that lead to the fifty-two percent that do not graduate, such as not being taught time management, academic skills, or how to take advantage of their sources (Teicher). Despite this fallback, “The Promise” has definitely started an era of higher college graduation rates and those who lack financial support a method of

College tuition has increased throughout the past decade, with little change on making the costs more affordable. With the recession state spending on higher education has decreased by 20 percent, and colleges have raised tuition, passing the costs onto students and their families. This paper will analyze Hillary Clinton’s New College Compact, and how the compact will alleviate the cost barriers and allow for affordable, higher education. Using Standfort & Moulton’s multilevel and effective policy implementation practices, this paper will discuss the merits of the plan and how well the College Compact attempts to solve college affordability, but does not take into effect the unintended consequences, such as, actor cooperation or the specifics on how the policy will gain funding.

The Federal government, state government, and Board of Trustees should consider creating policies that are aimed to reduce college tuition because seeing the monetary cost of attendance may deter many people from pursuing a degree which will affect unemployment rates and eventually the economy. Mark Pocan once said, “By making college unaffordable and student loans unbearable, we risk deterring out best and brightest from pursuing higher education and securing a good paying job” (Pocan 1). Education is a fundamental human right, and it needs to be accessible to everyone. The purpose of this paper is to persuade the government to help make

College in general has been questionable for quite some time about whether it should be free or at least lowered in the tuition prices. In this discussion, only community college is in question on whether or not it should be free. Most states are even offering a program that allows high school students to earn college credits before ever even graduating. This is one of a few ways that they are trying to provide “low-cost or no-cost tuition for community colleges” (“Free Community College”). Throughout the “At Issue: Should community college tuition be free?” published in CQ Researcher, Walter G. Bumphus and Richard Vedder display their unique approaches on the issue of community college tuition. Bumphus argues that community college should

Presently, the availability of educational opportunities at the college and university level is a critical state and personal interest given the needs of the state for a well-educated workforce which has never been greater. Too many, the focal point of attending college is receiving a high paying job in the future. Unfortunately, in most states, tuition is on the rise and students who come from low-income families find themselves struggling to fund their education. According to legislatures, “The cost of college in New Jersey, as in the nation, continues to grow faster than the rate of inflation.” (State of New Jersey 1). In the national financial aid policy resources that are typically given to the neediest families are shifting towards

The readings from “The Postsecondary State Policy Network”, led by Jobs for the Future, is a multistate partnership that is assists states in setting policies that will lead to student success and completion. The supporters of this initiative are Achieving the Dream, Completion by Design and Student Success Center. The primary focus is supporting structured student pathways from connection to college through completion. The four pathways are connection, entry, progress and completion (2014).

The primary responsibility of the federal government in higher education is to ensure equal educational opportunities. This is accomplished through enforcement of equal opportunity in education through civil rights rules, regulations, and litigation; and, through the creation and support of a variety of federal student assistance programs (Longanecker, 2008). The federal government has set policies that provided funding for those who could not afford to attend an institution of higher learning in the past. At one point higher education was limited to those with privileged background but with programs that included the G.I. Bill and the Pell Grants introduced by the federal government, a college education was open to greater number of individuals. Even though it is thought that legislation is the guiding light of public policy, but at the federal level, appropriations of law greatly shapes the U.S. government’s role in higher education (Longanecker, 2008). This is seen with the budget and appropriations process and how it has had a significant influence of the federal financial aid policy which has affected higher education and the funding of students. This has allowed low-to middle -income individual to attend. Higher education became a ladder to opportunity (Mettler,

Higher education costs have been increasing at a rapid pace, faster than inflation for the economy as a whole, for the past fifty years. It started in the 1960’s when the federal government passed the Higher Education Act to increase the amount of people able to afford and attend college. Regardless of the Unites States Government efforts to increase the affordability of college, federal aid programs have not risen to expectations due to the ever-increasing college prices. To lower the price of college, the government needs to cut back on student financial spending to go only to the lowest income families and create tax incentives for families to start saving up on their own.

Historically, many colleges have received state funding based on how many full-time equivalent students are enrolled at the beginning of the semester (NCSL, 2015). This model provides incentives for colleges to enroll students, and thus provide access to postsecondary education, but this model does not necessarily provide incentives for institutions to help students successfully complete degree programs (NCSL, 2015). In fact, such PBF models are reinforcing disparities within higher education and doing little to move the needle to completion (Douglas-Gabriel, 2016). PBF poses a host of questions: Is it a problem? Is public policy redressing the problem? Who are the major advocacy coalitions influencing policymaking? What are some alternatives