Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Policy Area
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Keyword
Program Calendar
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Search Tips
Session Submission Type: Panel
As state governments are tasked with greater control and oversight of education finance and policy, understanding the consequences of state-level policies that attempt to shape U.S. higher education is critical. Each paper in this panel considers policies’ effects relative to their stated goals and examines whether the policies serve their intended beneficiaries equitably. This diverse set of papers considers state policies that affect higher education institutions’ fiscal capacities and choices, student preparation for higher education, students’ access to higher education institutions, and support for postsecondary students.
The first paper from Katharine Meyer and Isabel McMullen studies the Governor’s Emergency Education Relief (GEER) program, which was implemented in response to the Covid 19 pandemic and distributed billions of dollars to states who were responsible for sub-granting funds to education institutions. In documenting state spending choices and tracing timing and distribution of the funds, they offer lessons for how such a policy could be improved upon or contain lessons for our current landscape, specifically at the higher education level.
In the second paper, Seth Walker studies the effects of losing access to financial aid when students fail to meet renewal requirements in Texas. Using the needs-based TEXAS Grant program and a multi-dimensional difference-in-discontinuities design, he expands the literature on the effects of aid loss at both early and later points in one’s college trajectory. Walker uses the rich data in the Texas setting to study the effects on both education and labor market outcomes, and offers how renewal policies can support students in meeting their educational and professional goals.
The third paper from Toufiq Rahman studies an Advanced Placement (AP) exam fee waiver program in North Carolina. This paper uses difference in differences and individual fixed-effects models to study changes in AP exam participation and pass rates, finding that the policy both increased exam participation and passes likely eligible for college credit. This paper offers important insights to secondary-level incentives that could promote student preparation for higher education and help students enter higher education institutions with college credit.
In the final paper, Heather Little studies the effect of a new Top Percent Policy in Wisconsin on high school level application patterns to the University of Wisconsin–Madison. The Wisconsin Guarantee policy differs from similar admission guarantees in previously studied contexts. Little uses a difference-in-differences design to study the treated Wisconsin high school applications relative to control schools in Minnesota. This work offers insights on implementing Top Percent Policies in new contexts, particularly as universities confront a new admissions landscape.
With context setting and chairing by Riley Acton, and discussant comments by Julia Turner and Isabel McMullen, this panel offers diverse regional and methodological insights into how stakeholders grapple with state policies, and what research can tell us about the potential paths forward.
State spending on education during the COVID-19 pandemic - Presenting Author: Katharine Meyer, Brookings Institution
Losing Aid, Losing Ground? The Academic and Career Consequences of Financial Aid Loss - Presenting Author: Seth Walker, Michigan State University
Removing Barriers to College Credit: The Impact of Advanced Placement Exam Fee Waivers - Presenting Author: Md Twfiqur Rahman, Georgia State University
Guaranteed Admission at UW–Madison - Presenting Author: Heather Kain Little, University of Wisconsin-Madison