The purpose of this study is to analyze the evolution of the federal government's role in developing policies designed to assist low-income students prepare for and enroll in college. Specifically, the study analyzed public laws beginning in 1964 with the first federal policy directed to the issue and extending thirty years to 1993. Seventy-six laws were analyzed. This study contributes to the field of higher education policy research in two ways. First, the study uses an historical evolutionary approach to describe the landscape of federal programs designed to assist low-income students prepare for and enroll in college. This study, for the first time, applies Hearn's (2001) framework of primary program vehicles, policy objectives, target populations, and delivery systems to explain the evolution of federal policy in this area over time. This study found that Congress enacted 30 primary program vehicles between 1964 and 1993. These primary program vehicles were enacted in fits and starts resulting in a proliferation of vehicles offering overlapping services. Examining the evolution of the vehicles over time shows increased Congressional attention at the end of the period covered by the study. Congress took a fragmented approach to policy objectives. This study reveals that a clear focus on access was supplemented by a focus on preparation, information, and cost. By addressing these objectives, Congress focused on the barriers – academic, social, and financial – that low-income students face in accessing higher education. Congress charted a clear path with target populations. This study found that Congressional attention slowly shifted away from low-income students between 1964 and 1993. From the mid-1960s to the 1970s, low-income students were the main target population. By the late-1970s, Congressional attention shifted to include some students who were not low-income. By the end of the period covered by the study, the focus was clearly on middle-income students. One area of relative stability was delivery systems. This study reveals that Congress primarily provided assistance through campus-oriented vehicles rather than through student-oriented vehicles. On the whole, the approach taken by Congress to the delivery systems is restrictive because it limits the choices that low-income students have in where to attend college. Although Congress attended to access, it did not maintain its commitment to assist low-income students exclusively; instead, its attention gradually shifted to middle-income students. Combining analysis of primary program vehicles, policy objectives, target populations, and delivery systems shows that Congress failed to focus enough on low-income students to close the higher education access gap for low-income students. Second, this study fills the gap in attention that has been paid to whether Congress used laws other than the Higher Education Act to address the income-based disparities in access to higher education. This study found that primary program vehicles were enacted under the Higher Education Act, the Public Health Service Act, the Economic Opportunity Act, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Job Training Partnership Act, and the Energy Policy Act. By including laws that were passed outside of the higher education arena, the study also reveals the way Congress has attended to the college access issue in areas such as public health, K-12 education, job training, and energy. In doing so, it shows that 46.67% of federal action around college access is addressed outside of the Higher Education Act and its reauthorizations. Finally, this study builds what is arguably the most comprehensive database of federal laws directed at college access for low-income students (Table 3.1). This study also contributes an enumeration of the primary program vehicles enacted under those laws (Tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4). By providing a more complete description of the actions that Congress has taken in its attempts to address the gap, this study also provides future researchers, evaluators, advocacy groups, and policymakers with fertile ground for further exploring the federal role in assisting low-income students to prepare for and enroll in college. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Summer Semester 2015. / June 26, 2015. / Includes bibliographical references. / Lora A. Cohen-Vogel, Professor Co-Directing Dissertation; David A. Tandberg, Professor Co-Directing Dissertation; Ralph S. Brower, University Representative; Shouping Hu, Committee Member; Patrice Iatarola, Committee Member.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fsu.edu/oai:fsu.digital.flvc.org:fsu_253167 |
| Contributors | Venters, Monoka L. (authoraut), Cohen-Vogel, Lora A. (professor co-directing dissertation), Tandberg, David A. (professor co-directing dissertation), Brower, Ralph S. (university representative), Hu, Shouping (committee member), Iatarola, Patrice (committee member), Florida State University (degree granting institution), College of Education (degree granting college), Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies (degree granting department) |
| Publisher | Florida State University, Florida State University |
| Source Sets | Florida State University |
| Language | English, English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text, text |
| Format | 1 online resource (174 pages), computer, application/pdf |
| Rights | This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). The copyright in theses and dissertations completed at Florida State University is held by the students who author them. |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds