What Works to Reduce Inequalities in Higher Education? A Systematic Review of the (Quasi-)Experimental Literature on Outreach and Financial Aid

Estelle Herbaut, K. Geven
{"title":"What Works to Reduce Inequalities in Higher Education? A Systematic Review of the (Quasi-)Experimental Literature on Outreach and Financial Aid","authors":"Estelle Herbaut, K. Geven","doi":"10.1596/1813-9450-8802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Policy makers are increasingly searching for ways to allow more disadvantaged students to access and complete higher education. The quickly growing (quasi-)experimental literature on policy interventions in higher education provide the opportunity to identify the causal effects of these interventions on disadvantaged students and discuss inequality mechanisms at the last stage of the educational system. The paper reviews 75 studies and rigorously compares more than 200 causal effects of outreach and financial aid interventions on the access and completion rates of disadvantaged students in higher education. The paper finds that outreach policies are broadly effective in increasing access for disadvantaged students when these policies include active counseling or simplify the university application process, but not when they only provide general information on higher education. For financial aid, the paper finds that need-based grants do not systematically increase enrollment rates but only lead to improvements when they provide enough money to cover unmet need and/or include an early commitment during high school. Still, need-based grants quite consistently appear to improve the completion rates of disadvantaged students. In contrast, the evidence indicates that merit-based grants only rarely improve the outcomes of disadvantaged students. Finally, interventions combining outreach and financial aid have brought promising results, although more research on these mixed interventions is needed.","PeriodicalId":345692,"journal":{"name":"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal","volume":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"50","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-8802","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 50

Abstract

Policy makers are increasingly searching for ways to allow more disadvantaged students to access and complete higher education. The quickly growing (quasi-)experimental literature on policy interventions in higher education provide the opportunity to identify the causal effects of these interventions on disadvantaged students and discuss inequality mechanisms at the last stage of the educational system. The paper reviews 75 studies and rigorously compares more than 200 causal effects of outreach and financial aid interventions on the access and completion rates of disadvantaged students in higher education. The paper finds that outreach policies are broadly effective in increasing access for disadvantaged students when these policies include active counseling or simplify the university application process, but not when they only provide general information on higher education. For financial aid, the paper finds that need-based grants do not systematically increase enrollment rates but only lead to improvements when they provide enough money to cover unmet need and/or include an early commitment during high school. Still, need-based grants quite consistently appear to improve the completion rates of disadvantaged students. In contrast, the evidence indicates that merit-based grants only rarely improve the outcomes of disadvantaged students. Finally, interventions combining outreach and financial aid have brought promising results, although more research on these mixed interventions is needed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
如何减少高等教育中的不平等?外延与经济援助(准)实验文献的系统回顾
政策制定者正在越来越多地寻找方法,让更多的弱势学生能够接受并完成高等教育。关于高等教育政策干预的快速增长(准)实验文献提供了机会来确定这些干预对弱势学生的因果影响,并讨论教育系统最后阶段的不平等机制。本文回顾了75项研究,并严格比较了推广和经济援助干预对弱势学生接受高等教育的机会和完成率的200多个因果影响。本文发现,当外联政策包括积极的咨询或简化大学申请过程时,这些政策在增加弱势学生的入学机会方面普遍有效,但当他们只提供高等教育的一般信息时,这些政策就无效了。对于经济援助,论文发现基于需求的资助并不能系统地提高入学率,只有当它们提供足够的资金来满足未满足的需求和/或包括高中阶段的早期承诺时,才会导致入学率的提高。尽管如此,基于需求的助学金似乎始终如一地提高了弱势学生的毕业率。相比之下,有证据表明,基于成绩的资助很少能改善弱势学生的成绩。最后,结合外联和财政援助的干预措施带来了有希望的结果,尽管需要对这些混合干预措施进行更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Do American Voters Really Not Punish Overt Undemocratic Behavior at the Polls? Natural Experimental Evidence from the 2021 Insurrection of the U.S. Capitol Absolute versus Relative: Asymmetric Framing and Feedback in a Heterogeneous-Endowment Public Goods Game Improving Studies of Sensitive Topics Using Prior Evidence: A Unified Bayesian Framework for List Experiments Are More Children Better Than One? Evidence from a Lab Experiment of Decision Making Financial Vulnerability and Seeking Expert Advice: Evidence from a Survey Experiment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1