Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/nwuipr/97-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

College-for-All: Do Students Understand What College Demands?

Author

Listed:
  • James E. Rosenbaum
Abstract
This paper examines whether youth understand what is required to attain their college plans. An analysis of a survey of 2000 high school seniors finds that many youth believe they can attain their plans even if they do poorly in high school, and these beliefs strongly predict lower effort in high school. However, an analysis of the High School and Beyond 1982 seniors finds that while poor high school grades have little effect on whether students attend college, they cut college degree attainment in half. Over 80% of students with poor grades failed at their college plans in the next ten years. Grades have a strong independent influence on educational attainment, net of SES, ethnicity, and test scores. Indeed, grades are the single largest influence in affecting whether students attain their plans, and grades are even more important for blacks than for whites. If students could change one attribute in high school to make their plans come true, they should improve their grades. These findings suggest that "college-for-all" norms create large opportunity costs for high school students. Three policy reforms are suggested. High schools should provide clear information on the effects of high school grades on college success rates, they should form linkages with colleges, and they should prepare students for back-up career options if their college plans are unlikely to succeed.

Suggested Citation

  • James E. Rosenbaum, "undated". "College-for-All: Do Students Understand What College Demands?," IPR working papers 97-21, Institute for Policy Resarch at Northwestern University.
    • Handle: RePEc:wop:nwuipr:97-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wop:nwuipr:97-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipnwuus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.