1. Expanding Access and Opportunity: The Impact of the Gates Millennium Scholars Program
JENNIFER RAMSEY, RESEARCH PROJECT MANAGER
Indianapolis, IN
June 12, 2009
SFARN
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

2. The GMS Program
$1 billion dollar pledge to fund undergraduate scholarships for underrepresented populations with funding guaranteed for graduate work in select fields
Last-dollar scholarship for any college or university in the US that will serve 20,000 students over the course of the 20 year program
Eligible students are Pell-eligible, have a 3.3 GPA and have a certain score on noncognitive characteristics
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

3. Purpose of Research
Deeper understanding of financial aid as major barrier to—and completion from—college
Application of noncognitive selection criteria
Provide “incentive” for future need-based scholarships
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

4. Methodology and Limitations
Methods
Regression discontinuity
Propensity score matching
Regression analysis
Mixed methods
Limitations
Early cohorts had higher-income students in survey groups
Initial cohort did not include non-recipient comparison group and were not solely freshmen
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

5. Major Research Questions
How does receipt of the scholarship affect engagement and enrollment behaviors of recipients?
Did the scholarship impact work and borrowing decisions?
What are the academic outcomes for Scholars?
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

6. GMS Research Program
Survey follows recipients and non-recipients to help understand the treatment effect and aligns with NCES design
Students (recipients and non-recipients) are surveyed from their first year of college through a fifth follow-up survey at approximately 17 years after entering college
Most of the findings presented are from cohorts 1 and 2, approximately six years after entering college
Additional research uses life histories, interviews and focus groups and transcript analysis
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

7. Receipt of GMS Provides Flexibility for Scholars
Scholarship receipt gave greater student choice in colleges (AIR)
Less time spent working allowed greater flexibility for engagement in the community and the college (St. John and Hu)
Scholars were more able and willing to change their majors while in school (Trent)
Students with an expressed interest in STEM fields were encouraged to pursue those fields as their major (Pavel and Myers)
27% of Scholars changed their majors versus 21% of non-recipients
Basically, I saw myself being able to go to schools that might have had higher tuitions instead of feeling I had to select schools that might have been more affordable. So in that sense it totally probably was the full factor for me choosing this school.
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

8. Scholars’ Engagement While in School
Scholars were more likely to use support networks on campus (St. John and Hu)
Scholars exhibited more signs of academic engagement (discussions with faculty, creative projects, etc.) (St. John and Hu)
Scholars were more likely to hold a leadership position on campus (St. John and Hu)
Scholars demonstrate interest in giving back to their communities upon graduation (Hu)
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

9. Financial Outcomes for GMS
Receipt of the scholarship gave Scholars greater school choice without concern over the cost of tuition (AIR)
Scholars were less likely to take out loans, and those that did took out significantly smaller amounts (DesJardins and McCall)
Scholars worked fewer hours during their undergraduate education; those that did work were more likely to do so for experience and not to earn money (DesJardins and McCall)
Scholars were more likely to hold on-campus jobs (DesJardins and McCall)
In their freshman year, Scholars borrowed approximately $1,000 versus $3,200 for non-recipients and $2,800 for the national sample; By junior year the cumulative debt was $3,400, $10,200 and $6,100 respectively
56% of Scholars took at loans at some point during college, versus 77% of non-recipients
In their freshmen year, Scholars work about 11 hours compared to 13 for non-recipients and 19 for the national sample; Junior year it was 15, 19 and 19.5, respectively.
I can concentrate on research activities, classes, and what not, rather than working. I do have a half-time assistantship but that’s also because of the experience that you get from the assistantship. That’s [why] I chose to do that.
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

10. Selected Findings on GMSP
In their freshman year, Scholars borrowed approximately $1,000 versus $3,200 for non-recipients and $2,800 for the national sample; By junior year the cumulative debt was $3,400, $10,200 and $6,100 respectively
56% of Scholars took at loans at some point during college, versus 77% of non-recipients
In their freshmen year, Scholars work about 11 hours compared to 13 for non-recipients and 19 for the national sample; Junior year it was 15, 19 and 19.5, respectively.
The non-recipient and Scholar samples were drawn from the pool of applicants within a small range of the noncognitive cutoff score. Source: DesJardins and McCall
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

11. Academic Outcomes for GMSP
Scholars enroll in highly selective colleges – those students graduate at high rates (Melguizo)
Scholars persist in and complete college at incredibly high rates (DesJardins; Melguizo)
Scholars are more likely to enroll in graduate school after receiving their Bachelor’s degree (Pavel and Myers)
Almost all Scholars graduate within 6 years (Melguizo)
Scholars are more likely to complete their undergraduate degree in four years
Scholars enroll in graduate and doctoral programs more often than professional fields (Pavel and Myers)
Though Scholars did not show changed expectations for their terminal degrees, they did pursue those degrees more quickly
Receipt of the scholarship reduced the likelihood that students would enroll in two-year institutions versus four-year institutions by 40 percent.
Five-year graduation rates for Scholars was 80% versus 49% from a national sample of low-income, high-achieving students.
In highly selective institutions, Scholars are up to 18 percent more likely to graduate than those at non-selective institutions.
48.6% of Scholars in cohorts 1 and 2 entered a graduate program versus 43.9 of non-recipients.
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

12. Academic Outcomes for GMSP
Receipt of the scholarship reduced the likelihood that students would enroll in two-year institutions versus four-year institutions by 40 percent.
Five-year graduation rates for Scholars was 80% versus 49% from a national sample of low-income, high-achieving students.
In highly selective institutions, Scholars are up to 18 percent more likely to graduate than those at non-selective institutions.
48.6% of Scholars in cohorts 1 and 2 entered a graduate program versus 43.9 of non-recipients.
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

13. Academic Outcomes for GMSP
Receipt of the scholarship reduced the likelihood that students would enroll in two-year institutions versus four-year institutions by 40 percent.
Five-year graduation rates for Scholars was 80% versus 49% from a national sample of low-income, high-achieving students.
In highly selective institutions, Scholars are up to 18 percent more likely to graduate than those at non-selective institutions.
48.6% of Scholars in cohorts 1 and 2 entered a graduate program versus 43.9 of non-recipients.
Source: NORC 2007.
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

14. Policy Implications
Removal of financial barriers provides opportunity and choice in college selection and time use
Using alternative selection criteria shows promise
The provision of aid may lead to greater civic and community engagement throughout life
Receipt of the scholarship reduced the likelihood that students would enroll in two-year institutions versus four-year institutions by 40 percent.
Five-year graduation rates for Scholars was 80% versus 49% from a national sample of low-income, high-achieving students.
In highly selective institutions, Scholars are up to 18 percent more likely to graduate than those at non-selective institutions.
48.6% of Scholars in cohorts 1 and 2 entered a graduate program versus 43.9 of non-recipients.
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy

15. Future Research
Career development of Scholars
Additional programmatic support and its effects as compared to the effects of the financial support
Commitment of Scholars to communities
Use of alternative selection criteria on lower performing students
Receipt of the scholarship reduced the likelihood that students would enroll in two-year institutions versus four-year institutions by 40 percent.
Five-year graduation rates for Scholars was 80% versus 49% from a national sample of low-income, high-achieving students.
In highly selective institutions, Scholars are up to 18 percent more likely to graduate than those at non-selective institutions.
48.6% of Scholars in cohorts 1 and 2 entered a graduate program versus 43.9 of non-recipients.
PRESENTED BY
The Institute for Higher Education Policy