Search

For decades, college tuition costs have been skyrocketing, yet state financial aid has failed to meet the increasing economic needs of college students -- leaving many young people with the choice of bridging the financial gap by taking out student loans or not attending college at all. This pressing issue of rising college tuition is not just a matter of economic inconvenience; it is a harbinger of deepening racial and socioeconomic inequalities. The lack of financial aid disproportionately deters Black and Latino students and students from low-income backgrounds from pursuing higher education and earning a college degree. In this report, we explore state financial aid funding and associated program requirements in 10 distinct states: California, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington. In it, we shed light on the 12 key eligibility requirements that often serve as barriers for students of color, students from low-income backgrounds, undocumented students, and justice-impacted students to afford college: (1) Program type (Need, Merit, or Need and Merit); (2) FAFSA completion required; (3) Alternative to FAFSA; (4) Low-income requirement; (5) Available without standardized test score; (6) Available without mandated GPA; (7) Marginalized student populations included; (8) FAFSA as a state high-school graduation requirement; (9) Institution types eligible; (10) Average undergraduate cost of attendance (COA) for in-state students (2022-23 academic year); (11) Annual award amount description; and (12) Enrollment intensity. This analysis is designed to help educators, policymakers, and advocates better understand the barriers, strengths, limitations, and influences that state financial aid programs can have on the ability of students of color and students from low-income backgrounds to access and afford college.

Postsecondary education is associated with achieving economic self-sufficiency and other positive outcomes. Young people in foster care face challenges pursuing postsecondary education, which can lead to them being less likely than their peers to enroll in college and less likely to earn a degree when enrolled. One federal initiative meant to address this issue is the Chafee Education and Training Voucher (ETV) program. The ETV program was created through a 2001 Congressional amendment to the 1999 John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Act. This report highlights the experiences of young people who have experienced foster care and received ETVs to help fund their postsecondary education. Eighty-one young people in nine states were interviewed. [This report builds on work originally funded by the US Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation.]

In an era in which public postsecondary institutions increasingly face budget constraints, the state residency of students has become an important factor in complex decisions on tuition-setting policies and enrollment management. This report examines the current trends and impact of out-of-state tuition premiums -- defined as the additional amount of tuition and fees for nonresident students -- at public four-year institutions in the U.S. Regional approaches to reducing out-of-state tuition premiums are described, and past research on the effects of tuition premiums is summarized.

Community colleges are mission-driven institutions committed to access and community needs. They serve a diverse population: The majority of students are employed, so they have to balance work with school; about one-third are first-generation, so they are navigating an unfamiliar system for the first time in their families; and 15% are single parents, juggling child care along with course load. With this understanding that students are people with complex needs and responsibilities, community colleges are innovating in the ways they are delivering wraparound supports -- sometimes referred to as basic needs supports -- that address nonacademic barriers to college success. (Common examples of wraparound supports are mental health supports and services, emergency funds and stipends, and housing and food assistance.) Enhanced wraparound supports can lead to higher rates of retention and completion for students. This Policy Brief explores supports offered by individual institutions, as well as broader and coordinated approaches that encompass states or entire systems. It cites examples from current state legislation and programs that support these efforts.

An estimated 17% to 30% of new teachers in the U.S. leave the profession within their first 5 years of teaching. Some challenges that prompt new teachers to leave the field include stress, lack of appropriate support, and feeling unprepared to handle behavioral and academic issues among their students. Research supports the finding that teachers who receive appropriate supports stay in the teaching field at rates more than twice those of teachers who lack these supports. However, only a small number of teachers have access to these supports. This brief provides resources that highlight examples of strategies, programs, and initiatives that help states, local education agencies, and school districts address the shortage of newly certified teachers. [For the other briefs in the series, see ED624965, ED624966, ED624967, ED624970, ED624971, and ED624972.]

One year after the COVID-19 pandemic forced state and school leaders across the nation and around the world to immediately close school buildings, the lasting impact on students is increasingly evident: Months of online learning and limited in-person interaction with educators, coaches and mentors have led to gaps in learning, and unknown emotional impacts on millions of K12 students and educators. Experiences of the past year have brought deeper understanding and greater clarity on how best to organize schooling and deliver instruction in a way that minimizes health risks and maximizes learning and engagement. Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and National Governors Association (NGA) analyzed emerging state efforts to accelerate student learning this summer and during the 2021-22 school year. They reviewed available state plans, websites, media reports and gubernatorial State of the State addresses for most states. Because each state is at different stages in their planning, in many cases, the documents reviewed were initial drafts, plan outlines (with specifics still being developed) or the first in a series of resources being developed. This memo provides an overview of notable strategies and trends that were identified through this analysis, and is organized around four major steps, which serve as the framing for this memo. Along with describing the activities states are taking as part of each step, this memo includes a range of state examples and links to related resources. As state approaches continue to evolve and plans are finalized, states are encouraged to share their detailed strategies with CCSSO, NGA and the field. The four major steps states are taking include: (1) Getting organized and understanding what needs to happen; (2) Using summer 2021 to accelerate learning; (3) Supporting more students to be successful learners; and (4) Tackling other challenges: Future considerations.

The secondary-to-postsecondary transition is a critically important step on a student's path toward economic success. The majority of jobs in the United States continue to require some sort of postsecondary attainment, whether that be a bachelor's degree, associate's degree, or other college coursework. However, the nation loses students as they progress through secondary and postsecondary education. Further, this problem disproportionately affects students of color, particularly Black and Latinx students, who are 20 percent less likely than other students to earn a college-level credential. This brief offers policy-based solutions and examples that can support greater alignment and partnerships across K-12 and postsecondary education, promote scaling, and, ultimately, ensure that every young person has the support necessary for success.

College students, staff, and faculty all across the country are demanding greater racial and socioeconomic justice in higher education, where longstanding inequities create barriers for students who are Black, Latino, or from low-income backgrounds to earn a postsecondary degree. In response, policymakers and higher education leaders have made public statements confirming their commitment to racial justice and equity more broadly. Statements, however, are just a start. What matters most are the policy decisions that directly impact the lives of students of color and students from low-income backgrounds. One set of policy decisions that higher education advocates are calling into question is how state leaders allocate resources and funds. "Re-Imagining Outcomes-Based Funding: Using Metrics to Foster Higher Education Equity" analyzes how well existing state policies address equity concerns and makes recommendations for designing and implementing outcomes-based funding (OBF) policies that better advance equity. The report looks at 33 states that have allocated funding to two-year or four-year public institutions (or both) through at least one OBF policy. The report introduces five key metrics to help state leaders develop equity-focused outcomes-based funding policies. It analyzes how well existing state policies address equity concerns and concludes with specific recommendations for both designing and implementing outcomes-based funding policies that advance equity. It also includes a state-focused handbook or practice guide that takes a closer look at the policies in three states: Illinois, Ohio, and Tennessee.

This Policy Snapshot provides examples of legislation in 13 states that have proposed or enacted legislation addressing the following principles of K-12 funding models: attendance and enrollment, revenue, and equity-based initiatives. All 50 states allocate K-12 funding in different ways. Refer to this two-page reference guide, which defines and illustrates common models and terms, and this 50-State Comparison, which captures how all states approach funding generally and for specific student populations.

This "Equity by Design" brief highlights equity issues that arise in the process of reopening schools during a global pandemic. The authors examine state plans and guidance for reopening schools across states in the Midwest & Plains Equity Assistance Center (MAP EAC) region which includes the 13 states of Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. The purpose of this paper is to provide explicit consideration of equity issues in the context of reopening schools and generate discussion about the topics addressed. The following topics are covered: (1) time spent in face-to-face instruction vs. virtual or hybrid learning environments and any calendar changes; (2) screening and reporting of COVID-19 symptoms and exposure; (3) social distancing, face masks and classroom set up; (4) ensuring more equitable learning for students with dis/abilities and multilingual learners; (5) access to technology; (6) opportunities and challenges in online learning, (7) communication with parent/caregivers; (8) addressing learning loss; (9) guidance on Social Emotional Learning (SEL); and (10) guidance on field trips and co-curricular and extra-curricular activities. Throughout this brief, the authors highlight equity issues that inevitably arise in the context of schooling where conditions of access are likely exacerbated by the pandemic and how one might approach and consider these issues in planning and policy. As school and district leaders review and revise policy implementation, the guidance outlined in this paper can inform the way that policy is implemented and can help highlight issues around equity that district and school personnel may not have considered in planning for reopening.

Forty-four elementary grade teachers of deaf and hard of hearing students were surveyed about how they taught writing and their beliefs about writing. Beliefs about writing included their self-efficacy to teach writing, attitude towards writing, and epistemological beliefs about writing. These teachers from 15 different states in the United States slightly agreed they were efficacious writing teachers and they were slightly positive about their writing. They slightly agreed that learning to write involves effort and process, moderately disagreed that writing development is innate or fixed, slightly disagreed that knowledge about writing is certain, and were equally split about whether writing knowledge comes from authorities and experts. On average, teachers applied the 22 instructional writing practices surveyed at least once a month. They reported their students wrote weekly, and their writing was supported through goal setting, feedback, and prewriting activities. Writing instruction mostly focuses on teaching grammar and how to plan compositions. Teacher self-efficacy uniquely and statistically predicted reported teaching practices after attitude towards writing and epistemological beliefs were first controlled. Recommendations for future research and implications for practice are presented. [This paper was published in "Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education" v26 n3 p438-450 2021.]

The National Math + Science Initiative (NMSI) is a nonprofit organization committed to improving educational outcomes that traces its roots back to the early 1990s. NMSI's College Readiness Program (CRP) is a long-standing program with the goal of promoting STEM education in high schools to improve students' preparation for college. The three-year program provides teacher, student, and school supports to promote high school students' success in English, mathematics, and science Advanced Placement (AP) courses, with a focus on students who are traditionally underrepresented in the targeted AP courses. Through a scale-up grant awarded to NMSI by the Investing in Innovation (i3) program, the CRP was implemented in 27 schools in the 2016-2017 school year (Treatment Schools) and in 21 schools in the 2017-2018 school year (Delayed Treatment Schools), collectively identified as Program Schools. CRESST conducted an independent evaluation of the impact of the CRP on students' AP outcomes using a randomized cluster trial with 48 CRP schools and 48 Comparison Schools in 10 states. The evaluation of the CRP consisted of three parts: (1) measuring the program's impact on selected student AP exam outcomes; (2) determining the impact of the program on school perspectives and culture; and (3) assessing of the fidelity of implementation of the CRP at the school level. AP exam data from 48 Treatment Schools, with a total of 8,778 exams in 2018 and 9,378 in 2019, and 48 matched control schools, with 7,505 exams in 2018 and 2019 in Year 3, were analyzed for this study. Program impact was evaluated using a 2-level hierarchical generalized linear model (HGLM) with students nested within schools. The analyses revealed that in 2018 the probability of a student taking an AP exam in the Program Schools was, on average, 7% higher than the paired Comparison Schools, and the difference was statistically significant. And in 2019 the effect was even greater with the probability of taking an AP exam being significantly higher in Program Schools (18%) than in Comparison Schools (3%). When looking at the probability of an exam yielding a qualifying score, in 2018, the HGLM analyses found no significant difference between the two groups. In 2019, however, exams taken at the Program Schools had a significantly higher overall probability (2%) of receiving a qualifying score than the Comparison Schools (0%). These analyses compared results to the total school population. In the next analyses, we looked only at those students who took AP exams. In 2018, overall, the fitted probability of achieving a qualifying score among the exams taken was 8% in the Program Schools, compared to 22% in the Comparison Schools. In 2019, however, the difference between the Program Schools (7%) and the Comparison Schools (9%) was not statistically significant. Fidelity of implementation was evaluated using a fidelity matrix approach (required as part of the evaluation of the i3 program), which showed that not all elements of the program were implemented with high fidelity. In 2018, results indicated that 43 out of 48 schools (90%) achieved 80% or better implementation fidelity, for an average fidelity score of 89%. Four schools achieved a perfect 100% fidelity score. In 2019, 88% of schools achieved 80% or better implementation fidelity. Ten schools achieved a perfect 100% fidelity score. In 2018 in more than 75% of schools, not all teachers fulfilled their requirements for attending the required teacher training sessions, and so this component was not implemented with fidelity. In 2019, this picture improved a little with 15 schools (31%) meeting the 80% threshold. Teacher stipends, administrator bonuses, and student qualifying score awards were paid as expected. Teacher survey data indicated that teachers found the training and professional development activities provided by the CRP to be the most beneficial program supports. Mentoring was chosen, across all years, as the least effective program component. When prompted for the second most effective CRP component, the same number of teachers selected the funding of classroom and lab supplies as did teacher training. [For "2016-2017 Implementation Evaluation of the National Math and Science Initiative's College Readiness Program," see ED615910.]

"The College Payoff: More Education Doesn't Always Mean More Earnings" explores how lifetime earnings vary by education level, field of study, occupation, industry, gender, race and ethnicity, and location. The lifetime earnings of a full-time full-year worker with a high school diploma are $1.6 million, while workers with an associate's degree earn $2 million. However, at least one quarter of high school graduates earn more than an associate's degree holder. Bachelor's degree holders earn a median of $2.8 million during their career, 75% more than if they had only a high school diploma. Master's degree holders earn a median of $3.2 million over their lifetimes, while doctoral degree holders earn $4 million and professional degree holders earn $4.7 million. However, one quarter of workers with a bachelor's degree earn more than half of workers with a master's or a doctoral degree.

The Latino population in the United States is large and growing. As a whole, however, it has been challenged with inequitable educational attainment rates compared to other groups, meriting the attention of public agencies, postsecondary institutions, and advocates. Latino economic and career success -- and the success of our overall economy -- depend on alleviating current educational inequalities. The most effective way to do that is by directing resources to effective, data-driven strategies. In 2018, 15 postsecondary institutions joined in the three-year Latino Adult Student Success (LASS) Academy to develop and implement targeted strategies that support Latino adult students (and adult learners generally) in their pursuit of postsecondary credentials. The LASS Academy was the inaugural cohort under the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL)'s Adult Learner Academy model, an approach that combines data analysis, technical assistance, and peer-to-peer learning to support new action plans and strategies for improving services and programs for important target populations. The data used in the initiative included enrollment, course completion, persistence, and graduation metrics along with surveys of the institutions' staff and current adult students through CAEL's Adult Learner 360™ process. The experience offered several important lessons that underscored the advantages of the Academy model. The institutions benefited from the opportunity to connect with each other and share strategies, and they valued the emphasis on the use of both quantitative data from their own student records and the analysis of new qualitative survey results. The initiative further showed the creative resilience of the institutions to quickly change course during the pandemic and adjust their implementation plans in the course of its shifting circumstances. As their new approaches to supporting Latino adults continue beyond the project, the participating LASS institutions expect to see even greater benefits to their Latino adult postsecondary enrollment and success.

Political scientists have largely overlooked the democratic challenges inherent in the governance of U.S. public education--despite profound implications for educational delivery and, ultimately, social mobility and economic growth. In this study, we consider whether the interests of adult voters who elect school boards in each community are likely to be aligned with the educational needs of local students. Specifically, we compare voters and students in four states on several policy-relevant dimensions. Using official voter turnout records and rich microtargeting data, we document considerable demographic differences between voters who participate in school board elections and the students attending the schools that boards oversee. These gaps are most pronounced in majority nonwhite jurisdictions and school districts with the largest racial achievement gaps. Our novel analysis provides important context for understanding the political pressures facing school boards and their likely role in perpetuating educational and, ultimately, societal inequality.

The National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS) and MHEC were awarded a competitive grant from the American Institutes for Research in 2019 as part of its National Research Collaborative on Postsecondary Competency-based Education and Learning (cberesearch.org). The grant objective was to specifically identify state policies related to the review of military transcripts and experience for military-connected students entering or reentering postsecondary education and explore how these policies are generally interpreted by the state higher education agency involved with implementation. The intent of the report is to provide a resource for those considering or amending a state policy as well as providing a repository that demonstrates policy variances.

Through the Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) grant program, the federal government charged community colleges across the country with two things: training adults who had lost their jobs so they could regain employment and providing the education needed for those still working to be able to move up career ladders. Now, as health and economic concerns rise in this time of COVID-19, disproportionately impacting racially minoritized populations, low-income groups, and women, we need to understand how the TAACCCT investment worked and how it could inform future policy and practice.

When the nation shut down in March because of the COVID-19 pandemic, states had to figure out what education would look like for the remainder of the academic year. These abrupt changes affected not only students' ability to learn but also their access to the support system that would help prepare them for steps beyond high school. This Policy Brief is part of a series dedicated to various facets of the transition from secondary to postsecondary education, now complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic. This brief explores challenges that students are facing and actions that states, and sometimes school districts, can take to support students in their postsecondary transition during these far-from-normal times. Those actions include: (1) addressing systemic barriers to college access exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic; (2) adapting data driven decision-making to the virtual environment; and (3) leveraging federal funds to support postsecondary transition. The series -- which builds upon "A State Policymaker's Guide to Equitable Transitions in the COVID-19 Era" (ED606369) -- provides actionable steps and examples for state policymakers to consider as they address the transition from high school to college and the workforce.

Developing and scaling high-quality systems of college and career pathways that help young people successfully transition through education into high-paying, high-demand careers requires strong leadership. This piece highlights key lessons about the structures and commitments that are necessary for effective leadership and governance from JFF's work with the communities in the Great Lakes College and Career Pathways Partnership (GLCCPP). These structures and commitments enable communities like those in GLCCPP to not only implement but sustain and scale college and career pathways that effectively prepare young people with the skills, credentials, and confidence to succeed in the evolving economy. [This report was produced with the Great Lakes College and Career Pathways Partnership.]

This Policy Brief defines dual enrollment and common barriers to entry for historically underserved student populations. It identifies three opportunities for policies to expand access and make it more equitable: (1) Protect low-income students' access to dual enrollment; (2) Re-examine student eligibility policies; and (3) Encourage greater collaboration between K-12 and postsecondary education. This Policy Brief is one of six dedicated to various facets of the transition from secondary to postsecondary education, now complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic. It focuses on the populations already underserved in the nation's education system. The series -- which builds upon "A State Policymaker's Guide to Equitable Transitions in the COVID-19 Era" (see ED606369) -- provides actionable steps and examples for state policymakers to consider as they address the transition from high school to college and the workforce.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a detrimental impact on many facets of students' successful transitions from secondary into postsecondary education, particularly for students who depend on in-person delivery of content and experience. For many young people, paid work-based learning has historically provided a needed source of income, and its importance has grown as youths and their families have been affected by the unemployment crisis. Moreover, the nature of work itself is changing, and policymakers must ensure that young people have meaningful and equitable access to learning about the world of work. This Policy Brief explores the structural challenges -- both new and old -- that prevent high school students from accessing quality work-based learning and transitioning to postsecondary education and on to the workforce. Drawing on evidence-based approaches and lessons from the field, it presents a set of state policy considerations to expand access to work-based learning experiences. This Policy Brief is one of six dedicated to various facets of the transition from secondary to postsecondary education, now complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic. It focuses on the populations already underserved in the nation's education system. The series -- which builds upon "A State Policymaker's Guide to Equitable Transitions in the COVID-19 Era" (see ED606369) -- provides actionable steps and examples for state policymakers to consider as they address the transition from high school to college and the workforce.

As part of our research on the community college baccalaureate (CCB), we studied the prospects of adopting and scaling CCB degrees in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Higher education leaders in these six Great Lakes states recognized the potential for CCB degrees to increase academic, geographic and financial access to higher education but concerns about mission creep, program duplication, and competition with universities within their states were on their minds. All leaders thought a more in-depth approach to analyzing labor force demand for CCB degree graduates would be helpful. In response, we used federal and state datasets to estimate job vacancies and annual degree conferral and found openings in business, software development, early childhood education, and registered nursing that may hold promise for CCB degrees in one or more Great Lakes states. [For Data Note 8, see ED608176.]

Social and emotional learning (SEL) competencies or standards derive from SEL frameworks. In this report, the terms "SEL competencies" and "standards" are used interchangeably to refer to statements about "what students should know and be able to do," recognizing that states may use different terms such as "competencies," "learning goals," or "benchmarks." In 2019, 14 separate sets of K-12 "learning standards" or "competencies" were analyzed for SEL that states have developed. This report updates that previous analysis to include four additional sets of learning standards (for a total of 18 states) and provides important updates about the original 14 states. The goal in this brief is to examine the specific SEL frameworks the states use and the competencies they have articulated based on these frameworks.

In the United States, approximately 65 percent of all jobs in 2020 will require some level of postsecondary education, and the demand will reach 68 percent in Iowa. This report seeks to inform public discourse on higher education by providing key performance indicators relevant to the goal of improving educational attainment for a healthy economy and society. Performance indicators are categorized within five areas: (1) Preparation; (2) Participation; (3) Completion; (4) Affordability; and (5) Finance. Several indicators provide the national and Midwestern Higher Education Compact (MHEC) regional values as well as the median of the top five states in the nation as possible benchmarks. Performance indicators are disaggregated by race/ethnicity and family income when data are available.

Congress amended and extended the "Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education" ("Perkins IV") in 2018 with passage of the "Strengthening Career and Technical Education Act for the 21st Century" ("Perkins V"); the law became effective on July 1, 2019. "Perkins V" increases federal funding for career and technical education (CTE), including the amount available for states to spend on educating students who are incarcerated. To provide a framework and to support states as they develop their "Perkins V" plans, this report looks back at how states used "Perkins IV" funds to serve individuals in states institutions during three fiscal years (FYs) 2012-14. This report addresses four research questions: (1) What was the total amount of "Perkins IV" funds that each state made available in each of the three fiscal years (FYs 2012-14) for state institutions, including states correctional institutions?; (2) What percentage of their total grant allocation from "Perkins IV" did each state make available in each of the three fiscal years (FYs 2012-14) for all types of state institutions?; (3) How many incarcerated students in state correctional institutions received programs and services with the "Perkins IV" funds for state institutions?; and (4) What types of programs and services did states offer incarcerated students in their state correctional institutions with "Perkins IV" funds? The number of individuals served in state institutions could increase with the "Perkins V" 1 percent increase in funds made available to serve individuals in state institutions, such as state correctional institutions, juvenile justice facilities, and educational institutions that serve individuals with disabilities. The data and the information in the state narratives about the services and activities for incarcerated students may assist state and local decisions makers in developing correctional education programs with the amount made available under "Perkins V."

The advent of new technologies and increased access to robust connectivity is reshaping the K-12 landscape for teaching and learning. School districts nationwide are leveraging digital instructional materials and resources to deliver transformative and impactful personalized learning opportunities for students and to enhance the administrative coordination of school business. Educators are striving to meet the needs of the modern workforce including the need to develop life-long learners that can adapt to ever changing jobs and careers as technology continues to disrupt the digital age workplace. This report advocates for equitable, reliable, robust broadband access both on and off campus to prepare all students for life and work. This report builds upon SETDA's earlier work, including its groundbreaking Broadband Imperative series of reports and State Broadband K12 Leadership reports. Exemplars highlight states and districts where robust bandwidth has already positively impacted teaching and learning. [For the summary, see ED604818. Additional funding from Parana River Group (PRG) and Spectrum. For "The Broadband Imperative II: Equitable Access for Learning," see ED584156.]

Today, nine out of 10 Americans age 65 and older depend on Social Security benefits to lead a comfortable and secure retirement. Among all Americans over age 65, Social Security makes up more than half of their household income. This brief outlines the history of Social Security benefits in the public sector, describes the safe harbor rule and how it is intended to work, and then shows its limitations. As a concrete example, it then analyzes the pension formulas covering approximately 1.2 million active public school teachers in the 15 states and the District of Columbia that do not offer universal coverage for teachers. Similar to previous work, it shows that the pension formulas in those states do not protect teachers from receiving retirement benefits that are worth less than they would otherwise receive under Social Security. Those workers should be covered by Social Security immediately. The brief concludes with suggestions about how the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could amend its rules to protect these workers and more closely align its policies with congressional intent.

Total enrollments (undergraduate and graduate) in languages other than English dropped by 9.2% between fall 2013 and fall 2016, as reported in the Modern Language Association's twenty-fifth language enrollment census. Despite the overall drop, there were gains in nearly half of all language programs (45.5%) that mitigate somewhat the downward trend. The total number of language programs offered in fall 2016 was down by 651, or 5.3%, since 2013, whereas between 2009 and 2013 the number of offered programs declined by one. This figure includes commonly taught languages such as French (which fell by 129 programs), Spanish (118), German (86), and Italian (56), as well as less commonly taught languages such as Hindi (which declined by 8), Yiddish (5), and Thai (3). Twenty-three Indigenous American languages that reported enrollments in 2009 or 2013 were not taught in fall 2016. Staffing for less commonly taught languages tends to depend on non-tenure-track hiring, which makes those languages especially vulnerable to budget changes. Despite challenges at the local and national levels, many language programs remain strong. This report highlights examples of programs whose robust enrollments demonstrate the value of innovative curricular thinking as well as dedicated faculty members who have the support of their administration. Clearly, investments are needed in language education, and this report includes case studies of successful programs on which change can be modeled. This report is the second of two that analyzes the findings of the Modern Language Association's 2016 language enrollment censuses. [For "Enrollments in Languages Other than English in United States Institutions of Higher Education, Summer 2016 and Fall 2016: Preliminary Report," see ED590075.]

Grant aid -- whether based on financial need, merit, or a combination therein -- is the primary form of financial aid awarded by states. States use grant aid to encourage academic preparation, enhance access to postsecondary education, affect students' choice of college, support persistence, and reduce out-of-state migration. State grant aid programs can be distinguished from other sources of grant aid, such as institutional scholarships or tuition discounts as well as the Pell Grant, the federal government's principal need-based program. The purpose of this report is to help policymakers compare their state's grant programs to others and also understand how policy design features relate to student outcomes. First, the report provides context for understanding state grant programs that serve undergraduate students, and then it describes common and distinguishing features of state grant programs by focusing on eligibility requirements, funding sources, and program magnitude, including award amounts and number of recipients. In addition, the characteristics of recipients are considered, including the type of institution attended, family income, race/ethnicity, and enrollment intensity. An overview is then provided of the research findings on the effects of state grants on educational attainment. Finally, implications and recommendations are identified. [This brief examines a critical state policy issue identified through the College Affordability Research Initiative, a collaboration between the Midwestern Higher Education Compact and the National Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good at the University of Michigan.]

The State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA) and its state member leaders play a pivotal role in driving high-speed broadband access to all students to best prepare them for college and careers. Complementing the 2016 "State K-12 Broadband Leadership: Driving Connectivity and Access" (see ED569341), this publication highlights the importance of state leadership and the various ways states strive to support districts and schools. Students deserve these equitable opportunities both on and off campus. States demonstrate leadership through legislation, initiatives, partnerships, statewide broadband networks, regional networks, and/or statewide purchasing consortia to facilitate reliable, cost-effective internet access for districts. States are also developing strategies to help ensure all students have adequate internet access both on and off campus, whether it is publicizing affordable home internet options; the availability of free internet at community locations; or the ability to provide Wi-Fi on school buses. With state leadership to ensure connectivity and access, districts and schools can achieve their goals for digital learning for all students. No one state has the same policies or practices, yet all states are providing leadership. [Additional funding for this report was provided by Parana River Group (PRG).]

The National School Lunch Program's (NSLP) original goal was to help students in need, but policy changes in the past decade have made students from middle-income and upper-income families eligible for federally funded school meals. The Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), an expansion of the NSLP enacted in 2010, effectively created a federal entitlement to school meals for all children, regardless of income, in certain areas. With more and more students eligible for and participating in the NSLP, more and more resources meant for students in need will be lost. If Washington wants to help students from low-income families, federal officials should repeal the CEP, and continue to use student-enrollment mechanisms, such as direct certification, to reduce errors in one of the nation's most error-prone federal systems.

This Policy Brief provides a detailed look at 529 education savings plans -- investment accounts with tax advantages -- including a breakdown of maximum annual dollar amounts and state tax deductions allowed, state responses to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, information on legislation in 2018 that changes eligible expenses allowed under 529 plans and a list of questions for state policymakers to consider when identifying the types of data they wish to collect on their existing 529 plans.