No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Financial pressures, encompassing factors such as tuition, fees, books, and work-life balance, consistently substantially influence student success in higher education. Existing research highlights finances' significant role in a student's withdrawal decision. This study aimed to assess the impact of financial aid awards on the retention, persistence, and completion of students enrolled in two community colleges in Alabama, primarily those residing in rural or urban areas. The research focused on the retention and completion outcomes of first-time, full-time students who began their enrollment at two community colleges, UCC and RCC, in the fall of 2017 and received financial aid. Utilizing a quantitative causal-comparative research design, the study analyzed data measuring the retention, persistence, and completion of first-year students who received financial assistance compared to those who did not receive financial aid. A Chi-square test investigated the relationship between financial aid awards and student success. The analysis of the study results revealed that there was no significant difference in the relationship between the retention and completion rates of first-time, full-time students who received financial aid awards and those who did not receive financial aid.

The main purpose of this research was to examine the dimensions of affordability of public undergraduate education, focusing on a single state during a particular period of time. The main research question was: What are the dimensions of affordability of public undergraduate education in Virginia? The study examined three dimensions between the years 1981 and 2000: 1) per capita disposable income (adjusted for inflation) in Virginia, 2) financial aid at the state and federal levels, and 3) the burden of a loan for college students. In addition, the study explored several possible influences on these dimensions, including partisan control of the U.S. presidency and Congress and partisan control of the Virginia governor and state legislature. Although this study focuses on the outcomes in a single state (undergraduate, public institution enrollments in Virginia), the national data were explored because states often determine how much they are able to contribute after the national contributions are taken into consideration. The key dependent variable was undergraduate enrollments at Virginia public higher education institutions. Do enrollments tend to increase, decrease, or remain constant when any of the dimensions of affordability increase, decrease, or remain constant? Two-year and four-year public undergraduate institutions in Virginia made up the sample of institutions examined. This research focused on the time frame of 1981 through 2000. The rationales for this specific time period were that 1) appropriate data are available for these years, and 2) it allows a big picture with contrary views of education policy at both the national and state levels. During this time period, Ronald Reagan (1981-1988), George H.W. Bush (1989-1992), and Bill Clinton (1993-2000) each served as president. Three consecutive years of decreases in Virginia's public undergraduate enrollments occurred in 1988-1990. 1990 was the highest year-to-year decrease at negative 4.79% overall. 1990 was the largest decrease in 4-year public institution enrollments in VA while 1988 was the largest decrease in enrollments for 2-year public institution enrollments in Virginia. The following things happened during these years of enrollment decreases, as they related to the dimensions of affordability and the named influences. First 1989 and 1991, were both years that the Virginia public higher education state appropriations were less than 1percent. Even though 1990 itself looked more positive with a 13.43 percent increase, the years preceding and following 1990 were not so positive. Second, when people can afford more, it appears to have an inverse relationship with public institution enrollments. When people can afford more, they most likely enroll at private institutions and when they can afford less, they enroll at public institutions. The highest enrollment year for 2-year public institutions was in 1985, which followed the second largest decrease to disposable income. The inverse relationship is less strong with four-year public institutions and is more evident in the two-year institutions. Thirdly, the 1993-1994 academic year marked the year when the number of loans for higher education appears that they will forever outnumber the amount of grants. This being said, the issue of affordability is really now a matter for after college years when the payback period for these loans begins versus during college attendance. Tuition costs rose by over 80% in four-year public institutions and by over 85% in two-year institutions while disposable income only increased by 36.% over the same time period. The issue of affordability should therefore be more closely examined during the payback period and could perhaps sway someone from enrolling knowing that this payback period is inevitable for most. / Master of Arts

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012 (CAA) was an omnibus spending bill that changed Pell grant funding in response to a budgetary shortfall after a four-year investment in student financial aid. The CAA occurred at a time of state disinvestment coupled with increasing tuition and fees. Through the lens of resource dependence and academic capitalism as a conceptual framework, I used panel data in an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression to explore the impact of the CAA on Pell grant revenues. I included an interaction term to specifically address the impact of the CAA on public regional universities (PRUs) versus other institutions. Results indicated that the interaction effect between CAA and PRU was jointly significant. The average Pell award per student at PRUs was $13 less than other institutions before the implementation of the CAA. The average Pell award per student at PRUs increased after the implementation of the CAA; however, the average Pell award per student at PRUs was still $20 less than other institutions. Results indicated that the percentage of students receiving Pell awards was a significant and positive predictor of an average Pell award. Interestingly, institutions designated as minority-serving institutions (MSIs) were also significant and positive predictors of an average Pell award. Admission rate was a significant and negative predictor of an average Pell award but offered little practical meaning. The results highlighted the ongoing fiscal disparities between PRUs and other institutions, particularly as a growing number of MSIs educate students who rely on Pell grants to attend college.

This review is an academic report used to provide recommendation and an in-depth look into The NOCCA Institute. The report includes an analysis of the organization’s structure, programs, finances, and my internship activities; Spring - Summer 2015. Additionally the report includes a SWOT Analysis and my recommendations based on the analysis and best practices of similar organizations.

No description available.

In his 2015 State of the Union Address, President Obama announced “America’s College Promise,” a plan to make community college free for all American families making less than $200,000. In this thesis, I provide an analysis of the plan and provide an evaluation of its potential impact on the education attainment gap in the United States. I also evaluate the plan’s various components and assess its potential impact on community college student enrollment, completion, and transfer to four-year universities. Lastly, I offer recommendations for improvement.

This qualitative research project focused on the interviews of 27 low socio-economic students at a research university in the southwestern United States. The students had already withdrawn from the university or were in the process of withdrawing. The study seeks to provide increased understanding of how students negotiate the decision-making process to withdraw from the first university they attended after high school. The theoretical lenses of student departure theories (Astin, 1993; Bean, 1983; Tierney, 1992; and Tinto, 1993) and decision-making theories (Becker, 1976; Frank, 1987; Kahneman, 2003; March, 1994; Scott, 2000) were combined. The Decision-Making Process Model of Student Departure is offered as a new theoretical framework that combines decision-making theories and student retention theories. This conceptualization is unlike other student departure models because it includes the proposition that forces push at the student from within the institution and forces pull them from outside the institution. In addition, it is different from other student departure models because it includes the discussion about how students think about their process to withdraw - it is not meant to describe their behaviors. Financial, academic and psychological stresses (from both within and outside the institution) influenced how the students negotiated the decision-making process to leave the institution. The students did not seek out institutional agents (advisors or faculty members) for advice when they were struggling academically. They developed their own strategies or went to their family members for advice, many of whom had never been to college.