Search

Dual enrollment--in which students take college credit-bearing courses when still in high school--is becoming increasingly popular. Community college programs account for about 70% of the dual enrollment that more than one million high school students participate in each year nationwide. Yet dual enrollment can be a big financial burden for community colleges. In most parts of the country, community colleges receive less funding per dual enrollment student than they receive for their regular, non-dual-enrollment students. If community colleges are to continue to provide broad access to high-quality programs, they need to be able to sustain these programs. In this paper, we consider the economics of dual enrollment from the perspective of the community college. We illustrate how dual enrollment may not be financially sustainable in colleges and states where it is offered at a discount, but we also show how community colleges can structure their programs to be more efficient. To support our analysis, we describe case studies to show the conditions under which dual enrollment is affordable and efficient.

We demonstrate the social efficiency of investing in high-quality early childhood education using newly collected data from the HighScope Perry Preschool Project. The data analyzed are the longest follow-up of any randomized early childhood education program. Annual observations of participant outcomes up to midlife allow us to provide a cost-benefit analysis without relying on forecasts. Adult outcomes on the participants' children and siblings allow us to quantify spillover benefits. The program generates a benefit-cost ratio of 6.0 (p-value = 0.03). Spillover benefits increase this ratio to 7.5 (p-value = 0.00).

The third ACECQA Occasional Paper examines activities to promote consistency and efficiency in the implementation and administration of the National Quality Framework (NQF). Striving for consistency and efficiency is a collaborative effort between the eight state and territory regulatory authorities, the Australian Government and ACECQA. This paper highlights the breadth and depth of collaboration to identify, implement and review approaches to promote consistency and efficiency under the NQF. It also includes case studies to illustrate in more detail how certain activities contribute to consistency and efficiency.

College attendance is a risky investment. But students may not recognize when they are at risk for failure, and financial aid introduces the possibility for moral hazard. Academic performance standards can serve three roles in this context: signaling expectations for success, providing incentives for increased student effort, and limiting financial losses. Such standards have existed in federal need-based aid programs for nearly 40 years in the form of Satisfactory Academic Progress (SAP) requirements, yet have received virtually no academic attention. In this paper, we sketch a simple model to illustrate not only student responses to standards but also the tradeoffs faced by a social planner weighing whether to set performance standards in the context of need-based aid. We then use regression discontinuity and difference-in-difference designs to examine the consequences of SAP failure. In line with theoretical predictions, we find heterogeneous effects in the short term, with negative impacts on persistence but positive effects on grades for students who remain enrolled. After three years, the negative effects appear to dominate. Effects on credits attempted are 2-3 times as large as effects on credits earned, suggesting that standards increase the efficiency of aid expenditures. But it also appears to exacerbate inequality in higher education by pushing out low-performing low-income students faster than their equally low-performing, but higher-income peers. A table on DID Estimated Effects of Failing GPA Performance Standard At End of Year 1, No Covariates is appended.

Sustainable Development Goal 4, to ensure inclusive and quality education for all and promote lifelong learning, sets out a grand ambition for education systems around the globe to achieve not just universal primary schooling, but to expand universal education from early childhood to secondary school and achieve relevant learning outcomes. While the Millennium Development Goals helped propel millions of children into primary school, meeting this larger goal in the coming decade and a half will require accelerated progress and a break from business as usual. This report, prepared by researchers from the Center for Universal Education at the Brookings Institution for the International Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity, describes the major gaps in education and the need for innovation to meet ambitious goals. Not only are children in low- and middle-income countries about 100 years behind their peers in measures of schooling, but rapid advances in technology, changes to the world of work, and the complex global challenges we face today call for a broader set of competencies every young person will need to be successful. To thrive in a changing world, young people will need skills and competencies that include information literacy, flexibility, critical thinking and collaboration in addition to academic knowledge. To achieve this broader vision of education will take new approaches that can reach children who have not yet been reached, get better results in learning outcomes, and drive down costs. This study surveyed the current landscape of innovations in education by conducting a scan and compiling an inventory of programs, schools, and tools currently being used around the globe to achieve these aims. To be as inclusive as possible, the scan included innovations which have not yet been proven through rigorous evaluations as well as many small-scale innovations.

This is the executive summary for "Structuring State Policy for Student Success: Applying Incentives in the Volunteer State." For many years, state funding to public colleges and universities in Tennessee and across the nation was distributed based primarily on enrollment, rather than degree production or efficiency. This led or allowed institutions to seek more funding through efforts such as boosting enrollment and engaging in mission creep, with little incentive for completion. To address this ill effect and promote better outcomes tied to state goals, Tennessee has implemented two primary types of direct economic incentives for institutions: performance funding (1979) and an outcomes-based funding formula for public higher education (2010). Under these initiatives, institutional performance, as measured by the funding model, leads directly to the institution's amount and share of state appropriations for institutional operating expenses. In Tennessee's experience, incentives work. This experience is pertinent to other states because: with only 36 percent of its adult residents holding a postsecondary certificate or higher, Tennessee has a long way to go in terms of educational attainment; it has made substantial strides in a short time; and it shares enough characteristics with enough states to make its experience relevant across a variety of state contexts. [For the full report, see ED587412.]

Prepared for a Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) Strategic Education Governance Learning Seminar, this working paper analyses the functioning of accountability mechanisms in the Flemish school system from a complexity perspective, particularly accountability of equity funding in primary and secondary education. The paper shows that accountability mechanisms are not highly developed, specifically to the Flemish government and to the public. As a result, it proved hard to examine if resources were used effectively and efficiently. The paper argues that a long-term perspective and step-by-step approach is needed to create a culture of evaluation and accountability. It is emphasised that a long-term strategy should start with building horizontal and more specifically professional accountability mechanisms, based on a clear picture of how accountability relates to the overall aims and vision of education. The paper suggests furthermore to strengthen the use of knowledge, both tacit knowledge among others from students, as well as knowledge from research.

Prepared for a Strategic Education Governance learning seminar, this working paper analyses the ways in which the Dutch government tried to reach overarching goals in education, in a system characterised by a high degree of distributed autonomy of education institutions and the participation of multiple actors, and consequently a government highly dependent on the collaboration with stakeholders. The paper introduces four perspectives on governance: 'traditional public administration', 'new public management', 'network governance' and 'societal resilience'. In practice, these perspectives do not exclude each other. Based on three cases the paper shows that the Dutch government used simultaneously different perspectives in each case and across the cases, in various combinations. Each combination proved to have its pros and cons. The paper argues for a deliberate consideration and choice of governance perspectives as an important element of policy preparation.

This paper assesses the impact on economic growth of increased efficiency of public spending in primary and lower-secondary education. Higher efficiency in public spending in schools can bolster growth through two main channels. On the one hand, it can allow a transfer of labour from the public sector to the business sector at unchanged educational output. On the other, it can enhance educational output and productivity of the future labour force at unchanged public employment and expenditures. The paper argues that, in most cases, efficiency gains might have larger effects on GDP in the long run if they are used to increase educational outputs rather than to reduce inputs. A 10% increase on educational output might raise GDP by, on average, 3% to 6% in the long run in most OECD countries, whereas using efficiency gains to transfer resources to the business sector might have an impact of less than 1% on GDP. However, some trade-off can appear in the short run because input-decreasing efficiency gains materialise more rapidly on growth than improvements in output-increasing efficiency. (A bibliography is included. Contains 12 footnotes, 3 figures and 2 tables.)

Community colleges are under pressure to increase completion rates and efficiency despite limited evidence of the economic consequences of different reform strategies. We introduce an economic model of student course pathways linked to college expenditures and revenues. Using detailed data from a single college, we calculate baseline efficiency and differences in efficiency for students who follow different pathways. We simulate changes in output, expenditures, revenues, net revenues, and efficiency assuming that the college meets particular performance targets. Findings indicate substantial differences in efficiency across pathways and significant differences in efficiency across strategies to help students complete college. They also suggest that increasing the completion rate is difficult and typically requires additional resources beyond the costs of implementing particular strategies. The model has wide practical application for community colleges. Appended are: (1) Measurement of the College Completion Rate; and (2) Outcomes for "U.S.A. Community College". (Contains 7 tables and 12 footnotes.)

OECD's Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) has worked on Open Educational Resources (OER) in the past, which led to the publication "Giving Knowledge for Free--the Emergence of Open Educational Resources" (2007). This working paper thus builds on exploratory and forward-looking research in CERI and invites countries to consider the policy implications of the expansion of OER, its benefits and associated challenges. A small OER expert group was established to discuss the subject, link it to other relevant developments in the field, and develop a draft questionnaire for member countries in order to collect information regarding the policy context related to OER. The expert group met in June 2011 and for a second time in September 2011. The questionnaire was sent to the 34 OECD member countries in August 2011. It outlined a short informative note about the benefits and challenges of OER. The responses to the questionnaire are analysed in this document. Annexed are: (1) Preamble; and (2) Questionnaire. (Contains 7 figures and 18 notes.)

This study provides a literature review on school funding formulas across OECD countries. It looks at three salient questions from a comparative perspective: i) What kind of school formula funding schemes exist and how are they used, particularly for promoting the needs of socially disadvantaged pupils?; ii) How do school formula funding regimes perform according to equity and efficiency standards?; iii) What are the unresolved issues? Formula funding of schools, as opposed to administrative discretion and bidding, relies on a mathematical formula containing a number of variables (e.g. number of pupils), each of which has attached to it a cash amount to determine school budgets. Across OECD countries there are four main groups of variables in such formulas: i) student number and grade level-based; ii) needs-based; iii) curriculum or educational programme-based and; iv) school characteristics-based. Sometimes output and outcome-related variables are also used. The performance of formula funding compared to alternative funding regimes is dependent on the details of the formula and on the wider education policy environment. Formula funding systems typically advance transparency and accountability at low administrative costs and in combination with matching complementary policy tools they can also contribute to equity and efficiency. Currently, there are several ongoing debates across OECD countries: First, there is an inherent trade-off between transparency/simplicity and sensitivity to local conditions/complexity. Second, knowing how much educating to a given standard costs is problematic and subject to heated debates. The main reason for this is that the causal relationship between education costs and student performance is largely unknown and even the identified impacts appear to be relatively small. Third, even though resources are allocated according to need estimation, they might not be devoted to these needs. Fourth, it is still undecided whether the introduction of school formula funding regimes has changed actual school funding practice. (Contains 11 footnotes.)

The implementation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) over the coming years will provide an opportunity for K-12 and postsecondary educators to share and use data effectively to support alignment between the sectors and reduce the need for remedial education. This brief describes how these groups can work together to make the most of data and their shared expertise to increase the proportion of students who are college ready. It also provides a framework for collecting data and information on the critical goal of improving college readiness, including data on related outcomes, processes, and inputs. In an upcoming report, the authors will provide recommendations for key data and other information that can be used to support specific goals and strategies being developed by Affinity Network teams. (Contains 9 references and resources and 2 footnotes.)

With California's public higher education system facing massive funding cuts and an increasingly diverse demography, the University of California recently established a commission to discuss policy options to shape the future of the ten campus system. The University of California Commission on the Future is chaired by UC Board of Regent Russell S. Gould and consists of other board members, faculty, a number of campus Chancellors, and representatives of the students, staff, alumni, and the business and labor communities. The commission will use working groups to reach out to the entire UC community and an array of experts inside and outside the system--including California State University and the state's community colleges--to re-examine key questions, including: How can UC best meet the needs of California and at the same time maintain access, quality and affordability in a time of diminishing resources? What educational delivery models will both maintain quality and improve efficiency for the university's future? What is the appropriate size and shape of the university going forward?; How can traditional and alternative revenue streams be maximized in support of UC's mission? This paper is a version of the presentation provided by UC President Emeritus Richard Atkinson to the commission on November 12, 2009. (Contains 2 footnotes.)

The key drivers of technical and further education (TAFE) institutes' systems for monitoring and evaluating effectiveness and efficiency are accountability for government funding, compliance with legislation and quality assurance requirements. The need to supplement government funding with commercial income requires institutes to understand the training markets in which they operate and to maintain productive networks with industry and local communities. This paper provides an account of the management strategies and processes that TAFE institutes use to evaluate their performance. It concludes that institutes use similar practices to understand their business and it provides some suggestions for the type of information that would be beneficial. Two appendices are included: (1) State strategic objectives; and (2) Examples of information that states are required to provide to state funding bodies. (Contains 1 table and 19 footnotes.) [Additional information relating to this research is available in the support document: "Tracking Our Success: How TAFE Institutes Evaluate Their Effectiveness and Efficiency--Case Studies." See ED507215.]