    [House Hearing, 113 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                         KEEPING COLLEGE WITHIN REACH:

                           ENHANCING TRANSPARENCY FOR

                        STUDENTS, FAMILIES AND TAXPAYERS
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                        SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION

                             AND WORKFORCE TRAINING

                             COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

                               AND THE WORKFORCE

                         U.S. House of Representatives

                        ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                 HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, APRIL 24, 2013

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 113-15

                                   __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce

                       Available via the World Wide Web:

                           www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/
               committee.action?chamber=house&committee=education
                                       or
                Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov

                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    80-427                    WASHINGTON : 2014
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
    Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
    area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104  Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
    20402-0001

                    COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE

                        JOHN KLINE, Minnesota, Chairman

    Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin           George Miller, California,
    Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,             Senior Democratic Member
        California                       Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey
    Joe Wilson, South Carolina           Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
    Virginia Foxx, North Carolina            Virginia
    Tom Price, Georgia                   Ruben Hinojosa, Texas
    Kenny Marchant, Texas                Carolyn McCarthy, New York
    Duncan Hunter, California            John F. Tierney, Massachusetts
    David P. Roe, Tennessee              Rush Holt, New Jersey
    Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania         Susan A. Davis, California
    Tim Walberg, Michigan                Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
    Matt Salmon, Arizona                 Timothy H. Bishop, New York
    Brett Guthrie, Kentucky              David Loebsack, Iowa
    Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee          Joe Courtney, Connecticut
    Todd Rokita, Indiana                 Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio
    Larry Bucshon, Indiana               Jared Polis, Colorado
    Trey Gowdy, South Carolina           Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
    Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania             Northern Mariana Islands
    Martha Roby, Alabama                 John A. Yarmuth, Kentucky
    Joseph J. Heck, Nevada               Frederica S. Wilson, Florida
    Susan W. Brooks, Indiana             Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon
    Richard Hudson, North Carolina
    Luke Messer, Indiana

                        Juliane Sullivan, Staff Director
                     Jody Calemine, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

            SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE TRAINING

                   VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina, Chairwoman

    Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin           Ruben Hinojosa, Texas,
    Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,             Ranking Minority Member
        California                       John F. Tierney, Massachusetts
    Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania         Timothy H. Bishop, New York
    Tim Walberg, Michigan                John A. Yarmuth, Kentucky
    Matt Salmon, Arizona                 Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon
    Brett Guthrie, Kentucky              Carolyn McCarthy, New York
    Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania           Rush Holt, New Jersey
    Joseph J. Heck, Nevada               Susan A. Davis, California
    Susan W. Brooks, Indiana             David Loebsack, Iowa
    Richard Hudson, North Carolina
    Luke Messer, Indiana
                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Hearing held on April 24, 2013...................................     1

    Statement of Members:
        Bishop, Hon. Timothy H., a Representative in Congress from
          the State of New York......................................     4
            Prepared statement of....................................     5
        Foxx, Hon. Virginia, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Higher
          Education and Workforce Training...........................     1
            Prepared statement of....................................     3

    Statement of Witnesses:
        Garrido, Alex, student, Keiser University....................    13
            Prepared statement of....................................    15
        Heller, Dr. Donald E., dean, College of Education, Michigan
          State University, East Lansing, MI.........................     7
            Prepared statement of....................................     9
        Hurd, Dr. Nicole Farmer, founder and executive director,
          National College Advising Corps............................    16
            Prepared statement of....................................    19
        Reindl, Travis, program director, postsecondary education,
          National Governors Association Center for Best Practices...    30
            Prepared statement of....................................    32

    Additional Submissions:
        Bonamici, Hon. Suzanne, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Oregon, ``Information Matters,'' by the Education
          Conservancy, Internet address to...........................    55
        Mrs. Foxx, questions submitted for the record to Dr. Hurd....    58
        Dr. Heller, response to questions submitted for the record...    57
        Hudson, Hon. Richard, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of North Carolina, questions submitted for the record
          to Dr. Heller..............................................    57
        Dr. Hurd, response to questions submitted for the record.....    59
        Mr. Kline, questions submitted for the record to Dr. Heller..    57
        Miller, Hon. George, senior Democratic member, Committee on
          Education and the Workforce, prepared statement of the
          National College Access Network............................    55

                         KEEPING COLLEGE WITHIN REACH:

                           ENHANCING TRANSPARENCY FOR

                        STUDENTS, FAMILIES AND TAXPAYERS

                                  ----------

                           Wednesday, April 24, 2013

                         U.S. House of Representatives

            Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training

                    Committee on Education and the Workforce

                                 Washington, DC

                                  ----------

        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:03 a.m., in
    room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Virginia Foxx
    [chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding.
        Present: Representatives Foxx, Thompson, Walberg, Brooks,
    Hudson, Bishop, Bonamici, McCarthy, and Davis.
        Also present: Representative Kline.
        Staff present: Katherine Bathgate, Deputy Press Secretary;
    James Bergeron, Director of Education and Human Services
    Policy; Heather Couri, Deputy Director of Education and Human
    Services Policy; Amy Raaf Jones, Education Policy Counsel and
    Senior Advisor; Brian Melnyk, Professional Staff Member;
    Krisann Pearce, General Counsel; Nicole Sizemore, Deputy Press
    Secretary; Emily Slack, Legislative Assistant; Alex Sollberger,
    Communications Director; Alissa Strawcutter, Deputy Clerk;
    Tylease Alli, Minority Clerk/Intern and Fellow Coordinator; Meg
    Benner, Minority Education Policy Advisor; Kelly Broughan,
    Minority Education Policy Associate; Tiffany Edwards, Minority
    Press Secretary for Education; Jamie Fasteau, Minority Director
    of Education Policy; Brian Levin, Minority Deputy Press
    Secretary/New Media Coordinator; Rich Williams, Minority
    Education Policy Advisor; and Michael Zola, Minority Deputy
    Staff Director.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Good morning, everyone. A quorum being
    present, the subcommittee will come to order. Welcome to
    today's subcommittee hearing. I would like thank our panel of
    witnesses for joining this important discussion on higher
    education transparency.
        Receiving a college acceptance letter can be one of the
    most joyous moments in a student's academic career, but for
    many families, that moment is often followed with the question:
    can we afford it?
        In January the New York Times detailed the exhaustive
    research many prospective students and parents conduct when
    choosing a college. After their son was accepted into college,
    the Ewell family of Chicago tried to navigate the federally-
    mandated college cost calculators to better understand the
    financial investment, but it wasn't as easy as they had
    expected.
        Quote--``We didn't have a lot of confidence that those were
    real numbers,'' Ms. Ewell said. ``They are all so different,
    and it seemed like there were such wide ranges and so many
    caveats that it really didn't feel apples-to-apples''--end
    quote.
        In recent years, the federal government has taken steps to
    improve data collection and transparency in the higher
    education system. Under Republican leadership, the 2008
    reauthorization of the Higher Education Act included several
    provisions to help provide families with the data needed to
    make informed decisions about their postsecondary
    opportunities.
        First, the law directed the Secretary of Education to
    collect and report 26 different pieces of information about
    institutions including the percentage of students receiving
    different types of financial aid, average cost of tuition and
    fees, and the percent change in total tuition and fees. This
    data is compiled in the College Navigator, which provides
    information for approximately 7,000 colleges and universities.
        Second, the law required all colleges participating in
    federal student aid programs to post net-price calculators on
    their websites. These calculators are supposed to help families
    understand the price of attendance at an institution, factoring
    in any grant or scholarship aid to give a more realistic
    estimate. However, as the Ewell family quickly realized, the
    calculators can be hard to use and are often difficult to find
    on college websites.
        Finally, the 2008 HEA reauthorization required the
    Department of Education to develop a model financial aid award
    letter to help students better understand their aid packages.
    This Financial Aid Shopping Sheet is now used by more than 500
    colleges and universities, but some higher education leaders
    have concerns that the shopping sheets are overly cumbersome
    and lack flexibility for institutions to present information in
    a way that makes the most sense.
        President Obama recently took another step to enhance
    transparency, releasing an online tool known as the College
    Scorecard in an effort to highlight key information about
    higher education institutions, including costs, completion
    rate, and average student loan debt. According to the Center
    for American Progress, however, college-bound high school
    students struggle to understand the scorecard. Additionally,
    the scorecard has come under fire for using different
    methodologies to calculate data, creating more confusion for
    students who are trying to access accurate information about
    their postsecondary options.
        Clearly there are areas for improvement in higher education
    data. However, as we discuss opportunities to provide more
    useful information to students and families, we must also bear
    in mind the significant investment colleges and universities
    already make to comply with existing reporting requirements.
        Data collection is a time-consuming endeavor that leads to
    higher costs for many institutions. During the 2012-2013
    academic year, institutions spent an estimated 850,320 hours
    and almost $31 million to fill out required federal surveys.
    This is in addition to the time and money spent complying with
    reporting requirements from states and regional, national, or
    programmatic accrediting agencies.
        As we approach reauthorization of the Higher Education Act,
    we must discuss ways to improve data without placing additional
    burdens on institutions or creating more confusion for students
    and families. We should also explore opportunities to better
    align federal transparency initiatives with state and
    accreditors' reporting requirements. I am confident our panel
    of witnesses will provide valuable insight into these issues,
    and I look forward to their testimony.
        With that, I now yield to my distinguished colleague, Mr.
    Bishop, for his opening remarks.
        [The statement of Chairwoman Foxx follows:]

             Prepared Statement of Hon. Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman,
            Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training

        Good morning, and welcome to today's subcommittee hearing. I'd like
    to thank our panel of witnesses for joining this important discussion
    on higher education transparency.
        Receiving a college acceptance letter can be one of the most joyous
    moments in a student's academic career. But for many families, that
    moment is often followed with the question: can we afford it?
        In January the New York Times detailed the exhaustive research many
    prospective students and parents conduct when choosing a college. After
    their son was accepted into college, the Ewell family of Chicago tried
    to navigate the federally-mandated college cost calculators to better
    understand the financial investment--but it wasn't as easy as they had
    expected.
        ``We didn't have a lot of confidence that those were real
    numbers,'' Ms. Ewell said. ``They're all so different, and it seemed
    like there were such wide ranges and so many caveats that it really
    didn't feel apples-to-apples.''
        In recent years, the federal government has taken steps to improve
    data collection and transparency in the higher education system. Under
    Republican leadership, the 2008 reauthorization of the Higher Education
    Act included several provisions to help provide families with the data
    needed to make informed decisions about their postsecondary
    opportunities.
        First, the law directed the Secretary of Education to collect and
    report 26 different pieces of information about institutions including
    the percentage of students receiving different types of financial aid,
    average cost of tuition and fees, and the percent change in total
    tuition and fees. This data is compiled in the College Navigator, which
    provides information for approximately 7,000 colleges and universities.
        Second, the law required all colleges participating in federal
    student aid programs to post net-price calculators on their websites.
    These calculators are supposed to help families understand the price of
    attendance at an institution, factoring in any grant or scholarship aid
    to give a more realistic estimate. However--as the Ewell family quickly
    realized--the calculators can be hard to use and are often difficult to
    find on college websites.
        Finally, the 2008 HEA reauthorization required the Department of
    Education to develop a model financial aid award letter to help
    students better understand their aid packages. This Financial Aid
    Shopping Sheet is now used by more than 500 colleges and universities,
    but some higher education leaders have concerns that the shopping
    sheets are overly cumbersome and lack flexibility for institutions to
    present information in a way that makes the most sense.
        President Obama recently took another step to enhance transparency,
    releasing an online tool known as the College Scorecard in an effort to
    highlight key information about higher education institutions,
    including costs, completion rate, and average student loan debt.
    According to the Center for American Progress, however, college-bound
    high school students struggle to understand the scorecard.
    Additionally, the scorecard has come under fire for using different
    methodologies to calculate data, creating more confusion for students
    who are trying to access accurate information about their postsecondary
    options.
        Clearly there are areas for improvement in higher education data.
    However, as we discuss opportunities to provide more useful information
    to students and families, we must also bear in mind the significant
    investment colleges and universities already make to comply with
    existing reporting requirements.
        Data collection is a time-consuming endeavor that leads to higher
    costs for many institutions. During the 2012-13 academic year,
    institutions spent an estimated 850,320 hours and almost $31 million to
    fill out required federal surveys. This is in addition to the time and
    money spent complying with reporting requirements from states and
    regional, national, or programmatic accrediting agencies.
        As we approach reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, we must
    discuss ways to improve data without placing additional burdens on
    institutions or creating more confusion for students and families. We
    should also explore opportunities to better align federal transparency
    initiatives with state and accreditors' reporting requirements. I'm
    confident our panel of witnesses will provide valuable insight into
    these issues, and I look forward to their testimony. With that, I will
    now yield to my distinguished colleague, Mr. Tim Bishop, for his
    opening remarks.
                                     ______

        Mr. Bishop. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Foxx.
        First of all, let me thank our distinguished panel for
    being here with us this morning. I look forward to hearing your
    testimony and exploring in detail the many suggestions that you
    will offer today.
        I would also like to take a second to thank the majority
    for holding this hearing. Although our two sides may differ on
    many of the policies contained within the HEA reauthorization,
    the majority is to be commended for its willingness to
    consistently invite nonpartisan experts on higher education to
    testify on reauthorization.
        I would be remiss, however, if I did not also briefly
    discuss the impact of the fiscal year 2014 Republican budget on
    higher education. By eliminating the mandatory funding elements
    of the Pell Grants program, shifting Pell to a program funded
    entirely by discretionary appropriations, rolling back Pell
    eligibility expansions for low-income students, freezing the
    maximum Pell Grant for 10 years, exposing federal work-study
    and SEOG to massive cuts through sequestration and
    discretionary spending caps and allowing certain student loan
    interest rates to double on July 1, we must recognize that such
    a budget, were it ever to become law, would have a
    disproportionately negative impact on students.
        We have reached a critical point for the future of higher
    education in this nation. As we all know, college tuition
    continues to rise, state appropriations continue to fall, and
    our students are now responsible for shouldering more of the
    burden than ever before.
        With student loan debt recently surpassing $1 trillion and
    sequestration inflicting significant cuts to programs like the
    College Work Study and SEOG, it is imperative that Congress
    promotes sustainable policies that encourage college access,
    affordability, and completion for our students.
        Enrolling in college is a lifetime investment. Studies
    universally indicate that a college graduate will earn
    significantly more over his or her lifetime than a non-
    graduate. While the national unemployment rates for those with
    a bachelor's degree or higher currently sits at 3.8 percent,
    for those with a high school degree or lower, the national
    unemployment rate stands at 8.5 percent.
        At the same time, a study released by Georgetown University
    notes that the gap between the supply of workers with
    postsecondary credentials and available job openings requiring
    those credentials may be as wide as 3 million people by 2018.
        And yet, research shows that the United States has fallen
    from first to 16th in the world in the percentage of 25-to 34-
    year-olds with a college degree. In fact, the United States is
    the only country in the world in which degree attainment levels
    for those just entering the labor market, at 39 percent, is
    actually lower than those preparing to retire and leave the
    labor market, at 41 percent. In order to maintain global
    competitiveness and our perch as the world's top economy, we
    must continue to support our students by investing in federal
    financial aid programs that encourage college access and
    affordability.
        We must do a better job of providing students and their
    families with clear, useful, and timely information about
    college costs and financial aid options to help them make the
    right decision. Given the variety of ways students attend
    college and the growing reliance on federal financial aid
    dollars, the federal government is in a unique position to help
    collect such information so that students and their families
    can make a direct comparison across institutions.
        Although Congress, the Obama administration, and the
    Department of Education have jointly issued a number of
    initiatives aimed at introducing transparency into the system,
    we must revisit these decisions in order to tweak, update, and
    ensure that these measures are helping our students make the
    most informed decisions possible.
        We must also work with the states to ensure that they are
    doing everything in their power to preserve, not eliminate,
    programs that enable families to afford college. State
    governments have played a vital role in the higher education
    triad since passage of the first Higher Education Act in 1965.
    Though we understand the difficult financial circumstances
    facing many of the states, balancing budgets on the backs of
    students and families is simply the wrong prescription for
    fixing these problems.
        As we look to reauthorize the Higher Education Act in the
    coming months, we must address these issues and many more with
    clear vision and an eye towards the future.
        I look forward to having a productive conversation with my
    colleagues and our distinguished panel. I yield back the
    balance of my time.
        [The statement of Mr. Bishop follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Timothy H. Bishop, a Representative in
                      Congress From the State of New York

        Thank you very much, Chairwoman Foxx.
        First of all, I'd like to thank our distinguished panel for being
    here with us this morning. I look forward to hearing your testimony and
    exploring in detail the many suggestions that you will offer us today.
        I would also like to take a second to thank the majority for
    holding this hearing. Although our two sides may differ on many of the
    policies contained within HEA reauthorization, the majority should be
    commended for its willingness to consistently invite nonpartisan
    experts on higher education to testify on reauthorization.
        However, I would be remiss if I did not also briefly discuss the
    impact of the FY2014 Republican budget on higher education. By
    eliminating the mandatory funding elements of the Pell Grants program,
    shifting Pell to a program funded entirely by discretionary
    appropriations, rolling back Pell eligibility expansions for low-income
    students, freezing the maximum Pell Grant for 10 years, and allowing
    certain student loan interest rates to double on July 1, we must
    recognize that such a budget--were it ever to become law--would have a
    disproportionately negative impact on students.
        We have reached a critical point for the future of higher education
    in this nation. As we all know, college tuition continues to rise,
    state appropriations continue to fall, and our students are now
    responsible for shouldering more of the burden than ever before. With
    student loan debt recently surpassing $1 trillion and sequestration
    inflicting significant cuts to programs like Federal Work-Study and
    SEOG, it is imperative that Congress promotes sustainable policies that
    encourage college access, affordability, and completion for our
    students.
        Enrolling in college is a lifetime investment. Studies universally
    indicate that a college graduate will earn significantly more over his
    or her lifetime than a non-graduate. While national unemployment rates
    for those with a bachelor's degree or higher currently sits at 3.8
    percent, for those with a high school degree or lower the national
    unemployment rate stands at 8.5 percent.
        At the same time, a study released by Georgetown University notes
    that the gap between the supply of workers with postsecondary
    credentials and available job openings requiring those credentials may
    be as wide as 3 million by 2018.
        And yet, research shows that the United States has fallen from
    first to sixteenth in the world in the percentage of 25-to-34 year olds
    with a college degree. In fact, the United States is the only country
    in the world in which degree attainment levels for those just entering
    the labor market--at 39 percent--is actually lower than those preparing
    to retire and leave the labor market--at 41 percent. In order to
    maintain global competitiveness and our perch as the world's top
    economy, we must continue to support our students by investing in
    federal financial aid programs that encourage college access and
    affordability.
        We must do a better job of providing students and their families
    with clear, useful, and timely information about college costs and
    financial aid options to help them make the right decision. Given the
    variety of ways students attend college and the growing reliance on
    federal financial aid dollars, the federal government is in a unique
    position to help collect such information so that students and their
    families can make a direct comparison across institutions.
        Although Congress, the Obama Administration, and the Department of
    Education have jointly issued a number of initiatives aimed at
    introducing transparency into the system, we must revisit these
    decisions in order to tweak, update, and ensure that these measures are
    helping our students make the most informed decisions possible.
        We must also work with the States to ensure that they are doing
    everything in their power to preserve--not eliminate--programs that
    enable families to afford college. State governments have played a
    vital role in the higher education `triad' since passage of the first
    Higher Education Act in 1965. Though we understand the difficult
    financial circumstances facing many of the states, balancing budgets on
    the backs of students and their families is simply the wrong
    prescription for fixing these problems.
        As we look to reauthorize the Higher Education Act in the coming
    months, we must address these issues and many more with clear vision
    and an eye towards the future. I look forward to having a productive
    conversation with my colleagues and our distinguished panel and I yield
    back the balance of my time.
                                     ______

        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Bishop.
        Pursuant to committee rule 7(c), all subcommittee members
    will be permitted to submit written statements to be included
    in the permanent hearing record.
        And without objection, the hearing record will remain open
    for 14 days to allow statements, questions for the record, and
    other extraneous material referenced during the hearing to be
    submitted in the official hearing record.
        Before introducing our panel of witnesses, I would like to
    recognize the fact that we have in the audience with us today
    seven parliamentarians from the country of Turkey, the Republic
    of Turkey, and we are very pleased to have them with us.
        They are accompanied by some other folks. They are visiting
    the United States, spending several days here in the Congress
    observing our work, and I am very honored that they chose to
    attend our hearing today.
        It is now my pleasure to introduce our distinguished panel
    of witnesses. Dr. Donald Heller is Dean of the College of
    Education and a professor in the Department of Education
    Administration at Michigan State University.
        Prior to his appointment in January 2012, he was director
    of the Center for the Study of Higher Education and professor
    of education and senior scientist at the Pennsylvania State
    University.
        Mr. Alex Garrido is currently a student attending Keiser
    University in Miami where he is studying criminal justice.
    Prior to enrolling at Kaiser, he served as a combat engineer in
    the Navy.
        Dr. Nicole Hurd is the founder and executive director of
    the National College Advising Corps, a consortium of 18 partner
    colleges and universities in 14 states that higher recent
    college graduates to serve as college advisors.
        Mr. Travis Reindl oversees the Education Division's
    postsecondary education work area at the National Governors
    Association Center for Best Practices. He also led the 2010-
    2011 NGA Chair's Initiative Complete to Compete, which focused
    on increasing college completion and productivity.
        Before I recognize you individually to provide your
    testimony, let me briefly explain our lighting system. You will
    have 5 minutes to present your testimony.
        When you begin, the light in front of you will turn green.
    When 1 minute is left, the light will turn yellow. When your
    time has expired, the light will turn red.
        At that point, I ask that you wrap up your remarks as best
    as you are able. After you have testified, members will each
    have 5 minutes to ask questions of the panel.
        I now recognize Dr. Donald Heller for 5 minutes.

                STATEMENT OF DR. DONALD E. HELLER, DEAN,
            COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

        Mr. Heller. Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member Bishop, and
    members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
    address you on today.
        I am speaking as a researcher on college access and not as
    a representative of Michigan State University this morning.
        As the price of college has risen over the last three
    decades, there has been much discussion of ways to ensure that
    students and their families have adequate information about the
    costs, programs, and benefits associated with attending
    college.
        We know that there are positive returns to investments in
    higher education, the college wage premium, the additional
    amount that someone earns after earning a bachelor's degree as
    compared to those with only a high school diploma, has more
    than doubled in the last 35 years.
        In order for students to make appropriate choices about
    attending college however they need good information about
    postsecondary educational options. In thinking about ways to do
    this, it is important to realize a few key facts about where
    students attend college in our nation.
        Fifty-four percent of first-year students attend community
    colleges and the great majority of these are in their local
    regions. Another 14 percent are enrolled in proprietary schools
    where again, they are most likely attending one in their local
    communities. These proportions are even greater for adult
    students.
        Over two thirds of first-year students are enrolled in an
    institution within 25 miles of home, and 81 percent are
    enrolled within 50 miles of their home.
        What these data tell us is that the majority of perspective
    college enrollees are looking at a fairly limited choice set.
    Those institutions that are very close to home and primarily
    community colleges and proprietary institutions.
        For individuals who are thinking about attending college,
    there are a number of sources of information. One of the most
    important is a student's family and peers. Research has shown
    that these are critical data sources particularly for students
    in the earlier parts of the college search process.
        There is much information available from colleges and
    universities themselves including admissions and financial aid
    websites, view books, college costs and financial aid
    calculators.
        Like any information provided by an organization selling a
    good or service, however, it is only fair that the information
    be consumed with a warning of caveat emptor.
        While I do not mean to imply that colleges and universities
    may intentionally mislead potential students, it is advisable
    to keep in mind that information is generally provided to
    maximize institutional rather than student interests.
        For students enrolled in high school guidance counselors
    are a valuable and critical resource. However, access to good
    college counseling in high schools is very inequitably
    distributed with schools serving high proportions of first-
    generation and poorer students least likely to provide access
    to good college counseling.
        The Department of Education has made a number of efforts
    some under congressional mandate to provide more consumer
    friendly information to students as Dr. Foxx mentioned. The
    IPEDS college navigator provides a single website with
    information about things like prices, enrollments, graduation
    rates, financial aid, etc.
        There are also a number of federal programs, most notably
    the TRIO and GEAR-UP programs, which have as an important part
    of their mission, providing information about colleges to their
    participants.
        There are also many private sources of information about
    college including college guidebooks and rankings. Other
    private sources include not-for-profit organizations devoted to
    improving college access such as the National College Access
    Network and its many state affiliates.
        There are also private college counselors who charge hourly
    or flat rate fees to parents to help their children choose
    colleges and prepare applications. These fees may run from a
    few hundred dollars to as much as $14,000 for a 4-day
    application boot camp. The states are also a source of
    information, but I will defer to Mr. Reindl on that topic.
        The Internet has greatly helped to democratize access to
    information. What has not done as well has been to help people
    access the right information at the right time to meet their
    needs.
        Let me turn now to a few recommendations to enhance higher
    education transparency. First, there is no substitute for
    access to knowledgeable information that could be tailored to
    the needs of individual students.
        While local school districts and states have the main
    responsibility for funding high schools, the federal government
    could consider a highly targeted program to place more
    qualified college counselors in schools serving lower income
    students.
        Second, the Department of Education can improve the
    information about college and financial aid that it provides.
    Just as the Institute of Education Sciences' What Works
    Clearinghouse provides access to educators on proven
    educational programs and practices, the department could
    develop a similar website on college access.
        Third, Congress should continue to support the existing
    Department of Ed programs, such as TRIO and GEAR-UP that
    provide information to students about college and how to pay
    for it.
        Fourth, there are some innovative experiments being
    conducted by researchers that are providing high-quality, low-
    cost information about college to students who desperately need
    it. One I highlighted in my written testimony is the Expanding
    College Opportunities Project.
        I would also like to add one cautionary note. There has
    been much focus recently on collecting better information about
    the salaries earned by graduates of specific colleges or in
    specific majors.
        While there are important vocational training components of
    many postsecondary programs, a college degree confers returns
    to the individual and society that cannot be valued only by the
    simple measurement of an individual's wages in her first job
    after college.
        I will close by thanking you once again for the opportunity
    to address you today. I would be happy to take your questions
    after the remaining witnesses have testified.
        [The statement of Mr. Heller follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Dr. Donald E. Heller, Dean, College of Education,
                  Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI

        Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member Hinojosa, and Members of the
    Subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to address you on today. I
    would like to offer a special greeting to Representative Walberg, from
    Michigan's 7th District, right next to our campus, as well as
    Representative Thompson, with whom I have met in the past and who
    represents the district of my former employer, Pennsylvania State
    University. I come to you today as a researcher having conducted
    studies on college admissions and access for over fifteen years, and
    not as a representative of Michigan State University.
        As the price of college has risen over the last three decades,
    there has been much discussion of ways to ensure that students and
    their families have adequate information about the costs, programs, and
    benefits associated with attending postsecondary education. We are
    reasonably assured of the benefits of attending college; much has been
    written of the lifetime returns earned by those with a college degree
    as compared to those who enter the labor market with only a high school
    diploma. One example, from a recent book of mine, is shown in figure 1
    on the next page. In 2008, the median income of men holding bachelor's
    degrees was 105 percent greater than men holding only a high school
    diploma, and 204 percent greater than high school dropouts. More
    importantly, this college wage premium--the additional amount, on
    average, that someone with a bachelor's degree earns over those with
    only a high school diploma or less education--has more than doubled
    over the last 35 years. This increasing college wage premium is the
    primary reason that most analysts describe to explain why college
    enrollments have continued to rise, even in the face of price increases
    that have well exceeded inflation over the last three decades.
        It is important to note that earning a bachelor's degree is not the
    only path toward achieving what we often have called a ``middle class
    lifestyle.'' However, it is clear that fewer and fewer jobs in our
    economy today, as well as into the future, will allow people to earn a
    decent wage if they don't have some form of postsecondary training.

        It is clear that it is a national imperative to ensure that we have
    good information available about postsecondary educational options for
    students and their families. In thinking about ways to do this, it is
    important to realize a few key facts about where students attend
    college (all data are the author's calculations from the U.S.
    Department of Education's National Postsecondary Student Aid Study of
    2008):
         54 percent of all first-year students enrolling in
    postsecondary educational institutions attend community colleges, and
    the great majority of these are attending community colleges in their
    local regions. Another 14 percent of first-year students are enrolled
    in proprietary institutions, where again, they are most likely
    attending one in their local communities.
         This proportion is even greater for independent students,
    those generally over the age of 24. Fifty-nine percent of these
    students attend community colleges, and another 22 percent attend
    proprietary institutions.
         Over two-thirds of all first-year college students are
    enrolled in an institution within 25 miles of their home, and 81
    percent are enrolled within fifty miles of their home. Again, these
    proportions are even greater for adults students--three-quarters and 90
    percent, respectively.
        What these data tell us is that the vast majority of prospective
    college enrollees, both traditional-aged students as well as adults
    returning to college for the first-time, are looking at a fairly
    limited choice set: those institutions that are very close to home, and
    primarily community colleges and proprietary institutions.
        This is not to say that given better information about
    postsecondary educational choices, more students would not choose to
    move farther from home to attend college, or more students could not be
    persuaded that a four-year public or not-for-profit institution would
    be a better option for them. But the reality is that for many students
    attending college for the first time, there are a very small number of
    the over 7,200 accredited, Title IV-participating institutions, that
    these students are considering.
        For high school students or adults who are thinking about attending
    college, there are a number of sources of information available:
         Parents, families, and peers: One of the most important
    sources of information about college is a student's parents (if a
    traditional-aged student), families, and peers. Research has shown that
    these are critical data sources, particularly for students in the
    earlier parts of the college search process, i.e., those in the early
    high school years.\1\ Students later in high school seek out and find
    additional sources of information, but family and friends are critical
    in the earlier stages.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Bell, A. D., Rowan-Kenyon, H. T., & Perna, L. W. (2009).
    College Knowledge of 9th and 11th Grade Students: Variation by School
    and State Context. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(6), 663-685.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
         The quantity, quality and reliability of information about
    college available from family and friends varies greatly by such
    characteristics as income and parental education.
         Colleges and universities: There is lots of information
    from colleges and universities themselves, including admissions and
    financial aid websites, view books, and college cost and financial aid
    calculators. Most college also provide tours to prospective students
    who visit the campus, and send representatives to college fairs out in
    the community. Like any information provided by an organization selling
    a good or service, however, it is only fair that the information be
    consumed with the warning of caveat emptor. While I do not mean to
    imply that colleges and universities may intentionally mislead
    potential students, it is advisable to keep in mind that information is
    generally provided to maximize institutional, rather than student,
    interests.
        Many colleges, including my own, offer outreach programs that bring
    high school students to their campuses to give them an intensive
    experience of what it is like to be on a college campus, provide
    academic and test prep tutoring, and the like. These experiences may
    range from the relatively short-term (such as a weekend) to as long as
    four or more weeks in the summer.
         Guidance counselors: For students still enrolled in high
    school, guidance counselors (as well as teachers and other school
    staff) can be a valuable resource. However, access to these kinds of
    resources--particularly guidance counselors, who are most likely to
    have the best and most up-to-date information about attending college--
    is very inequitably distributed. A study conducted for the National
    Association for College Admission Counseling found that high school
    guidance counselors can be critical in improving college access for
    racial minority and low socioeconomic status students, but these are
    exactly the populations who are likely to have the least access to good
    college counseling.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ McDonough, P. M. (2006). Counseling and College Counseling in
    America's High Schools. Arlington, VA: National Association for College
    Admission Counseling.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Federal government: In recent years, the Department of
    Education has made a number of efforts, some under Congressional
    mandate, to provide more consumer-friendly information to students. The
    IPEDS College Navigator, for example, provides a single website with
    basic data about every Title IV-participating institution in the
    country. This includes things like prices, enrollments, programs
    offered, financial aid available, and graduation rates. The Department
    has also worked with colleges to help them implement Net Price
    Calculators, mandated by Congress in the Higher Education Opportunity
    Act of 2008.
         There are also a number of federal programs, most notably
    the TRIO and GEAR-UP programs, which have as an important part of their
    mission providing information about colleges to their participants.
         Private sources: There are also many private sources of
    information about college. This includes:
         Publications, such as college guidebooks written by
    individuals or organizations, or rankings published by such
    organizations as U.S. News & World Reports, Barron's, and The Princeton
    Review. This includes numerous books providing advice on how to pay for
    college. A simple search on Amazon for ``college guides'' returns over
    3,000 entries.
         Information provided in written and other forms by not-
    for-profit organizations devoted to improving college access, most
    prominently the National College Access Network and its many state
    affiliates around the country.
         Private college counselors, who charge hourly or flat rate
    fees to parents to help their children choose colleges. These fees may
    run from a few hundred dollars to as much as $14,000 for a four day
    ``Application Boot Camp.'' \3\ As with access to guidance counselors in
    high schools, access to private college counseling is correlated with
    the income of the student's parents.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Hernandez College Consulting. (2013). ``Application Boot
    Camp.'' Retrieved April 21, 2013, from http://
    www.hernandezcollegeconsulting.com/application-bootcamp/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
         States: Information from the 50 states and the District of
    Columbia, who control and provide funding to public colleges and
    universities that enroll 72 percent of all college students. I will not
    say much else about this, however, as I know that Mr. Reindl will be
    discussing this topic.
        I would argue that there is no issue with the volume of information
    available about college. As mentioned earlier, there are numerous
    guidebooks, websites, magazines, and other sources that are often
    freely accessible and available to most all prospective college
    students. As has been said by many, the Internet has greatly helped to
    democratize access to information. What it has not done as
    successfully, however, has been to help people get access to the right
    information to meet their needs. And it is critical that we help
    prospective students to get the right information in their hands at the
    necessary times.
        Having provided you with this overview of the availability of
    information about college and how to fund it, let me turn now to a few
    recommendations regarding how we can improve the this information.
        Some of these are actions that the federal government can assist
    with; others are better suited for other levels of government or
    private sector actors.
        First, there is no adequate substitution for having access to
    objective, unbiased, and knowledgeable information that can be tailored
    to the needs of individual students. A couple of generations ago, when
    we had a much smaller proportion of high school students who
    transitioned into college (and adult students were few and far between
    in comparison to today), this role was fulfilled by the high school
    guidance counselor. Schools in upper-middle and upper-income
    communities were the ones sending a high percentage of students onto
    college, and these schools provided adequate access to college
    counseling.
        Today, we have a higher proportion of students who aspire to attend
    college, and they are distributed among a broader set of high schools
    than in the past. However, we have not provided access to good college
    counseling in the schools to many of these students who historically
    have been underrepresented in higher education, those predominantly
    from lower-income and racial minority families. Because these students
    tend to be clustered in lower-resourced schools, they are not provided
    with the same level of college counseling afforded to students from
    wealthier families. And for most of them, access to private college
    counseling--including the $14,000 ``Application Boot Camp'' mentioned
    earlier--is well beyond their means.
        While local school districts and states have the primary
    responsibility for funding and operating high schools, the federal
    government could consider a highly-targeted, federally-funded program
    to place more qualified college counselors in schools serving lower-
    income students. A complimentary approach would be for the federal
    government to partner with non-profits, such as the National College
    Advising Corps (NCAC), a largely privately-funded organization which
    works with colleges and universities to place recent college graduates
    into high schools serving high proportions of low-income and first-
    generation students. The NCAC representatives work one-on-one with
    these high school students to supplement guidance counselors who are
    often overwhelmed with high student-to-counselor ratios and many other
    demanding responsibilities.
        Students in predominantly low-income schools who have had been able
    to gain access to good college counseling from an individual report how
    important it has been to them. In one study, respondents described this
    person as being ``almost `savior-like' '' (p. 674) in helping them gain
    good information about college.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Bell, A. D., Rowan-Kenyon, H. T., & Perna, L. W. (2009).
    College Knowledge of 9th and 11th Grade Students: Variation by School
    and State Context. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(6), 663-685.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Second, the Department of Education can also continue to improve
    the information about college and financial aid that it provides to
    students and families. While as I noted earlier the Department has made
    great strides in recent years with its websites and other sources of
    data, the information that is provided is still focused on providing
    facts and figures. If a student wants to know what majors are offered
    at a particular institution, or what the tuition and fees and net price
    are, or what the six-year graduation rate is, the IPEDS College
    Navigator is a good place to go. But it is not a place to visit to help
    students understand if a college is the right ``fit'' for them. I am
    not suggesting that the Department get into the college guide book
    business, but it could create a portal to objective information that
    could help students find a good college. Just as the Institute of
    Education Sciences' What Works Clearinghouse provides access to
    educators on proven educational programs, products, practices, and
    policies, a similar website on college access could provide pointers to
    good, objective information about choosing colleges.
        Third, Congress should continue to support the existing Department
    of Education programs, such as the TRIO and GEAR-UP programs, that have
    as part of their design providing information to students about
    attending college and how to pay for it.
        Fourth, school districts and state governments need to step forward
    and ensure that high school students and their families are being
    provided access to high quality information about attending college and
    paying for it. One way of doing this is to ensure that schools are
    adequately funded so that students have access to good advice from
    school personnel. As described earlier, there is no good substitute for
    this level of personalized attention. Schools should be encouraged to
    work with private organizations, including local businesses and non-
    profits, that have as their mission getting more students enrolling in
    postsecondary education.
        As I described earlier, the great majority of students are
    interested in attending college very close to their local communities,
    and for many of these students, the local communities can offer at
    least one postsecondary option that is the right price, offers the
    program they want, and would be that proverbial ``good fit.'' Thus,
    providing good information about these local options should not be as
    daunting a task as trying to help students choose from among the over
    7,000 accredited institutions across the country.
        Fifth, there are some innovative experiments being conducted by
    researchers that attempt to target information at those students who
    historically have been underrepresented in higher education and
    generally have poor access to good information about it. One I will
    highlight is the Expanding College Opportunities Project, being
    conducted by researchers Caroline Hoxby of Stanford University and
    Sarah Turner of the University of Virginia.\5\ This project has
    targeted high-achieving, low-income students, and provides them with
    very low-cost, highly-targeted information (via the mail and websites)
    about colleges, financial aid, and net prices. While the study is
    somewhat limited because the target population is those students who
    have relatively high levels of academic achievements, early results
    nevertheless show that the approach holds promise.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ Hoxby, C., & Turner, S. (2013). Expanding College Opportunities
    for High-Achieving, Low Income Students. Unpublished manuscript,
    Stanford University and the University of Virginia.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        I would also like to add one cautionary note. There has been much
    focus in the last year or two, particularly in some states, on
    collecting better information about the salaries earned by graduates of
    specific colleges and universities, including data on earnings by
    major. This issue has been framed not just as one of providing better
    information to prospective students, but also as one of institutional
    accountability. While this kind of information can be helpful, I think
    that it also can be used in a way that narrows the purpose of a
    postsecondary education. While there are important vocational training
    components of many postsecondary programs, a college education--whether
    it is one that leads to a bachelor's degree or not--confers returns to
    the individual and society that cannot be valued only by the simple
    measurement of an individual's wages in her first job after college.
    The true value of an education can only be seen five, 10, or even 20
    years after the education is experienced, and in ways well beyond the
    size of the paycheck earned by the recipient of that education.
        In summary, we have made some good strides on getting more
    information to students about college. These efforts have been
    accomplished by the federal government, states, local districts, and
    private organizations. But we still have a long way to go to improve on
    these efforts if we are going to ensure that all students have the
    right information at the right time and tailored to their needs.
        I will close by thanking you once again for the opportunity to
    address you today. I would be happy to take your questions after the
    remaining witnesses have testified.
                                     ______

        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Garrido, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

                  STATEMENT OF ALEX GARRIDO, STUDENT,
                           KEISER UNIVERSITY

        Mr. Garrido. Good morning, Chairwoman Foxx and committee
    members. It is an honor to have been invited to testify before
    the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training to
    share my story about college experience.
        As you said earlier, I was a military member from 2001 to
    2006 as a Sea Bee which is a combat engineer, civil engineer.
        During my time in service I went to countries such as
    Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Spain, Guam, Iraq, and Kuwait. I
    was medically discharged for my injuries sustained while in
    service and came back to Miami, where originally, where I was
    from.
        I found a job as an FAA--at a FAA repair station, which was
    as a jet engine mechanic. Unfortunately, as the economy
    plummeted, I found myself without a job in 2008. Unable to
    readily find work, I chose to enroll in college so I could
    continue providing for my family. I began to search online for
    colleges and degree programs which were of interest to me.
        While doing my research, I looked at the Veterans' Affairs
    website and I found out about the Post 9/11 benefits were
    available and could cover housing stipend, books, and tuition.
    This helped me with my decision and I knew it was time to go
    back to school.
        Although the VA was not involved with my search for
    schools, they did help me however, with the necessary forms for
    my education funding.
        Initially, I looked online at different schools in South
    Florida and I felt best--what would best meet my needs. I was
    looking for schools that had degree programs, which could be
    completed quickly, would not require a long commute to school,
    and that the student body that was serious about learning.
        The main information I was able to obtain online in these
    searches was what degree programs were often offered as well as
    the college locations. I was also able to use the website to
    get a feel for the schedule and plans for the various degree
    programs.
        For me, schedule was important seeing as how I was already
    in my thirties and had been out of school for a long time so
    the idea of focusing on three to four classes at once was a
    daunting task.
        After selecting the schools I was interested in, I began to
    visit the campuses and speak to admissions advisors. I wanted
    to get a feel for the environment of each individual school and
    then this had gauge slowly--from my--I couldn't gauge this from
    the websites.
        The first school I visited had an admissions representative
    who spoke quickly and could not keep my attention. This did not
    take the time--she didn't take the time to answer my questions
    and I was--she was forcing contracts my way.
        Another school I visited, I was informed I would need to
    take general education courses, which would have about thirty
    students per class.
        Class size was an important issue so I began speaking to
    my--with friends; and they informed me that classes would
    normally have between 50-100 students. Having been out of
    school for so many years I wanted more individualized attention
    so I ruled those colleges out.
        When I discussed my options with my girlfriend, she
    encouraged me to come up with a game plan. I went to see her
    friends at Keiser University where the admissions counselor,
    she knew. Arriving, he gave me a tour of the college, explained
    in detail the degree programs offered, along with taking and
    what to expect.
        After he got to know me, and the fact that I was a veteran,
    he took me to financial aid to see about my veteran's benefits.
    I was not able--aware of any navigation tools from the
    Department of Education, which was why my decision was based
    mostly on my visit and the support of my friends and family.
        Unlike the experience to another college where I felt I was
    being pressured into signing paperwork and enrolling, this was
    not the case at Keiser because of the experience during my
    first visit, I returned a few days after knowing that I was
    going to--expected to take a test and then later to see if I
    was going to be admitted.
        Keiser did everything they could to fund my education in
    conjunction with benefits from the VA and also the Yellow
    Ribbon Scholarship. Then Keiser matched whatever the Yellow
    Ribbon would offer.
        I filled out the Free Application for Federal Student Aid,
    which is the FAFSA and obtained a Pell Grant. I was also
    eventually offered an academic scholarship because of my grades
    and a military scholarship for being a veteran.
        I have been at Keiser University since 2009 and I likely--
    and I like everything about the school from small classes,
    everyone being required to be in professional attire, and the
    fact that Keiser is a Level 6 accredited, a Level 6 SACS
    accredited school offering doctoral degrees.
        I am a firm believer in that the environment plays a role
    in the attitude of the students. Teachers are easily accessible
    whether you meet with them on campus or by email them after
    hours.
        My associate--I earned my associate's degree in 2011 with a
    GPA of 3.6. I would never imagine that I would have graduated
    with such a high GPA with my associate's.
        After graduating with my associate's, I continued my
    education my bachelor's, and I am proud to say I am going to
    graduate in September.
        For me, choosing a college was about the academics needed
    to come, and my decision was not lightly. I considered the
    graduation rates, the number of students in my class, and the
    length and degree of the program because my funding would not
    last indefinitely.
        I chose a career of criminal justice, and Madam Chair and
    members, thank you for the opportunity to speaking today about
    my experience and hoping the decision of transparency will help
    things a little easier for people like me, people with busy
    lives, children, and those who are veterans. I look forward to
    any questions that you might have for me.
        Thank you.
        [The statement of Mr. Garrido follows:]

         Prepared Statement of Alex Garrido, Student, Keiser University

        Good morning, Chairwoman Foxx and Committee Members. It is an honor
    to have been invited to testify before the Subcommittee on Higher
    Education and Workforce Training to share my story about my college
    experience.
        Let me begin by sharing a little of my history. I served in the
    United States Navy from 2001 to 2006 and I was a Sea Bee, which is a
    civil engineer. During my time in the service I went to countries such
    as Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Spain, Guam, Iraq, and Kuwait. I was
    medically discharged from injuries sustained while in service and came
    back to Miami, where I was originally from. I found a job at a FAA jet
    engine repair station. Unfortunately, as the economy plummeted, I found
    myself without a job in 2008. Unable to readily find work, I chose to
    enroll in college so that I could continue providing for my family. I
    began to search online for colleges and degree programs, which were of
    interest to me.
        While doing my research, I looked at the Veterans' Affairs website
    and I found out that Post 9/11 benefits were available and could cover
    a housing stipend, books, and tuition. This helped with my decision and
    I knew it was time to go back to school. Although the VA was not
    involved in my search for schools, they did help me fill out the
    necessary forms to have my education funded.
        Initially, I looked online at different schools in South Florida I
    felt would best meet my needs. I was looking for a school that had
    degree programs, which could be completed quickly, would not require a
    long commute to the school, had a student body that was serious about
    learning, and classes that would interest me. The main information I
    was able to obtain online in these searches was what degree programs
    were offered as well as the college locations. However, I was also able
    to use the websites to get a feel for the schedules and plans for the
    various degree programs.
        For me, the schedule was important seeing as how I was already in
    my thirties and had been out of school for a long time so the idea of
    focusing on three or four classes at once was daunting. After selecting
    the schools I was interested in, I began to visit the campuses and
    speak to admissions advisors. I wanted to get a feel for the
    environments of each individual school and this is hard to gauge solely
    from school websites. The first school I visited had an admissions
    representative who spoke too quickly and could not keep my attention.
    She did not take the time to answer my questions and was forcing
    contracts my way. At another school I visited I was informed I would
    need to take general education courses, which would have about thirty
    students per class.
        Class size was an important issue so I began speaking with friends;
    I was informed classes at a number of my other choices would have
    anywhere from 50-100 students. Having been out of school for so many
    years I knew I wanted more individualized attention so I ruled out
    those colleges. When I discussed my options with my girlfriend, she
    encouraged me to come up with a game plan and move forward with my
    education. I went to see a friend of hers at Keiser University who was
    an admissions counselor. After arriving, he gave me a tour of the
    college, explained in detail the degree programs offered, how long they
    would take, and what to expect. After he got to know me, and the fact
    that I was a veteran, he then took me to financial aid to see about my
    veteran's benefits. I was not aware of any navigation tools from the
    Department of Education which is why my decision was based mostly on my
    visits and the support of my friends and family.
        Unlike an experience at another college where I felt I was being
    pressured into signing paperwork and enrolling, this was not the case
    at Keiser. Because of the experience during my first visit, I returned
    a few days later to take my entrance exam and I already knew what to
    expect from the school if I was admitted. Keiser did everything they
    could to help fund my education in conjunction with benefits offered by
    the VA--the Yellow Ribbon Scholarship and a match by Keiser. I filled
    out the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and obtained a
    Pell Grant. I was also eventually offered an academic scholarship
    because of my grades and a military scholarship for being a veteran.
        I have been at Keiser University since 2009 and I like everything
    about the school from the small classes, everyone being required to be
    in professional attire, and the fact that Keiser is a Level 6 SACS
    accredited school offering doctoral degrees. I am a firm believer that
    the environment plays a role in the attitude of the students. Teachers
    are easily accessible whether you meet with them on campus or email
    them after hours. I earned my Associate's degree in 2011 with a 3.6 GPA
    and would never have imagined I could graduate with such a high GPA. I
    immediately continued my education and went on to obtain my Bachelor's
    degree; I am happy to tell you I will graduate this coming September.
    The one class at a time structure allows me to absorb the information
    presented and with the way the information is continuously delivered
    over that month it helps me to retain what I have learned, having it
    become second nature. The University administration is always available
    to listen to the concerns of students and takes action on issues
    raised, which is greatly appreciated by the student body because it
    lets us know our voices are being heard and we are not just a number.
        For me, choosing a college was about my academic needs and I did
    not come by my decision lightly. I considered graduation rates, the
    number of students in my classes, the length of the degree program
    since I was receiving funding that would not last indefinitely,
    accreditation and placement rates. These things would all determine how
    successful I would be in my chosen career path of criminal justice; my
    goal from the start has been to be employable. I did not enroll with
    any unanswered questions and it has made the task of focusing on my
    studies that much easier.
        Madam Chair and Members, thank you again, for the opportunity to
    speak to you today about my experiences. My hope is that today's
    discussion about transparency helps make things a little easier for
    people like me--people with a busy life, children, those who work and
    veterans. I look forward to any questions you may have.
                                     ______

        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Garrido.
        I now recognize Dr. Nicole Hurd for 5 minutes.

      STATEMENT OF DR. NICOLE FARMER HURD, FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE
               DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COLLEGE ADVISING CORPS

        Ms. Hurd. Thank you for the honor of being here today.
        As the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of the National
    College Advising Corps, I am here representing 335 recent
    college graduates who are serving as college advisers to nearly
    117,000 students in 389 high schools across 14 states.
        Our program places these college graduates from our 18
    partner universities into low income underserved high schools
    to help students navigate the path to college and earn
    meaningful credentials.
        We are an evidence-based, data-driven, high-impact program
    that has seen an increase of 8 to 12 percent college
    matriculation rates in these schools. And this morning, I have
    to share with you that the Department of Education data shows
    is that we have helped 36,000 students file their FAFSA forms
    this fall--or this spring.
        We--our mission is simple. We are to help every student,
    every student find the right match and fit so they enroll in
    schools that serve them well.
        My testimony is from the vantage point of these near peer
    advisors. They spend every day working alongside our guidance
    counselors, teachers, and principles making sure our students
    take advantage of educational opportunities and are ready to
    compete in the global economy.
        There are real barriers for our high school students today;
    the gap between what they think they know and what they need to
    know. If you ask an eighth-grade class in this country how many
    of them want to go to college, every head will go up. But we
    lose them.
        We lose them in the process. They are unaware of fee
    waivers. They are unaware of Pell grants. They are unaware of
    the net price calculators. They do not know to look for
    graduation rates and they don't know how to make wise choices.
        In my home state of North Carolina and many of the other
    states represented here, 100 students will enroll in our public
    colleges and universities. Only 13 will graduate with a 2-year
    degree in 4 years, and only 29 will graduate with a 4-year--
    from a 4-year institution within 8 years.
        We need to do better. There are real barriers. Our college
    guidance counselors--excuse me--our high school guidance
    counselor rate is way too high. The recommended ratio is 250 to
    1. In California, it is 810 to 1. In Texas, it is 711 to 1. And
    in Michigan, it is 660 to 1.
        Our job in the National College Advising Corps is to bring
    these near peer graduates into the schools to help those
    guidance counselors make sure that all of our students find a
    match and go to a school where they will succeed.
        But there are very simple barriers; the barriers that you
    can help us fix. Information barriers that are also preventing
    our students from enrolling and completing higher education.
    There are certain activities that all high school students
    need. They need to go on college visits. They know college is
    good, but they have no idea what a vocational school, a
    community college, or a 4-year school can offer them.
        They need financial literacy. They do not know the
    difference between a grant or a loan. They have sticker shock.
    They have no difference between what the sticker price of the
    University is versus their actual net cost that they will pay.
        And my most heartbreaking example I want to share with you
    this morning as a family who did not want to take out a loan
    and take support from the federal government because they were
    too proud and thought that that was aid that they did not want
    to take and so instead, they put their tuition on a 15 percent
    credit card not realizing a credit card is actually a loan.
        We have a lack of timeline in knowledge in our schools as
    well. We need timelines for all students, the 9th through 12th
    grade, and they need to be posted in every classroom, not just
    in the guidance office.
        The students need to know when to register, when to take
    the SAT and ACT, when to start their scholarship searches, when
    to fill out their FASFA, priority deadlines, these are all
    things that can be really, really big barriers and they are
    really small, but we need to knock them down.
        I cannot tell you how many students we advise that did not
    take their SAT or ACT in their junior year, did not see a list
    of courses they needed until 12th grade and therefore were not
    college and career ready and did not realize that you file
    financial aid forms and when you do is important.
        You all have done some amazing things to help us and I want
    to thank you for that. We ask you to have universal adoption of
    the Financial Aid Shopping Sheet. It is so important that our
    families see things apples to apples. In order to have
    graduation rates there, those make a huge difference.
        Think about what choice you can make when you can actually
    see a school's graduation rate, loan default rates, median
    borrowing, grants and scholarships, net costs so our families,
    especially our low income families can see what this is really
    going to cost them.
        As you know, reading financial award letters up until this
    time, you need an advanced degree for. They are full of jargon.
    They are hard to read, and they have been a barrier. Net price
    calculators; thank you for what you have done to make our
    higher institutions put those there. They need to be places
    where people can see them.
        They are so buried right now that our families, our
    students, our counselors, and our advisors can't get to them.
    And again, we need to explain to people the difference between
    the sticker price and the net price.
        And finally, I want to thank you for what you have done
    with college navigator and all of the other things that are
    coming up to help people with families--and their families
    navigate the college process.
        I will say we still worry about how much predatory and
    wrong information is out on the Internet. People should not
    have to pay to fill out their FAFSA. People should not have to
    pay to get information from public domains.
        So my final comment is just to thank you all for this and
    again, on behalf of the 335 recent college graduates all who
    are part of this amazing advising corps, all who are part of
    major universities, I want to thank you. Every student in this
    country deserves to fulfill their potential through education
    and this committee is leading the way. Thank you.
        [The statement of Ms. Hurd follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Dr. Nicole Farmer Hurd, Founder and Executive
                   Director, National College Advising Corps

        Chairwoman Foxx, Representative Hinojosa, and Members, thank you
    for the honor of providing this testimony to your committee.
        As the Founder and CEO of the National College Advising Corps, I
    represent 335 recent college graduates who are serving as college
    advisers to nearly 117,000 students in 389 high schools across 14
    states. Our program places these college graduates from 18 partner
    universities into low income and underserved high schools to help
    students navigate the path to college and earn meaningful credentials.
        Our partner universities, some from your states, schools such as
    the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of
    Georgia, the University of Michigan and Michigan State University, New
    York University, the University of Virginia, Franklin & Marshall
    College, Texas A&M, and Cal, Berkeley, are so committed to ensuring all
    of our students are college and career ready and have a meaningful
    postsecondary plan that they join us--with their dollars and talents--
    in placing their recent graduates in high schools. My testimony is from
    the vantage of these near peer advisers who spend every day, alongside
    guidance counselors, teachers, and principals, making sure our students
    take advantage of educational opportunities and are ready to compete in
    the global economy.
        There are real barriers for our high school students today. There
    is a gap between what students think they know and what they need to
    know. If you ask an 8th grade class how many of them want to go to
    college, 100% of the hands will go up--and yet as the years go by--we
    lose these students. They do not understand financial aid or what
    classes they need to take. They are unaware of fee waivers, Pell
    grants, and net price calculators. They do not know to look for
    graduation rates and how to make wise choices, so in North Carolina,
    and many of the other states represented here--100 students will enroll
    in our public colleges and universities, only 13 will graduate with a 2
    year degree within 4 years and only 29 will graduate from a 4 year
    institution within 8 years (http://www.completecollege.org/docs/North--
    Carolina--Feb28.pdf).
        There are structural barriers that prevent our student for
    achieving their full potential through education--our high school
    counselor to student ratio is too high. The America School Counselors'
    Association recommends a ratio of 250:1, but recent Department of
    Education data shows the national average is 459:1--in California it is
    810:1, in Texas it is 711:1, and in Michigan it is 660:1.
        The vast majority of our Education Schools which train our
    counselors, teachers, and school leadership do not include college and
    financial aid counseling in the curriculum. There is not enough human
    capital to serve our students well.
        The National College Advising Corps is helping to address this
    human capital issue by placing near peer advisers in our partner high
    school to work alongside our counselors and teachers and help make
    college and career dreams become reality.
        And yet there are simple barriers--information barriers--that are
    also preventing our students from enrolling and completing higher
    education. They are certain activities that all high school students
    need in their schools.
    College Visits
        Students think they know what college is, but many have never been
    to a campus. They do not understand how higher education works and may
    not see how they could be successful in college until they see it with
    their own eyes--research shows if they actually visit a college campus,
    their chances of matriculating increase.
    Financial Literacy
        They think they know how much college costs, but we have not
    educated many of them or their families on financial literacy. They do
    not know the difference between a grant and a loan. They do not know
    the difference between the college cost and the net price. My most
    heartbreaking example is a family, who did not want to take out a loan
    due to pride--refused their government backed aid--and instead put the
    tuition on a credit card with a 15% interest rate--not realizing a
    credit card is a loan.
    Lack of a Timeline and College Information throughout the School
        One of the most effective things we have seen is enhancing a
    school's college-going culture. In one low-performing school in North
    Carolina, our adviser changed the signs on the all the classroom
    doors--instead of reading ``Mrs. Smith, History or Mr. Jones, Math'',
    they read ``Mrs. Smith, History, the UT Austin or Mr. Jones Math, the
    University of Georgia.'' The principal called me to say he had never
    seen the aspirations and the conversation in a school change so
    quickly. These students thought they did not know anyone who went to
    college or anyone to ask for advice when the reality is they were
    surrounded by college graduates every day. We now do this across the
    country and refer to it as our ``Diploma Doors'' campaign.
        Timelines for all students--from 9-12th grades--need to be posted
    in every classroom, not just the in the guidance office. Students need
    to know when to register and take the SAT or ACT exams, when to start
    scholarship searches, when to fill out to the FAFSA, and priority
    deadlines for applications. These seem like small steps, but I cannot
    tell you how many students we advise who did not take the SAT/ACT in
    their junior year, did not see a list of courses needed for college
    until 12th grade and then had the shock to learn that they are not
    college ready, did not realize that when you file your financial aid
    forms is of the utmost importance.
        And there are real barriers that can be knocked down by the work
    this Committee is doing:
        Universal adoption of the Financial Aid Shopping Sheet--This
    document is a game changer for our students. There are many key areas--
    graduation rate, loan default rate, median borrowing, grants and
    scholarships, net costs, options to pay net costs that this document
    provides in a clear and concise format. As you may know, reading
    financial aid award letters from many of our colleges and universities
    requires an advanced degree. They are full of jargon, hard to read, and
    do not allow consumers to make wise choices. We are excited that 600
    college and universities have adopted the Sheet. Every institution
    should use this form--for the first time a student can compare apples
    to apples--they can look at their options and see real graduation
    rates, real net costs, and what the investment in their education will
    cost. Our college and universities need to honor this investment by
    providing clear information in this accessible form.
        Net price calculators--While we have made great advances in helping
    students and families understand net price vs. college costs, the
    sticker shock of the price of education is still discouraging too many
    of our students, especially our low-income students from pursuing
    higher education. A Century Foundation study found that at the most
    selective 146 colleges and universities, 74% of students come from the
    wealthiest socioeconomic quarter of the population, but just 3% from
    the poorest quarter. Yet the graduation rates at the most selective
    institutions are higher and these schools provide substantial aid. Our
    low income students do not realize they can afford to go to these
    institutions. And while it is great that net price calculators are now
    required on college websites, many of buried them deep within the
    content. The calculator needs to be where prospective students and
    families can find it.
        College information--in addition to College Navigator, there are
    many websites from credible sources that are assisting students and
    families with making wise choices. The College Board's Big Future site,
    https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org, the Chronicle of Higher Education's
    College Reality Check, launched this week, http://
    collegerealitycheck.com/, and the Administration's launch of the
    College Scorecard have made comparing college and accessing important
    data points a reality. Wage data is becoming another way to help
    empower students to make wise choices with sites such as College
    Measures that shows earnings by college and major in four states:
    Arkansas, Colorado, Tennessee, and Virginia. http://
    www.collegemeasures.org/ Our concern is the level of misinformation
    still available on the web. Students and families need to have credible
    information and fall prey to sites that charge them for access to
    information and forms that are in the public domain.
        My final comment goes back to the human capital. As I mentioned in
    the opening, I represent 335 recent college graduates who are working
    daily to ensure our students have the information they need to access
    and persist in higher education. We do this work with great partners--
    high schools, non-profits, the National College Access Network, and
    other support networks. What makes our model unique is that higher
    education institutions help select, train, place, and pay for our
    advisers who serve in high schools. And they are not recruiting for the
    partner university, but rather for all forms of post-secondary
    education. I would encourage the committee to look at this engagement
    as a way to have higher education assist with our nation's college
    access and information barriers.
        Each university has admissions professionals, financial aid
    professionals, recent graduates and others who can assist our high
    schools in helping students navigate the path to college and careers.
    In a global economy, where more of citizens will need a college
    education to compete, we must create a seamless and collaborative
    education pipeline that includes higher education working with K-12,
    and that empowers our students. I am grateful for the leadership of
    this committee for their work to help our students navigate their post
    high schools plans and to fulfill their potential through education.
          attached: national college advising corps overview and data

                                    ------

        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Dr. Hurd.
        I will now recognize that Mr. Travis Reindl for 5 minutes.

      STATEMENT OF TRAVIS REINDL, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, POSTSECONDARY
       EDUCATION, NATIONAL GOVERNORS ASSOCIATION CENTER FOR BEST
                               PRACTICES

        Mr. Reindl. Madam Chairwoman, Mr. Bishop, members of the
    subcommittee, good morning.
        I am Travis Reindl, program director for postsecondary
    education at the National Governors Association Center for Best
    Practices. I thank you for the opportunity to share a state-
    level perspective on increasing transparency and higher
    education, and I look forward to your questions.
        States have an established track record when it comes to
    promoting transparency from their colleges and universities.
    And today, states face a combination of challenges that require
    even more transparency including a growing demand for a more
    educated workforce, significant and lasting fiscal constraints,
    even as revenues improve, and increasing enrollment by students
    from historically underrepresented and underserved populations.
        Governors are leading the call for better information about
    postsecondary outcomes recognizing that students and their
    families and taxpayers need more and better information about
    how our colleges and universities are doing at getting students
    to and through college, outcomes for those students, and the
    return on states' and students' investments in their education.
        In 2010, the National Governors Association launched
    Complete to Compete, an effort to improve how states measure
    and communicate the performance of their postsecondary
    institutions. That effort has produced metrics in two areas.
        The first is college completion. NGA has partnered with
    Complete College America in an effort to improve and build on
    the graduation rate as a performance measure. The result is the
    common completion metrics.
        These metrics cover one, student progress and this includes
    indicators in areas such as students taking remedial courses,
    course completion, credit accumulation, and retention; and two,
    student outcomes, which includes indicators such as the number
    of degrees awarded, graduation and transfer rates, and average
    time and credits to degree.
        Today, 32 states are collecting and publicly reporting
    these metrics and making real changes in policy. For example,
    Connecticut has adopted legislation designed to overhaul and
    eventually end remedial education as we know it statewide.
        The second area is efficiency and effectiveness. Governors
    are also interested in whether their state's colleges and
    universities are producing graduates that can get jobs in
    today's economy and participate in their communities and how
    efficient those institutions are in moving students to degrees
    and certificates.
        As a result, NGA is developing metrics in four areas;
    meeting workforce needs, completion relative to enrollment,
    return on investment, and student learning.
        States are currently working to adopt and use these metrics
    for public reporting and making policy decisions. I am pleased
    to report progress on both fronts. Public reporting is becoming
    more accessible and user-friendly. For example, a growing
    number of states including Arizona, Kentucky, and Washington
    are creating online interactive data dashboards that display
    state and campus level data in areas such as college readiness,
    student progress and success, research and economic
    development, and efficiency and innovation.
        States are also using the data to shape policy. Colorado is
    developing performance contracts with its colleges and
    universities that are based in part on indicators of student
    outcomes and institutional efficiencies. Tennessee now bases
    its general fund appropriations to public colleges and
    universities on a range of progress, outcome, and efficiency
    measures. And Nevada's governor has proposed a move in that
    direction as well.
        States experiences yielded several key lessons including,
    number one, focus on outcomes as well as inputs. States are
    focusing more on results when it comes to reporting
    postsecondary performance. As students and their families
    invest more in higher education, they are expecting more
    information on what kind of return they can expect from that
    investment. Federal data collection such as the Integrated
    Postsecondary Education Data System or IPEDS should move in the
    same direction, perhaps drawing on the common completion
    metrics.
        States' focus on outcomes is also one of several reasons
    why NGA does not support maintenance of effort requirements for
    participation in federal programs.
        Two: less is more. States are taking this lesson to heart
    and are striving to build data dashboards and performance
    funding formulas that are simpler and clearer than their
    predecessors, which didn't last because they were too
    complicated.
        Simpler and clearer should also be a goal in federal
    efforts. Specifically, there should be review of all existing
    federal dashboards and data tools for postsecondary education
    to determine whether and how they are being used and if there
    is unnecessary duplication.
        Number three: craft policies for the long-term. As
    evidenced by NGA's work, reform doesn't happen overnight.
    Moreover, real sustained reform requires a long-lasting,
    stable, yet flexible framework to allow growth, exploration,
    and ongoing innovation. In this and other areas, NGA urges
    Congress to exercise legislative restraints and craft federal
    policies with an eye for the future.
        In short, increasing transparency in higher education has
    been and continues to be a priority for states. I thank you
    again for the opportunity to testify, and I look forward to
    your questions.
        [The statement of Mr. Reindl follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Travis Reindl, Program Director, Postsecondary
      Education, National Governors Association Center for Best Practices

        Madame Chairwoman, Mr. Hinojosa, members of the Subcommittee, good
    morning. I am Travis Reindl, program director for postsecondary
    education at the National Governors Association Center for Best
    Practices. I thank you for the opportunity to share a state-level
    perspective on increasing transparency in higher education, and I look
    forward to your questions
    1. The Need for Greater Transparency
        States have an established track record when it comes to promoting
    transparency from their colleges and universities. More than three
    decades ago, Tennessee unveiled the first performance-based funding
    formula for its postsecondary institutions and in the years since every
    other state has engaged in efforts to increase accountability among its
    public colleges and universities.
        Today, states face a combination of challenges related to
    postsecondary education that call for even more transparency and more
    use of the data states and institutions gather:
         Demand for a more educated workforce. The number of jobs
    requiring education after high school continues to rise in all states,
    and estimates show that our colleges and universities are not on track
    to meet expected labor market demand for educated workers. According to
    the Center on Education and the Workforce at Georgetown University, the
    gap between the supply of workers with postsecondary credentials and
    available job openings requiring those credentials may be as wide as 3
    million by 2018.\1\
         Significant and lasting fiscal constraints. State revenues
    are recovering to pre-recession levels, but the recovery is uneven
    across states. Moreover, there are a number of urgent demands competing
    for limited state resources, including health care and K-12
    education.\2\ For colleges and universities, this may mean a slow and
    modest recovery of state investment.
         Changes in who goes to college. The demographic make-up of
    states is changing, which means changes in the college-going
    population. The students who are increasingly heading for our colleges
    and universities--low-income students, working adults, students of
    color--are the same types of students who have historically faced
    greater hurdles in getting to and through certificate and degree
    programs.\3\ Identifying and overcoming these hurdles will be essential
    for states and their institutions to increase attainment and meet
    workforce needs.
        Given these challenges, governors, students and their families, and
    taxpayers need more and better information about how our colleges and
    universities are doing at getting students to and through college,
    outcomes for students, and the return on states' and students'
    investments in their education. This information is critical for making
    informed choices about how and where to invest scarce resources and in
    tracking progress toward meeting workforce needs.
        States are leading efforts to make higher education more
    transparent and more productive, and are learning important lessons
    along the way. The federal government can support these efforts,
    specifically by streamlining and coordinating regulations across
    federally funded programs to promote better accountability,
    transparency, and reduce redundancies and administrative costs.
    2. Gubernatorial Leadership on Transparency
        Governors have led the call for more transparency and more of a
    focus on outcomes in postsecondary education for years. A quarter
    century ago, former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander dedicated his
    year as chair of the National Governors Association (NGA) to an
    initiative called Time for Results, which raised awareness of the need
    for more and better data about colleges' and universities' performance.
    In the years that followed, states developed fact books and performance
    funding and budgeting policies, and the federal government enacted the
    Student Right to Know Act, which mandated the reporting of
    institutional graduation rates.
        Now, in the face of rising economic demand and limited public
    resources, governors are once again leading the call for better
    information about postsecondary outcomes, including return on
    investment. Under the leadership of former West Virginia Governor Joe
    Manchin and former Washington Governor Chris Gregoire, NGA launched
    Complete to Compete, an effort to improve how states measure and
    communicate the performance of their postsecondary education
    institutions. The effort has focused on two types of measures:
                Completion Metrics
        States and the federal government have used the graduation rate for
    years as a measure of student outcomes, but the graduation rate doesn't
    tell the whole story about outcomes. It doesn't, for example, cover
    part-time or transfer students, who represent a significant share of
    total enrollment. It also does not address questions such as where
    students are encountering the greatest roadblocks on the way to
    graduation, or how long it is taking students to get certificates and
    degrees. Given the trends outlined above, these are increasingly
    important questions.
        NGA partnered with Complete College America in an effort to answer
    those questions, and released the Common Completion Metrics in 2010.\4\
    The metrics fall into two groups:
                Student Progress
         Remedial education: How many students end up in remedial
    courses? How many of them pass the remedial course and go on to pass a
    course for credit?
         Gatekeeper courses: How many students pass key first-year
    courses in subjects such as mathematics and English?
         Credit accumulation: How many students complete a full
    load of courses in their first year?
         Course completion: How many courses do students pass in
    relation to the number they attempt in a particular year?
         Retention: How many students continue their enrollment
    from the first semester to the second semester or from the first year
    to the second year?
                Student Outcomes
         Degrees awarded: How many students complete certificates
    and degrees each year?
         Graduation rate: What percentage of students graduates
    within normal time (2 or 4 years) or extended time (3 or 6 years)?
         Transfer rate: What percentage of students successfully
    moves from two-year institutions to four-year institutions?
         Time and credits to degree: How long does it take for
    students to get certificates and degrees?
        NGA and Complete College America recommend these metrics because
    they are backed by research on what helps--and hurts--students complete
    certificates or degrees. For example, we know that students who enroll
    in remedial classes are less than half as likely to get a certificate
    or degree.\5\ Similarly, we know that students who don't take and
    finish a full load of courses in their first year are more likely to
    lose momentum and drop out of college.\6\
        What are states doing with these metrics? Today, 32 states are
    collecting and publicly reporting the metrics through Complete College
    America's Alliance of States. For example, publishing data on remedial
    education has increased the pressure to do something about that issue
    and states are responding. Connecticut has adopted legislation designed
    to overhaul and eventually end remedial education statewide.\7\
                Efficiency and Effectiveness Metrics
        Completion represents just one part of the transparency picture.
    Governors are also interested in answering the ``what'' and the ``how''
    of completion--whether their state's colleges and universities are
    producing graduates that can get jobs in today's economy and how
    efficient those institutions are in moving students to degrees and
    certificates.
        As part of Complete to Compete, NGA also identified metrics
    designed to help states gauge the efficiency and effectiveness of
    postsecondary institutions and systems in four areas: \8\
         Meeting workforce needs: Are institutions meeting the
    state's need for an educated workforce? [Metrics: certificates and
    degrees awarded relative to the number of employed adults with a
    postsecondary credential; certificates and degrees awarded relative to
    the number of adults in the state with no postsecondary credential]
         Student output relative to input: How many students are
    graduating relative to the number enrolled? [Metric: certificate and
    degree completions per 100 students enrolled]
         Return on investment: What is the return on the state's
    and students' investment in terms of completed certificates and
    degrees? [Metric: certificate and degree completions per $100,000 of
    state appropriations and net tuition revenues]
         Quality: How can colleges and universities increase
    efficiency without sacrificing student learning? [Metrics: learning
    assessments, licensure/certification exam pass rates, job placement
    rates]
        NGA has worked with and can point to a number of states that are
    taking significant steps toward increasing transparency, and more
    importantly, using data for making important policy decisions.
                Data Dashboards
         Arizona. The Governor's Office of Education Innovation has
    produced the Arizona Ready Report Card, an interactive online report
    that shows state and campus-level progress toward goals in K-12 and
    postsecondary education and the workforce. Postsecondary and indicators
    include degrees awarded, transfers, cost of attendance, and credit
    accumulation.\9\
         Kentucky. The state's Council on Postsecondary Education
    has developed an interactive online dashboard that displays statewide
    and campus performance on indicators in four categories: college
    readiness, student success, research and economic development, and
    efficiency and innovation.\10\
         Washington: Using the Common Completion Metrics and other
    key indicators, the Office of Financial Management (OFM) has developed
    an interactive online dashboard that covers the state's six public
    universities and colleges. The dashboard provides statewide and campus-
    level data in three categories: enrollment, student progress, and
    degrees and graduates.\11\
                Performance Contracts
         Colorado: The Colorado Department of Higher Education is
    developing binding contracts with its public colleges and universities
    and systems that are based on a range of performance metrics, including
    student outcomes and institutional efficiency.\12\
                Performance Funding
         Tennessee: The state now allocates its general fund
    appropriations to public two-year and four-year institutions using
    performance metrics that include certificate and degree completions,
    transfers, success in remedial education, job placement, and degree
    completion relative to enrollment.\13\
         Nevada: The state is currently considering a complete
    overhaul of its postsecondary funding formula. If adopted, the new
    formula would allocate state general fund appropriations on outcomes:
    the majority on course completions and the remainder on a menu of other
    performance measures, including degree completion in priority areas and
    degree completion relative to enrollment.\14\
    3. Lessons Learned
        As in many areas, states have been the laboratory for new thinking
    when it comes to transparency in higher education. Their experiences
    yield several lessons that have implications for federal action,
    including:
         Focus on outcomes as well as inputs. States are focusing
    more on results when it comes to reporting postsecondary performance.
    As students and their families invest more in higher education, they
    are expecting more information on what kind of return they can expect
    from that investment. Inputs such as enrollments and revenue still
    matter, but they need to be accompanied by metrics on student success
    and efficiency.
        Federal data collections such as the Integrated Postsecondary
    Education Data System (IPEDS) should move in the same direction,
    perhaps drawing on the Common Completion Metrics.
        States' focus on outcomes is also one of several reasons why NGA
    does not support maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements for
    participation in federal programs. Demanding a fixed level of input
    (i.e. appropriations) without regard for outcomes runs counter to how
    states are increasingly looking at their higher education systems.
         Less is more. One of the reasons why many of the
    accountability efforts of the 1990s did not last is that they collapsed
    under their own weight. They had too many goals, too many measures, and
    policymakers and students were overwhelmed with data. States are taking
    this lesson to heart and are striving to build data dashboards and
    performance funding formulas that are simpler and clearer than their
    predecessors.
        Simpler and clearer should be a goal for federal efforts as well.
    The upcoming reauthorization of the Higher Education Act provides a
    prime opportunity for the Congress to review all of the existing
    federal dashboards, report cards, and data tools for postsecondary
    education (e.g. College Navigator, College Scorecard, United States
    Education Dashboard) to determine whether and how they are being used,
    and if there are opportunities for streamlining or consolidation.
        Similarly, we encourage a thorough review of the Integrated
    Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), with the goal of
    identifying and eliminating surveys and survey items that are rarely
    used. This would provide needed relief for states and their colleges
    and universities.
         Craft policies for the long term. As evidenced by NGA's
    work, reform doesn't happen overnight. Moreover, real, sustained reform
    requires a long-lasting, stable, yet flexible framework to allow
    growth, exploration, and ongoing innovation. If Congress were to craft
    a solution for success based on today's knowledge, two things are
    likely to occur: (1) the federal policy will be outdated and obsolete
    before it's even enacted; or (2) the law will inhibit state creativity
    and problem solving to help students. NGA's work tells but a small
    story of the growing body of knowledge. In this and other areas, NGA
    urges Congress to exercise ``legislative restraint'' and craft federal
    policies with an eye for the future.
    4. Conclusion
        Increasing transparency in higher education has been and continues
    to be a priority for states. With leadership from governors and other
    policymakers, states have made more information about the performance
    of colleges and universities available to students, families, and
    taxpayers. They have learned important lessons along the way and are
    eager to share those lessons with the federal government as it seeks to
    improve the information provided to higher education's funders and
    consumers.
                                    endnotes
        \1\ Carnevale, Anthony, with Nicole Smith and Jeff Strohl. Help
    Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements Through 2018.
    Washington, D.C.: Center on Education and the Workforce, Georgetown
    University, 2010.
        \2\ ``Summary of Fiscal Year 2014 Proposed Executive Budgets,''
    National Association of State Budget Officers, 23 March 2013. Accessed
    from: http://www.nasbo.org/sites/default/files/pdf/
    FY2014%20Proposed%20Budgets%20-%20Summary.pdf
        \3\ Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE).
    Knocking at the College Door: Projections of High School Graduates.
    Boulder, Colo.: Author, 2012.
        \4\ Reyna, Ryan. Common Completion Metrics. Washington, D.C.:
    National Governors Association Center for Best Practices: 2010.
        \5\ Complete College America. Remediation: Higher Education's
    Bridge to Nowhere. Washington, D.C.: Author, 2012.
        \6\ Complete College America. Time Is the Enemy of Graduation.
    Washington, D.C.: Author, 2011.
        \7\ Mangan, Katherine. ``National Groups Call for Big Changes in
    Remedial Education,'' The Chronicle of Higher Education, 13 December
    2012.
        \8\ Reindl, Travis and Ryan Reyna. From Information to Action:
    Revamping Higher Education Accountability Systems. Washington, D.C.:
    National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, 2011.
        \9\ http://arizonaready.com/content/
        \10\ http://dataportal.cpe.ky.gov/sadashboard/dashboard--master.swf
        \11\ http://www.ofm.wa.gov/hied/dashboard/index.html
        \12\ http://highered.colorado.gov/Publications/General/
    StrategicPlanning/MasterPlan2012/Master--Plan--Final.pdf
        \13\ http://www.state.tn.us/thec/Divisions/Fiscal/funding--formula/
    1-Outcomes%20Based%20Formula%20Narrative%20-%20for%20website.pdf
        \14\ http://system.nevada.edu/tasks/sites/Nshe/assets/File/
    Initiatives/2013legislative/NSHE%20Formula%20Study.pdf
                                     ______

        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you all again very much.
        I now recognize as the chairman of the full committee, Mr.
    Kline for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Kline. Thank you, Madam Chair for recognizing me for
    the hearing.
        I want to thank the panel for being here today; really
    excellent testimony. We are grappling with a problem that has
    been perplexing us for a very, very long time.
        And I want to start with Mr. Garrido because as I--you got
    both the Pell grant and the G.I. Bill to help you out, but you
    didn't know about that by going to the department's website or
    something like that. Correct? I mean that you--I think your
    testimony was you went personally and talked to advisors at
    different colleges.
        Mr. Garrido. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Kline. Is that right?
        Mr. Garrido. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Kline. And so I guess it is a little bit perplexing
    because we always talk about what information ought to be on
    these websites and how they ought to be user-friendly, but if
    you don't even know they are there, it doesn't help very much.
    It is a great website and really user-friendly. And so I think
    that is what your testimony is, right?
        Mr. Garrido. Yes, sir, the VA--in all actuality, the VA
    just let me know that there was a form for me to submit to be
    able to get my benefits that I paid into.
        When I got to Kaiser however, they were so versed in how to
    use and how to understand the system that they were able to
    help me, guide me, into the steps that I needed to take.
        In other words, they gave me like a checklist and on that
    checklist, meaning my DD 214, anything that I needed to have,
    they gave me all of those things that I needed to be able to
    submit to be able to go through the process. But it was very
    difficult. If an individual was having to do this on their own,
    I don't think they can do it, honestly.
        Mr. Kline. All right, okay. Thank you. I was pretty sure
    that was your testimony. I just wanted to understand it. You
    didn't go to a terrific website, get all your answers, and then
    go make a decision.
        Mr. Garrido. It wasn't just a one-stop, yes.
        Mr. Kline. You had to sort of wade through it the old-
    fashioned way.
        Mr. Garrido. Correct.
        Mr. Kline. Okay, thank you very much.
        Dr. Heller, one of the things that we grappled with here I
    am sure way before I ever came on the committee but certainly
    since I've been here is reporting requirements that
    institutions have. We had a witness testify here a couple or 2
    or 3 years ago and he brought in a whole stack of three ring
    binders for just things that the college, that the institution
    had to do and so I am interested in your suggestions, your
    thoughts about how we might be helpful in scaling back some of
    these requirements, but not harming the information that
    students like Mr. Garrido need to make informed decisions.
        Mr. Heller. Congressman, I don't think we need more data
    about college and college admissions and financial aid. We have
    lots of data from the sources that all four of us have talked
    about. What we need for prospective students and their families
    is better information. And that is where, you know, the role of
    college counselors come in, high school counselors.
        Dr. Hurd mentioned things like visiting colleges, getting a
    sense and Mr. Garrido mentioned that when he visited Keiser
    University he got a much better sense of what it was going to
    be like to be a student there.
        So I am a firm believer that there is not more data that we
    need. I think that some of the data the department--and that
    the Department of Education collects through the IPEDS system
    could be improved.
        We could have a conversation about that, but I certainly
    don't think we need any more data, and I don't think even
    though there are concerns about the burdensome requirements of
    the reporting, I think most colleges in this day and age with
    the data systems they have are able to report the kind of data
    that are necessary in IPEDS, that show up in the IPEDS college
    navigator and the net cost calculators and things like that
    without a lot of difficulty.
        So I wouldn't recommend that we try to roll back on any of
    those data and those reporting requirements that we are talking
    about today. There may be other reporting requirements for
    colleges and universities that may be very different, but I
    think the ones we are talking about today are not frankly that
    burdensome on colleges.
        Mr. Kline. Okay. Thank you. I guess I would in my example
    of the witness who had the stack of three ring binders, it was
    all reporting requirements.
        Mr. Heller. Correct.
        Mr. Kline. But interesting, your perspective on this
    particular piece.
        And then finally, I see my time is about to run out but I
    am curious, Mr. Reindl, how do states determine what process to
    use? How do they determine at what to put on these dashboards?
        Mr. Reindl. Well, Chairman, we like to say in the governors
    association, ``When you have seen one state, you have seen one
    state.'' There is always a bit of a respect for state culture
    but it has always started from what you have. One of the things
    that we have encouraged at NGA in working with states and
    governors have really picked up on this is to really take a
    look at what is and to look at how it has been used or when it
    has been used or where it has been used and if we add measures,
    we should be taking measures away.
        So it is a one in, one out kind of a philosophy. We are
    still working on that and trying to make some progress there
    but it is taking whatever a state has and try to help them to
    balance that so that we are not getting to the binders that you
    were mentioning with Dr. Heller.
        Thank you. I see my time is up, I yield back.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I now recognize Mr. Bishop, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Bishop. Thank you very much.
        And thank you for the testimony. I think it was very, very
    good; very insightful, and very helpful.
        I have three issues so I want to try to handle them
    quickly. I want to just pick up on Chairman Kline's question. I
    will address it to Dr. Heller and Mr. Reindl.
        Are we currently collecting any information that is not
    particularly useful to either policymakers or students that we
    could do away with? Just real quick. Anything come to mind?
        Mr. Heller. Within this realm that we are talking about in
    this hearing, Congressman, no, we could have a discussion about
    whether it is important for colleges to have on the College
    Navigator their enrollments by gender for example overall in
    the university, but again, frankly, given the burden of those
    kinds of reporting requirements, I don't think that there is
    anything there that I would say we need to get rid of.
        Mr. Bishop. Okay.
        Mr. Reindl?
        Mr. Reindl. Mr. Bishop, I think governors look at this in
    difference between collection and reporting and I think Dr.
    Heller did a good job in describing the collection part. It is
    the reporting. There are things that we report that maybe
    aren't as valuable and governors are really focused on
    outcomes.
        So it is taking the data and to Dr. Heller's point, turning
    it into information, combining the outcomes with what we spend,
    the inputs, and putting that on the table for taxpayers and
    students and families. So I think it is less the collection
    issue than the reporting issue.
        Mr. Bishop. And if I may then, if you could submit to the
    committee some things that you are currently reporting or that
    colleges are currently reporting that you, at least in the
    opinion of the governors, is not particularly useful.
        Mr. Reindl. Certainly, certainly. From our experience, we
    can send in that for the record.
        Mr. Bishop. Thank you.
        Second issue, both Dr. Hurd and Dr. Heller, you talked
    about the concept of fit, which is I would imagine a
    particularly elusive concept and one that is intensely personal
    and it seems to me that the point that you are making
    particularly you, Dr. Hurd, with respect to fit, goes to the
    human element of the college selection process which in turn
    goes to the element of the college completion process.
        I mean, one of the truisms of student retention issues if
    you want students to finish right, you have got to get them
    started right and one of the ways to get them started right is
    to make sure they pick the right school.
        So what I want to pursue with both of you is the suggestion
    you are making, Dr. Heller, about some federal role in helping
    particularly low income schools afford a better college
    counseling program. So could you talk about it from the
    perspective of what is in your head, and then Dr. Hurd, what
    your actual experience is?
        So Dr. Heller?
        Mr. Heller. Sure, Congressman Bishop, I know there is not a
    lot of support in Washington today for new federal
    initiatives----
        Mr. Bishop. You have you have noticed that? [Laughter.]
        Mr. Heller. Even up in Michigan we have noticed that.
        Nevertheless, I think there is a very good and strong
    history of the federal government supporting local school
    districts through Title I programs for example.
        And with respect to college counseling, I think that is
    another area where the federal government could step in to
    under-resourced schools that are being strangled through local
    funding, local district funding, state funding, and one of the
    easy things to cut out are things like guidance counseling
    because they are not being tested about that and school
    districts are obviously concerned with complying with state
    testing needs.
        So I think this is a case where the federal government
    could step in, could help out these under-resourced schools to
    ensure that these schools and the students in them have an
    opportunity to get the kind of high touch need to figure out
    for students, help them decide what is the right fit in a
    postsecondary institution.
        Mr. Bishop. But what you are talking about is some kind of
    either formula-driven or competitive grant program that would
    place college counselors in high need school districts?
        Mr. Heller. Correct and I think most effectively if it is
    partnered with the states and local districts.
        Mr. Bishop. All right.
        Dr. Hurd?
        Ms. Hurd. And so that is actually what we do. So we have
    been fortunate enough to have federal funding and I am happy to
    tell you that not only is our federal funding being used
    wisely, it is actually matched 3:1.
        So we can get the school districts, we can get the private
    sector, and we can get our higher education institutions to
    coinvest on our federal dollars to make sure that we put really
    well-trained, really well-advised counselors by our guidance
    counselors and make sure that every young person has a pathway
    to a postsecondary plan.
        Mr. Bishop. And the federal funding you receive is through
    AmeriCorps?
        Ms. Hurd. It is through AmeriCorps and it is through the
    Social Innovation Fund, and it is also through Challenge Grant
    money through the Department of Ed, so we have competed for
    every dollar that we have got and what we have been matching
    that.
        Mr. Bishop. And the match is from what source?
        Ms. Hurd. So the match has been a couple places--so part of
    this is going back to the question about higher education
    institutions. I actually think it is higher education
    institutions that have to get in the game.
        They have to be part of the solution. So they actually
    match our dollars by going out and raising money with their
    donors. So corporations, foundations, alumns. Then the National
    Office also raises dollars.
        So like I said, for every dollar, we are matching at the
    National Office, and the higher ed institution is matching as
    well. So I think there is an incredible way to leverage these
    dollars and make sure again when things--again, I would like to
    congratulate you all for doing this especially the funding,
    that is evidenced-based, it is data-driven, and we have to show
    impact.
        And again, I think we can do that in a way that honors our
    students and allows us to have capacities in schools where
    frankly our low income students--I think you saw the
    statistics--out of 146 most selective schools in this country,
    3 percent of those students are from the lowest quarter
    economically; 3 percent.
        Mr. Bishop. Okay. My time is up. Thank you very much. That
    is a fabulous program. Thank you very much.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Mr. Walberg, you are recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Walberg. I thank the gentlelady.
        And Dr. Heller, it is good to see Michigan State here and
    appreciate the work that you do. In the coming weeks they will
    be a lot of high school students in Michigan that will be
    looking at Michigan State and many this coming the fall will be
    matriculating into the school.
        We have talked about some generalities, but if you could
    give us some specifics on how many avenues the average Michigan
    student and parent have to access information about a college
    or university and also its associated costs.
        Mr. Heller. Well, I described a number of those in my
    testimony. Depending upon what kind of high school they are in,
    they may have access to good college counselors. In other high
    schools, they might not have any kind of college counseling.
        Dr. Hurd has talked about some of the ratios, the student-
    counselor ratios around the country and she singled out
    Michigan as one where it has a very high ratio. They can go to
    college websites. They can go to the Department of Education.
    They can look for view books.
        So as I said earlier, there's lots of sources of data out
    there. The problem is that we don't have better information for
    the students and also giving them better information at the
    right time, which is early enough in the college search that
    they can make informed decisions about what they need to do
    themselves, what they need to do to prepare themselves both
    academically as well as financially.
        If a student starts a looking at college at the end of the
    junior year because they have got to decide what they are going
    to do after they graduate in 12 months, it is too late for a
    lot of students. So we have to have a focused effort to get
    better information not just data into students' hands earlier
    in their careers; in the earliest years of high school or even
    middle school.
        That is the reason why GEAR-UP for example starts working
    with students in middle school so they can start to work with
    students to prepare academically and they have plenty of time
    to do that before graduating from high school.
        Mr. Walberg. Is there any information out there--speaking
    of reports and studies--is there any information showing any
    difference between students that come from academic experiences
    that were highly associated with choice schools, in the sense
    that they made their own choice. The parents worked together,
    they picked schools of choice, academies, charter schools,
    whatever else in comparison to those who just a general
    followed the local option?
        Mr. Heller. With respect to where they attend college,
    Congressman?
        Mr. Walberg. Well, no, specifically--yes. Ultimately the--
    where they attend college, the success in attending college,
    the good choices that are made, their preparation, having SAT,
    ACT tests taken.
        Just from the--I guess what I am getting at is if they have
    throughout the course of their academic career have made
    significant choices already, they have taken responsibility for
    making those choices because it has been afforded to them
    regardless of economic strata, are there any studies out there
    showing a difference in ultimate outcome?
        Mr. Heller. Not that I am aware of and certainly not any
    studies that do a good job of controlling for background
    characteristics and what we call selectivity bias in terms of
    differences in the parental background, parental aspirations,
    and the kind of push that parents give.
        So I haven't seen any studies that look at the difference
    between students who participate in choice programs like we
    have in Michigan in K-12 schools versus those who don't.
        Mr. Walberg. And I guess I would ask that of any others if
    you have seen that.
        Dr. Hurd, in relationship you are pushing for guidance
    counselors, counselors, peer counselors that are going to be
    there but do you see any--are there any reports showing that we
    ought to be, as you say, starting out earlier?
        Ms. Hurd. So I think the earlier the better in terms of
    giving them knowledge and giving them access to knowledge. I
    also I think all of our public schools--and we are in Michigan.
    We actually have a lot of advisors in Michigan. Michigan State
    is a chapter as well as the University of Michigan.
        I think what we are seeing is the earlier they get the
    information the more they understand the choices, the more they
    understand the options because there are some great options in
    Michigan. They do have great high, you know, high graduation
    rates where financial aid will go a long way.
        I will also just say in terms of charter schools and others
    we actually have a national partnership with KIPP, so I think
    it is not just one public school or one sector that is actually
    struggling with this.
        I think all of us are trying to make sure that our students
    get the most and the best information as early as they can so
    that they and their families can navigate this together, but it
    is a human capital issue.
        I think they have to have the not just information, but
    they have to have somebody help them navigate that path to
    college. And so whether you are in a charter school, a public
    school, a big school, or a small school, it is about making
    right decisions early and making sure that somebody helps
    navigate that path with you.
        Mr. Walberg. Part of that navigation, does that include
    saying to a student, ``Not only is this school not the best for
    you, but there is another approach to education you ought to
    consider; proprietary, vocational----
        Ms. Hurd. Absolutely, absolutely. So I think it is about
    postsecondary opportunity that every young person, and that is
    why I use the words match and fit very intentionally.
        You know, in our program it is any postsecondary plan is a
    success, but they need to have a plan. So whether it is
    military, vocational school, 2-year, 4-year. This isn't about
    getting everybody to school X, this is about getting everybody
    to a place where they have a meaningful credential that has
    been valued well, that has been paid for affordably, and gets
    them to where they get to go so they can make their American
    dream happen.
        Mr. Walberg. Thank you.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Walberg.
        Ms. Bonamici, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Foxx.
        Thank you so much to the witnesses for this important
    hearing. I really appreciate all of the testimony.
        Dr. Heller, I especially appreciated in your testimony
    where you raised some concern that I share about the problems
    of valuing a college based on the wages of an individual upon
    graduation.
        I would be concerned for example of what if a college
    graduates a lot of students who go into nonprofit work or the
    Peace Corps or some other AmeriCorps program for example.
        So I share that concern. I also applaud those of you who
    are talking about getting this information, important
    information, to students early not just early in the college
    search, but early in their education.
        There is a school district in my congressional district
    down in Oregon that actually gives all eighth-grade students,
    they explore all 10th grade students the plan and all of 11th
    grade students the ACT and it is resulted in a lot of students
    actually thinking well maybe I could go to college because of
    they are already in that process.
        Dr. Reindl, you talked about better ways that we can
    measure outcomes and compare different colleges. We actually
    have a program in Oregon called ASPIRE trying to fill those
    gaps because we also don't have enough college counselors to
    meet that recommended ratio. And ASPIRE is Access to Student
    Assistance Programs in Reach of Everyone with thousands, about
    15,000 now trained volunteers.
        It is available to any student regardless of income, and
    students really get that one-on-one mentoring throughout the
    school year. It has been quite successful and has expanded with
    some federal grant help but a lot of volunteers throughout our
    state.
        There is also some great nonprofit work going on in this
    area. We talked about what the states are doing. There is The
    Education Conservancy, is a nonprofit organization that just
    did a pretty thorough joint research project with consumers
    union called Information Matters and they did a lot of student
    surveys including nontraditional students, focus groups, polls,
    and interviews with experts.
        They have five recommendations including simplifying the
    research and admissions process, which they found of course too
    complex and confusing. But one of their recommendations is to
    minimize the information overload by having a more standardized
    framework.
        So I wondered if the people on the panel and I especially
    want to hear from Mr. Garrido, what do you think should be in
    that standardized framework? And following up on what Mr.
    Bishop asked, what information do students really need and are
    we giving them information that they might not find useful?
        Dr. Heller? You are not here for Michigan State, but you
    have a Spartan tie on, would you like to----
        Mr. Heller. Sure, sure. Let me just first say,
    Congresswoman, that I am glad it you raise the issue about
    measuring college outcomes based on wages and challenges in
    doing that.
        The best example that I give people is that I can have two
    students graduating from my teacher education program. One
    could be a--they could both be secondary science teachers. One
    could take a job in one district and have a wage of $35,000 in
    her first year. Another one maybe in another district in
    Michigan and be making $60,000 in her first year.
        Now you tell me whether those are--should be looked at as
    two very different kinds of outcomes. The wage data alone would
    say yes, but I would argue those are very similar kinds of
    positions.
        As far as standardizing, having a template of information,
    I think that is a move in the right direction and I think that
    the work of The Education Conservancy out of Portland is doing
    is doing a great job on trying to nudge the institutions on
    standardizing information just as we are trying to do with the
    financial aid letters and having a template about that.
        It would be nice if we could standardize information about
    admissions and the kind of fit we have been talking about. It
    is a little bit more of a challenge because college is
    obviously very complex. You have got lots of different majors.
    You have got lots of different students between 18-year-olds
    versus adult students.
        So I think it is a little bit more of a challenge to come
    up with a workable template that all colleges could fit into
    regarding admissions as we are trying to do on the financial
    aid side.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, and Mr. Garrido, what would be
    most important in that standardized form for you?
        Mr. Garrido. Maybe the way an individual like myself would
    try to get all the information. When I went looking for this
    information, it was not readily available.
        I had to not only ask friends, ask former teachers. It is--
    for a person like myself, it was difficult, however, there are
    some people that can, you know, have the access but in my case,
    I did not have that access. It was very difficult for me to
    find any information on that.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you.
        Dr. Hurd?
        Ms. Hurd. You know, it has been the Wild West out there. I
    have no doubt that he had a hard time. There is just too much
    information out there. So I do think there are very consistent
    things, and you all have already moved on some of them in terms
    of graduation rates--in terms of what is in that standard award
    letter, you can give those categories very simply to somebody
    so they can make decisions.
        My biggest issue is that they are not comparing apples to
    apples so things like the College Board has this a new site
    called Big Future that is a huge step in the right direction
    and the Chronicle of Higher Ed just gave a college reality
    checked website this week that shows apples to apples. I think
    part of the problem is when you are apples to oranges, you
    start making unwise choices.
        Ms. Bonamici. And I see my time has expired. Thank you,
    Madam Chair.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you.
        Mrs. Brooks, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mrs. Brooks. Thank you. I am a former senior administrator
    at our state's community college, Ivy Tech Community College,
    and also am the mother of a very recent college graduate and
    one of the things that I know we have struggled with at not
    only our college but I think colleges often struggle with this
    and I am curious is this whole conversation around return on
    investment and whether or not young people and returning
    adults, adults returning to school, really have a very good
    grasp on what their career path might be, what type of majors
    would lead to actual jobs versus just entering into programs of
    study that they just are interested in.
        And so I am curious and I guess I will start with the
    governors association, what kind of metrics and things we ought
    to be--or and information we ought to be providing students at
    all ages about how that field of study will actually lead to a
    career and while I appreciate that it is not all about salary,
    I think it is about needs in this country and what kind of job
    openings there are going to be and how are we doing a good job
    in higher ed or what do we need to be doing to do a far better
    job educating young people and older people on what is really a
    very good career path for the future.
        Mr. Reindl. That is an excellent question, Congresswoman,
    thank you. We have to crawl before we walk and I think that
    from a governor's perspective, we need to look at, are students
    employed after they graduate and is that employment in a family
    supporting salary or wage. I think that it is very easy to get
    very granular quickly and saying does X major lead to Y job.
        We don't live in a planned economy and I don't think we
    will be so I think that the question for governors is are we
    educating people that can in fact be employed and that are
    employed in a way that allows them to be contributors to their
    communities, to the tax basis and be a little bit less granular
    and specific about does a particular major lead to a particular
    job.
        Because, and I know where my major ended up and my parents
    are surprised. So I think that is a case study.
        Mrs. Brooks. Actually, if you would just like to share, Dr.
    Heller, I would be curious what your thoughts are because--but
    what could we put in these college--you know, in these guides
    and in all of the different systems that are out there that can
    help answer that question.
        Mr. Heller. You know, we are certainly--our economy is
    certainly passed this stage, Congresswoman, where people take a
    first job either out of high school, out of college and stick
    in that job or with that employer for the rest of their
    careers.
        People now are expected to hold a large number of jobs over
    the course of their careers and in all of those jobs they have
    to have the ability to learn new skills, learn new things
    whether it is on the job or through additional training.
        So focusing only on the kinds of wages that people earn
    coming out of school very quickly or very soon after they have
    graduated from college I think can provide a lot of misleading
    information. If anything, you want to know where somebody is 5,
    10, 15, even 20 years down the road with their career.
        Mr. Reindl gave the example where if you looked at what he
    is doing today, and the same would certainly be true with me,
    it would necessarily match up with what I did as an
    undergraduate. So I think that is the challenge and that is the
    difficulty with trying to map specific careers to specific
    majors outside of those vocational programs that are very
    clearly and targeted at specific locations.
        So a lot of the Ivy Tech programs for example that are
    training people for specific careers but even in those cases,
    we see people who may do that career for 5, 10 years, and then
    switch at some point in the future. So that is the biggest
    challenge we have in trying to do this mapping that Mr. Reindl
    is talking about.
        Mrs. Brooks. And I guess I would ask Mr. Garrido, you chose
    criminal justice and I have been involved in criminal justice
    system actually most of my career until Ivy Tech. Were there
    certain things that you looked at in any of the tools that you
    looked at or was it the advising that helped lead you towards
    the criminal justice major?
        And how are the job prospects looking?
        Mr. Garrido. In my situation, seeing as how I was over 30
    years old and when I was a child in, you know, your middle
    school and high school I was, I want to be that or I have
    ambitions to be a firefighter or, you know, role model in the
    community. I joined the service.
        Mrs. Brooks. And thank you for your service.
        Mr. Garrido. Thank you. Unfortunately, I was hurt and if
    not for me, for myself being hurt, I would still be in the
    service. Now, I had to get into something that I can relate to
    in the service and in the civilian world, so I can contribute.
        I chose criminal justice because it was so close to the
    field that I can relate to. In my age, I wasn't able to have
    people, you know, you should be a lawyer or you should be a
    consultant. I didn't have that, you know, an opportunity.
        So by me choosing a vocational school, that was able to
    teach me or to streamline that process was awesome in my--I am
    sorry for the word, but, you know----
        [Laughter.]
        Mrs. Brooks. Well, thank you and thanks. I will think you
    make a terrific firefighter someday or public servant. Thank
    you.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Mrs. Davis, you are recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mrs. Davis. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        And I appreciate you all being here.
        Dr. Hurd, I wanted to talk to you a little bit more about
    the Stanford study. I think you mentioned it and in that case
    they found that students who ordinarily would probably not
    apply to what they call Peer Colleges, high esteem colleges
    perhaps that when they have more information they are more
    likely to apply and that more information is basically the fact
    that over the course of their college education that their
    costs would not be as dramatic as perhaps they might have
    thought.
        Ms. Hurd. That is right.
        Mrs. Davis. And so with that kind of information and I
    think there has been a follow-up study as well, why aren't--is
    there a better way then to get out that information for
    students? And clearly, it has to be done much earlier? There
    are programs--I think someone mentioned STRIVE, I know AVID as
    a program that really does a good job of integrating the
    college experience with the curriculum so that it is, you know,
    it is not something that comes after.
        Ms. Hurd. Right.
        Mrs. Davis. What is it within that--I mean, if the Stanford
    study is actually an important one in terms of learning, what
    is missing in kids knowledge about what their options are? Why
    aren't we doing more than that?
        Ms. Hurd. Well, so, I think you are hitting on something
    really important which is that information matters. So
    graduation rates matter. That net income matters because what
    we are talking about is low income students that frankly they
    and their parents have sticker shock and they think I can't go
    to school X for $40,000 or $50,000 a year when they realize
    that they might be going to school X for nothing or they might
    be going to school X actually for $5,000 or $10,000 a year.
        So part of it is just at that lack of information and
    because like I said that some of the measures you all have made
    it to make these things more standard so that we can compare
    apples to apples it is becoming more transparent. It happens
    more.
        I do think we have a human capital challenge. So again, I
    think this is why I am so honored to work with the recent
    graduates I work with but frankly in this space, we have had a
    lot of cohort programs, so 15 kids get served but the other 500
    in the senior class don't get served.
        And we have had a lot of, you know, if you have a GPA of 3,
    you know, 3.0 and higher you might get served or if you have a
    GPA of 3.5 or higher you might get served. I think we need to
    get to a place where every student counts and every student is
    given this information.
        And so again, I think we have had a situation where we have
    had just cherry picking frankly; certain school districts,
    certain populations, certain numbers of kids when every young
    person, every citizen deserves to have the information.
        I also think one of the barriers frankly is that again,
    families when they have that sticker shock they don't make
    those choices as wisely as they could, and again if you look at
    retention rates--so this is another thing that is important
    about that study.
        If they go to those highly selective schools, their chances
    of actually graduating go up as well.
        Mrs. Davis. They are higher, right.
        Ms. Hurd. So it is not just about picking the right school
    because it is the right match. It is about retaining and having
    a meaningful credential and I do think this is a pressure point
    on our higher education institutions to actually make sure that
    when they--that they honor the investment. When they take a
    young person, they should make sure that they graduate.
        Mrs. Davis. We had a hearing earlier and I know one of
    the--I think the entire panel in many ways was suggesting
    actually to all of us who were looking for a federal role in
    this, is there one? We are suggesting that, well, we don't
    really know very much yet and so you don't want to act on, you
    know, information that perhaps is not really accurate.
        But on the other hand, when it comes to retention and
    certainly what you are suggesting is we do know that in many
    cases they--there is a--the schools that students may shy away
    from may be more inclined to be more rigorous in supporting the
    outcomes. And so I think this is--we do know that--what is it
    that we don't know actually?
        Ms. Hurd. Well, and again, I think others--just real
    quickly--I said this statistic before because it keeps me up at
    night, frankly. So if you take our 146 more selective
    institutions, many of them are in your states, and you look at
    who is going, the bottom, you know, the bottom quarter--there
    is only 3 percent of those kids that are low income. So we have
    got a huge gap.
        And so I think part of this again is what we don't know is
    that--or what we do know is why are they not going? It is
    because we are not actively recruiting them. We are not telling
    them what is possible and I do think higher ed has to get in
    the game.
        So again, I think of the 18 universities that I work with
    are all selective institutions and they are not recruiting for
    just their own institution, they are recruiting for all forms
    of higher ed, but to have a Michigan State or a UNC Chapel Hill
    or a Cal Berkeley say we care so much about every student that
    we are going to put our recent graduate in there and make sure
    that every person has a graduation rate in front of them, every
    student has a financial aid package in front of them, is an
    incredibly powerful thing and I think the federal government
    could be huge in making sure that that kind of national service
    frankly and that kind of transparency is presented to every
    single one of our students.
        Mrs. Davis. Yes. Thank you very much.
        Anybody else want to quickly and the two seconds we have
    left weigh in on that? No? Okay, thank you.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you.
        Mr. Thompson, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
        Thanks to the panel.
        Mr. Garrido, thank you for your service.
        When--a little bit different--I want to back up a little
    bit to post-discharge. When you were on active duty, did the
    Department of Defense in terms of that transition help at all
    or during your active duty service in terms of providing
    information on access to education whether it is online
    education or anything like that or how well did that
    information get pushed out if it got pushed out at all to those
    of you in the front lines?
        Mr. Garrido. What they had it was a program called the Navy
    College Online and basically for instance when you do like a C
    school or an A school, depending on what type of course title
    it had, it was able to be then taken into a, like a educational
    standpoint.
        In other words, you could take it as a credit for let's say
    math or science credit. Depending on what classes you took and
    what classes were available for you to be able to take as like
    a--for instance some of my higher training was chemical,
    biological. We had detaining, that type of stuff. So in the
    civilian sector, it is not really a acknowledged title----
        Mr. Thompson. That was kind of my follow-up question. How
    well did the training that you did translate into the academic
    setting? I think that is something we could--that is a
    challenge to our universities, our career and technical
    education centers to honor our veterans by doing a better job
    of that.
        Did--in your search, you know, once you were doing the
    online search, you were looking for resources for a school and
    the one you picked, in that one or others, did you see
    information that, you know, kind of was connected to that, that
    kind of provided answers of, you know, if you are a returning
    veteran you got--maybe you had, took some courses that were
    translated into semester hours or credit hours but also did you
    see anything where there were colleges that recognized and
    somehow would provide recognition of your training and
    experience?
        Mr. Garrido. I know for a fact Kaiser does that. Part of my
    checklist was to bring up my SMART Transcript and then they
    were able to document to see what was able to be taken and used
    so I would have that much less time in the academic, you know,
    in the training environment to get me out that much quicker out
    into the field.
        Mr. Thompson. To give you a head start.
        Mr. Garrido. Correct.
        Mr. Thompson. Thanks.
        Mr. Heller. Congressman, if I may, back when I was at Penn
    State in your district, I did a study funded by the National
    Science Foundation that we were looking at veterans who were
    transitioning into postsecondary education and the kind of
    information they received and we spoke to veterans on I think
    six campuses around the country and we heard a very common
    message from all of them.
        They all said that they wished they had more information
    about their postsecondary options earlier in their military
    careers. Most of them received the information only when they
    were separating when they said they were absolutely swamped
    with everything from information about health benefits to
    education to housing, et cetera.
        And they are reflected back and said they wish they had
    better information earlier in their military careers so they
    would know the kind of training that they were signing up for
    in the military and how that would translate to later credits
    in college. So they all wanted more information at earlier.
        Mr. Thompson. Very good, thank you.
        Dr. Hurd, you mentioned a phrase that is near and dear to
    me, I talk about a lot, and that is financial literacy. Now how
    would--what would--for you, what would be your definition of
    full financial literacy for perspective students and their
    parents? And then a follow up to that, in your opinion, what is
    the optimal time to begin that process?
        Ms. Hurd. Thank you for the question. Early. We are talking
    sixth, you know, seventh, eighth grade. Some of our advisors
    actually play this game, they call it the game of life and
    everybody gets an envelope and everybody has a different career
    and you start paying rent and you start paying back your loans
    and you start--and then all of a sudden, people start running
    out of money and it is ah-ha moment. And if we did that in 12th
    grade or frankly if we do that in college or we do that after
    college, that is when we get into the credit card situation we
    are in right now, that is when we get into all sorts of things.
        So I would say middle school is when financial literacy
    really needs to kick in, and I do think the difference between
    a loan and grant--it might be basic to everybody in this room--
    it is not basic to our students.
        You know the difference between like I said, a net price
    and what the sticker price is, huge difference. Again, there
    are some amazing institutions in Pennsylvania, a lot of our
    students could go there for a lot less than what is on the
    website or what is in a college guide book.
        So, I mean, I do think there are some very basic things
    like I said in my testimony, we have people putting their
    tuition on credit cards because they feel like a government
    loan is a hand out, because they feel like they don't want to
    do this, they don't want to do that, and so again, I think
    loan, grant, scholarship, net price versus what the sticker
    price is--there are just some very basic things in terms of
    financial literacy that would be game changers for our
    families.
        Mr. Thompson. All right. Thank you.
        Thank you, Chairwoman.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Thompson.
        Mrs. McCarthy, your recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mrs. McCarthy. Thank you.
        And thank you for--I am sorry I missed all the testimony. I
    had--we both--all of us probably all have two committees and we
    have to go running between the two of them.
        Dr. Hurd, I want to follow up on, you know, what--some of
    the things that I have read about the program on sending the
    college graduates to be placed in high schools as peer
    advisors. What is the average stay of the students in the
    schools that they're placed?
        Ms. Hurd. So, we place our recent college graduates in
    school for 2 years and then after their 2 years, they are
    replaced by another member. So we are there for the long haul,
    but their term of service is 2 years. We actually track them to
    see what happens to them afterwards and I am happy to report a
    lot of them are going to education schools. They are going to
    places like Dr. Heller's school. A lot of them are going into
    public service. I was actually this morning with our divisor in
    TC Williams Alexandria who is off to Syracuse to do an MPA. She
    wants to staff you all someday. So some of them see as a policy
    issue, some of them say they want to be practitioners, but we
    are creating new generation of leaders friendly by having them
    go into these public schools for 2 years.
        Mrs. McCarthy. And how is the relationship between the
    students that are coming into the schools and the counselor
    that might already be there?
        Ms. Hurd. Yes, so, because they are recent graduates and
    they are there full-time, they integrate into the school very
    well. So frankly, if they were current students or if they were
    kind of roadrunners coming back and forth I think we would have
    some issues, but they are there full time. So they are there
    from 7 in the morning until 5 at night. They are there for
    football games. They are there for this and that. And as I said
    before, our guidance counselor/student ratio is so horrific in
    this country, our guidance counselors are actually welcoming
    them with open arms.
        And I will tell you they see them as this next generation
    of guidance counselors so they actually are writing their rec
    letters to education schools and other things.
        The thing that also gets me really excited is frankly we
    have not--and Dr. Heller can talk about this--we have not
    always educated our guidance counselors very well. So we see a
    lot of guidance counselors who want to come back to us for
    training. They want to come on our summer training. We do not
    teach college advising and financial aid in our education
    schools. And frankly, we don't need to just teach the guidance
    counselors, we need to teach the teachers, and we need to teach
    the principles because the whole school has to believe in a
    college going culture, not just the guidance counselor.
        So I do think part of it is the lack of education that they
    are getting in the professional training on some of these
    issues which I know Dr. Heller and others are trying to remedy,
    but that is historically been a problem with a guidance
    counselor opens up their arms and says thank you so much, I
    didn't know all of these things that you know.
        And our training is so great because our universities are
    doing this--I should just clarify--it is our financial aid
    people, our admissions people who are taking the time to give
    these advisors 6 weeks of really thorough training.
        And one of the things I have to ask you to look at is our
    high schools are drowning in this information, why aren't we
    asking our universities, our admissions and financial aid
    professionals and to help so this is a seamless pipeline that
    helps everybody and not this completely siloed system we are in
    right now.
        Mrs. McCarthy. I have a very strong opinions on some of our
    teaching colleges and how we are actually teaching our teachers
    to be teachers. I think that needs to be looked at. A lot of
    the states are looking at that but I think that something that
    should be looked into even deeper.
        Mr. Garrido, tell me how you chose the school that you
    ended up going to.
        Mr. Garrido. I--my other--my better half, she has a
    Bachelor's in Biology, an Associates in Psychology, a
    Bachelor's in Nursing, and now she is going for a nurse
    practitioner. She was a high school teacher and when I came
    back from the service, she was a high school teacher for 3
    years.
        The guidance counselor like they have been you know,
    testifying about, my other half was the activities type--the
    ones for the Grad Nines--the, you know, all the fun stuff in
    high school that you always want to have the memory, the proms,
    well, my--Jackie had a really close relationship with her
    students.
        So she was able to talk to all these recruiters and these
    people who are coming on campuses and she was able to gauge an
    angle to see which student would best work out with what
    school. She was able to do that for me and I ended up Kaiser
    University.
        Mrs. McCarthy. All right. And as far as the transition
    coming from military life going into----
        Mr. Garrido. Criminal justice.
        Mrs. McCarthy [continuing]. University setting, how did the
    school work with you to make that transition? Because from what
    I have spoken to, some of these colleges that are certainly
    reaching out to our veterans coming home to give them the
    education that they are looking for. A lot of those military
    people had a very hard time and it is almost a new world I
    guess for the universities because so many are coming back
    almost like after World War II and they have had to come up
    with programs. So was that transition good for you?
        Mr. Garrido. Being a part of the service I am used to being
    in a tight structure that you wake up in the morning. At 6.30,
    you are going to PT. At 9 o'clock, you are going to muster. At
    10 o'clock you are going to do this. You know, getting out of
    the service and just all of a sudden you are free, doesn't
    help.
        Mrs. McCarthy. No. I could imagine.
        Mr. Garrido. It is very difficult, and my situation was
    extremely difficult to be able to find the resources add that I
    needed to be able to continue. If it wasn't for my support
    system, I don't think I would have been able to make it.
        Mrs. McCarthy. Mr. Heller, did you want to add anything to
    that?
        Mr. Heller. No. Just to add to what Dr. Hurd said, you
    know, guidance counselors particularly in schools that serve
    predominately low income populations, first-generation
    populations. They spend most of their time on what they will
    tell you is STD, and that is not sexually transmitted diseases,
    it is scheduling, testing, and discipline.
        And they spend so much time on that they don't have the
    time to work with the students in their school who may express
    an interest in going to college. So that is why the
    supplemental work that people and Dr. Hurd's program can do are
    welcomed into these schools generally with open arms because
    the counselors recognize that they just don't have the time to
    do that because they have their hands full with other things.
        Mrs. McCarthy. Thank you. My time is up.
        I yield back.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. I want to thank all of the
    members for being so good on their questions and staying on
    time today. Everybody has done a great job. So thanks for
    recognizing that.
        I am now going to recognize myself for 5 minutes.
        I am very impressed that all of you are talking about
    outcomes and information versus data. I think you all have
    either explicitly said that or implicit--or implied it.
        Dr. Heller, if you had to pick five pieces of information
    that the federal government should collect and ensure it is
    provided to students, what would they be and why?
        Mr. Heller. Oh boy, that is a good question. I will start
    with net price data. I think net price data is critical as the
    other witnesses have said as well. So and also net price data
    for example by family income. So not just an average net price,
    but if you are in this income bracket, here is what the average
    net price is at our institution.
        The second thing that would be information about the kinds
    of admissions criteria that make a difference for that
    institution. So for example, how heavily are things like test
    scores weighed versus high school grades; AP classes, things
    like that.
        Certainly, graduation rates is critical and this is an area
    as I mentioned earlier, we have lots of data but we don't have
    the right data about graduation rates because right now we are
    only tracking students who start in one school and complete in
    that school.
        And with over half of all students today attending more
    than one institution, we need to have some kind of way of
    tracking students who cross institutions because for example,
    if a student starts at Michigan State and spends 2 years there
    and then transfers somewhere else, that is not going to show as
    a completion to us even though they may go elsewhere and
    complete their bachelor's degree at a school down the street in
    2 more years. So we need better data that tracks students
    across institutions.
        That is three and I will let anybody else chime in on the
    other two that they would like to add.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Mr. Reindl, do you want to add to that?
        Mr. Reindl. Well, I think that from the governor's
    perspective it is really important and you want to look at who
    is coming and that is age, race, income. It is just essential
    especially for working adults like Mr. Garrido. We need to know
    how many of them are participating and then number two,
    remediation. That is the ticket out for too many students. And
    it is a national disgrace that we were not being transparent
    about that until governors came together and said no, we are
    going to be transparent about that.
        It is to Dr. Heller's point, completion. Again, age, race,
    income. If I were a working adult, I would like to know how
    good that college does at getting people like me to graduation.
    How do we pay for it? I think Dr. Heller touched on that very
    nicely.
        Net and debt--this is what I would say--you know, net
    tuition--net price as well as the indebtedness and then the
    return. It is essential to know if I am paying this tuition,
    what is my likelihood of being employed somehow somewhere and
    how much--how many people are being helped by my tuition and by
    the money that states pay. So it is coming, going, and paying.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Coming, going, and paying. Okay. Great.
        Dr. Hurd, do you have anything to add to that?
        Ms. Hurd. They have done a beautiful job covering it.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Right. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Reindl, would you talk a little bit more about how the
    information that we are talking about gets presented? Are there
    some suggestions, are there some states that have done a
    wonderful job of presenting the information so that we could
    look at those as models?
        Mr. Reindl. Certainly, Chairwoman Foxx. And in my
    testimony, I point to three states; Kentucky, Washington State,
    and Arizona. They have developed interactive dashboards. You go
    on the web. You are able to pull down--it is a small number of
    measures so that you are not overwhelmed--you can tell how many
    students graduated from X University or College that year or
    look at it statewide or look at how many students ended up in
    remedial classes at the community colleges in the state or at a
    specific college.
        So those three states--and there are others--but those
    three states in particular make it easy for a consumer to just
    go, push the button that you want, and look at it either across
    the state if I am a legislator or just a taxpayer or at a
    particular campus.
        If I am that working adults and I want to know, how many
    people like me end up in remedial education so I think those
    are three examples of states that have done some good work in
    that.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you very much.
        I want to thank the panel again for taking time to testify
    before the subcommittee today. I think again it has been a very
    good hearing. I think the questions were well asked and I think
    you all have done a great job.
        Mr. Bishop, do you have any closing remarks you would like
    to make?
        Mr. Bishop. Other than to thank the panel both for their
    testimony and also for the work that they do and to
    congratulate Mr. Garrido on what I am sure is going to be a
    great career. So thank you.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Well I would like to make a couple of
    observations based on the comments that I have heard today. I
    appreciate the emphasis, Dr. Hurd, that you have put on
    evidence-based and data-driven results. I am going to submit
    some questions to you after today's hearing that I didn't want
    to try to--I knew you wouldn't probably have the answers at
    your ready and so I am going to ask you some questions about
    that.
        In reading your testimony, Dr. Heller, I have noted our
    talking about traditional versus nontraditional and I have
    challenged other panels that we have had. When you are talking
    about 70 percent of students going to community colleges and
    proprietary schools, that is what I believe is the total in
    your testimony, the term traditional doesn't mean anything
    anymore.
        Certainly if--I can't remember the exact amount but the
    number of students in 4-year schools that are between ages 18
    and 24 is something like 14 percent now or at least that is
    making up 14 percent of our college going population. So I am
    challenging people to come up with a better title than
    traditional-nontraditional because the nontraditional have
    become the traditional or they are certainly the majority.
        I am again, intrigued by the emphasis that all of you have
    put on the word information as opposed to data. I think that is
    very, very important that we pay attention to those and I
    appreciate that a lot.
        Again, the emphasis on outcomes. Many, many years ago I
    thought we were going to get to that point. I have been around
    for a long time. I have been involved with Southern
    Association, accreditations, and been railing against inputs
    for a long time and saying when are we going to get to where we
    talk about outcomes. And so I appreciate very much the
    emphasis, Mr. Reindl, that you say that the governors are
    putting on this and I think it is really, really important that
    we do that.
        I don't have a concern about people choosing to go to
    school closer to their homes or going to community colleges to
    begin with. That does not--or proprietary schools--that doesn't
    seem to bother me but it does seem to bother some people that
    we are not--that folks are doing that.
        There is an implication that that is not as good as going a
    long distance to some school. You know, frankly, I think it is
    a smart decision on the part of a lot of people to do that.
        When we talk about the enormous debt that many students
    take on, maybe these students are pretty smart and their
    parents and they are saying we are not going to take on the
    debt because they have looked at the outcomes and they have
    seen that it isn't necessary to get a degree from an Ivy League
    school to do well outside--after you get out of college.
        And so I think that that is very good. I think most, or a
    lot of my colleagues think the wisdom of the world is out there
    in flyover country and so we are very keen on that.
        I did note a couple people mentioned up here the issue of
    personal responsibility, and while I believe that if we spend
    hard-working taxpayer dollars, we deserve to get good outcomes
    for that, there is something about personal responsibility that
    I think is getting lost in our country and it concerns me a
    great deal.
        It is as though the government has an answer for everything
    and I think that in some cases we diminished the emphasis on
    personal responsibility for people and that we expect people to
    be spoon-fed in some way.
        So there are responsibilities. However, again, I think
    there has to be a balance. If we are going to pay for
    something, either at the local, state, or federal level, then
    we ought to be getting value for where that money is being
    spent.
        So I appreciate again all of the testimony that we have
    had. I do think this will be useful to us as we look to the
    reauthorization of the higher ed bill, as we look to other
    issues that we are dealing with on this subcommittee and on the
    larger committee.
        So I want to thank you all again for being here.
        I want to thank all of my colleagues for being here today.
        There being no further business, the subcommittee stands
    adjourned.
        [Additional submission for the record from Hon. Suzanne
    Bonamici, a Representative in Congress from the State of
    Oregon, ``Information Matters,'' by the Education Conservancy,
    may be accessed at the following Internet address:]

                      http://www.educationconservancy.org/
                     InformationMattersResearchReportRv.pdf

                                     ______

        [Additional submission for the record from Hon. George
    Miller, senior Democratic member, Committee on Education and
    the Workforce, follows:]

           Prepared Statement of the National College Access Network

        The National College Access Network (NCAN) appreciates the
    opportunity to respond to the April 24, 2013, Subcommittee on Higher
    Education and Workforce Training hearing titled, ``Keeping College
    within Reach: Enhancing Transparency for Students, Families, and
    Taxpayers.'' NCAN and our over 350 affiliate organizations nationwide
    work to assist low-income, first-generation, and students of color to
    achieve their educational dreams. A large portion of the services
    provided to our over 200,000 students annually is guidance through the
    complicated and opaque pathway to college.
        Increasing the number of Americans with postsecondary credentials
    economically and socially benefits both the country and those
    individuals receiving degrees. But today's pathway to and through
    college is often confusing and full of barriers. In order to increase
    those going to and graduating from college, the federal government,
    state governments, and institutions must each do their part to provide
    a transparent pathway to and through college. Transparency includes
    simplicity for students and accountability to the taxpayers.
        NCAN's response will further explore the role the federal
    government can play to increase transparency for students and
    taxpayers. Mr. Travis Reindl spoke for the state role during his
    testimony, and Dr. Don Heller on the role of institutions. NCAN concurs
    with Dr. Nicole Hurd's assertion that institutions must, ``honor their
    investment by getting students to graduation.'' This first and foremost
    must be the priority of every institution in this country.
        The profile of the college student is rapidly changing. Students
    who follow the traditional path enter college directly after high
    school, live on campus, and graduate within five years. With 44% of
    Pell grant recipients over the age of 24 \1\ and 75% of all college
    students commuting to campus,\2\ the traditional path no longer defines
    the college experience for most students. NCAN encourages a shift away
    from labeling students ``traditional/non-traditional,'' as suggested by
    Representative Foxx. Other terms currently used in the field to
    describe the new normal include: new majority students, post-
    traditional students, 21st century students, dependent/independent
    students, and traditional-aged/adult learners.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ ``Rethinking Pell Grants.'' The College Board. 2013. http://
    media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/advocacy/policycenter/
    advocacy-rethinking-pell-grants-one-pager.pdf Page 1.
        \2\ Time Is the Enemy.'' Complete College America. 2011. http://
    www.completecollege.org/docs/Time--Is--the--Enemy.pdf Page 6.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        For these students who are first in the family to go to college,
    receiving guidance through the college going process is crucial. The
    federal government must lead the effort to collect and disseminate the
    information students need. Representative Foxx asked witnesses what the
    most important information for students to have when making a college
    choice is. For NCAN, the two most crucial pieces of information for
    students are:
         Disaggregated graduation rates for all students.
    Currently, the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS)
    only collects graduation rates for first-time, full-time students and
    does not break down those rates by Pell grant status. With a growing
    number of students following a post-traditional college path, this
    limited definition of graduation rates does not inform students as to
    their chances of completing a degree from an institution.
         Net price by family income. It is important for students
    to know not only the net price of an institution, but what that net
    price is for their family's economic quintile. Many low-income students
    still think college is out of reach based solely on the cost.
        Additional helpful information would be the profile (age, race,
    income, part time/full time, size) of the student body, the cohort loan
    default rate, and the admission criteria for the school. Admission
    criteria is important for students to learn in middle school so that
    they can plan their high school paths to not only complete high school
    but have the right courses to be college ready and eligible as those
    two paths are always the same.
        The federal government must continue its support of competitive
    funding programs, such as AmeriCorps and Social Innovation Grants, that
    the non-profit sector leverages in its work. As Dr. Nicole Hurd
    testified, the National College Advising Corps has multiplied these
    federal funds several times over to place near-peer counselors in high
    schools across the country to provide the high-touch, one-on-one
    counseling that students need to help them through this process.
    Schools with NCAC advisors experience an 8-12% increase in college
    going rates in comparison to similar high schools without college
    advisors.\3\ Further, NCAN has affiliates running proven, effective
    programs across the country that leverage AmeriCorps members to provide
    added assistance in high need high schools. Many of these AmeriCorps
    volunteers are first-generation college students from low-income
    backgrounds who become college advisors to give back to their
    communities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ National College Advising Corps. ``Success & Results.'' http://
    www.advisingcorps.org/success-results. 6 May 2013.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The importance of this direct, in person advising was discussed
    during the hearing, and its role cannot be understated. During his
    testimony, Dr. Don Heller noted that guidance counselors, who
    traditionally provide these supports, are burdened by high case loads
    and frequently spend most of their time on scheduling, testing, and
    discipline, leaving little time to help their students plan for their
    futures. Because of this burden on counselors, NCAN affiliates such as
    the National College Advising Corps work with guidance counselors to
    provide the individual support students need while building a college-
    going culture \4\ within the high schools so that all students have the
    opportunity to succeed. Additionally, fewer than 10% of guidance
    counselor training programs nationwide offer a course in college
    planning according to Patrick O'Connor, former president of the
    National Associations for College Admissions Counselors.\5\ NCAN
    affiliates also aid counselors by bringing training and expertise to
    high need high schools.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Corwin, Zoe and William Tierney. ``Getting There--and Beyond:
    Building a Culture of College-going in High Schools.'' USC Center for
    Higher Education Policy Analysis. January 2007. http://www.eric.ed.gov/
    PDFS/ED498731.pdf Page 3.
        \5\ Adams, Caralee. ``Guidance Counselors Lack Training in College
    Admissions.'' Education Week. 28 December 2010. http: / /
    blogs.edweek.org / edweek / college -- bound / 2010 / 12 / counselors
    -- lack -- training -- in -- helping -- students -- get -- into --
    college.html?utm -- source = feedbur ner&utm -- medium = feed&utm --
    campaign = Feed%3A + edweek%2FBVuj + %28Education + Week + Blog%3A +
    College + Bound%29
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The hearing witnesses showed why our higher education system needs
    to be more transparent--so that all students have the opportunity to
    attend college without barriers. It also was clear that while
    technology is an important part of this outreach to students, that
    direct advising is crucial to the process. The federal government must
    lead the effort to collect and disseminate the crucial information
    students need about all colleges as well as continue to provide funds
    that the non-government sectors can leverage to do this work so that
    students have access to the best information and tax payers can examine
    their return on investment.
                                     ______

        [Questions submitted for the record and their responses
    follow:]

                                                 U.S. Congress,
                                          Washington, DC, June 5, 2013.
    Dr. Donald Heller, Dean, College of Education,
    Michigan State University, Erickson Hall, 620 Farm Lane, Rm. 501, E.
            Lansing, MI 48824.
        Dear Dr. Heller: Thank you for testifying before the Subcommittee
    on Higher Education and Workforce Training at the hearing entitled,
    ``Keeping College Within Reach: Enhancing Transparency for Students,
    Families and Taxpayers,'' on Wednesday, April 24, 2013. I appreciate
    your participation.
        Enclosed are additional questions submitted by members of the
    subcommittee after the hearing. Please provide written responses no
    later than June 19, 2013 for inclusion in the final hearing record.
    Responses should be sent to Amy Jones, Brian Melnyk or Emily Slack of
    the committee staff who can be contacted at (202) 225-6558.
        Thank you again for your important contribution to the work of the
    committee.
                Sincerely,
                                     Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman,
               Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training.
                           chairman john kline (r-mn)
        1. It seems the federal government provides a number of tools for
    students and families to utilize in their college search process
    whether it be the College Scorecard, the Shopping Sheet, the net price
    calculator, or data derived from new regulations. Do you have a sense
    about whether these tools offer consistent data? So, for example, if a
    student uses more than one tool, does he or she get consistent
    information?
        2. The College Navigator displays data at the institutional level.
    Do you think that collecting data at this level assists the current
    college-going population or do you believe we need to display
    information by program? What information might we want at the
    programmatic level?
                      representative richard hudson (r-nc)
        1. Dr. Heller, you mentioned that both traditional--aged students
    as well as adults returning to college generally are looking at
    institutions close to where they live. What other metrics, besides
    location, do traditional-aged students examine when choosing a college?
    Do these vary for non-traditional students?
        2. Your testimony mentions that the Department of Education can
    improve upon the information it currently provides to students and
    families. Are there more appropriate or accessible ways the federal
    government can present data to students, parents, and taxpayers?
                                     ______

          Dr. Heller's Response to Questions Submitted for the Record

                                 chairman kline
        1. It seems the federal government provides a number of tools for
    students and families to utilize in their college search process
    whether it be the College Scorecard, the Shopping Sheet, the net price
    calculator, or data derived from new regulations. Do you have a sense
    about whether these tools offer consistent data? So, for example, if a
    student uses more than one tool, does he or she get consistent
    information?

        In my experience, information useful in the college search process
    provided by the Department of Education (ED)--most of which is derived
    from data collected and disseminated by the National Center for
    Education Statistics--is consistently distributed to consumers. It is
    very unusual to find the same data element from the same time period
    having two different values in the information provided by ED.
        The key point here is the same data element from the same time
    period. You may find similar data elements reported with different
    values; one example would be the sticker price reported for a
    particular college as compared to the net price. Similarly, there may
    be situations where one data element is reported with values from two
    different time periods on different tools disseminated by ED. When this
    does occur, it is usually related to differences in data collection or
    propagation schedules.
        In general, however, my experience is that there is good
    consistency across the various ED tools available to students and
    parents.

        2. The College Navigator displays data at the institutional level.
    Do you think that collecting data at this level assists the current
    college-going population or do you believe we need to display
    information by program? What information might we want at the
    programmatic level?

        The Chairman has raised a very good point. Right now, all the data
    in the ED College Navigator is at the institutional level, not the
    program level within institutions. At present, I do not see this as
    particularly problematic. In most institutions, the tuition prices are
    generally fairly consistent across programs, though in some
    institutions there are small numbers of programs that charge higher, or
    premium, tuition rates.
        These are generally laboratory-intensive programs with higher
    costs, such as nursing, laboratory science, and the like.
        However, if the ED begins to disseminate more information about the
    earnings of graduates of particular programs, then the College
    Navigator would be enhanced if it provided data at the program level.
    This is because the earnings of students with different majors within
    an institution are often greater than differences in the average
    earnings of students across institutions. Right now, there is not an
    accurate and reliable source of earnings data for students by
    institution, never mind within different programs at institutions (I
    recently blogged about this issue--see part one at http://
    edwp.educ.msu.edu/dean/2013/measuring-the-return-on-investment-of-
    attending-college-part-1/ and part two at http://edwp.educ.msu.edu/
    dean/2013/measuring-the-return-on-investment-of-attending-college-part-
    2/).
        If the Congress does agree to consider allowing ED to develop a
    student-level unit record data system, this would be a step toward
    collecting better data on the earnings of graduates of colleges and
    universities at the program level. This could be accomplished by
    matching university records with Social Security earnings records. If
    this step is taken, then providing College Navigator data at the
    program level could be useful to students and families.
        In addition, if colleges move more toward charging differential
    tuition--varying tuition rates for different majors--than it would be
    useful to have these different program rates reported in the College
    Navigator.
                         representative richard hudson
        1. Dr. Heller, you mentioned that both traditional-aged students as
    well as adults returning to college generally are looking at
    institutions close to where they live. What other metrics, besides
    location, do traditional-aged students examine when choosing a college?
    Do these vary for non-traditional students?

        For traditional-aged students, the price of college and
    availability of financial aid are important and growing factors in
    their decisions regarding where to attend college. The research shows
    that sensitivity to price is inversely related to income, i.e., the
    lower the financial resources of the student and her family, the
    greater is her sensitivity to rising prices.
        There are also a number of other characteristics that the research
    shows can influence traditional-aged students' decisions about college
    attendance. These include: size of institution; racial/gender mix;
    program availability; retention and graduation rates; urban/suburban/
    rural location; support services; and campus amenities, including
    housing, dining, and cultural and recreational facilities.
        For non-traditional students, price and availability of financial
    aid are also important factors, as are program availability. However,
    the other factors mentioned above tend to be less important for adult,
    working students, and location and price tend to be most important.

        2. Your testimony mentions that the Department of Education can
    improve upon the information it currently provides to students and
    families. Are there more appropriate or accessible ways the federal
    government can present data to students, parents, and taxpayers?

        As I stated in my testimony, we have a plethora of data available
    about colleges, but less information that is truly useful to students
    and parents who are trying to distinguish among different institutions.
    I do not believe there is much more the federal government can do to
    improve the delivery and availability of existing data to students and
    their families.
        What we need is more help for potential college attendees to wade
    through the data that are already available, and this is where better
    access to college counselors and the like can be helpful. This is
    particularly true for first generation college students.
                                     ______

                                                 U.S. Congress,
                                          Washington, DC, June 5, 2013.
    Dr. Nicole Hurd, Founder and Executive Director,
    National College Advising Corps, 200 No. Greensboro, Suite C8,
            Carrboro, NC 27510.
        Dear Dr. Hurd: Thank you for testifying before the Subcommittee on
    Higher Education and Workforce Training at the hearing entitled,
    ``Keeping College Within Reach: Enhancing Transparency for Students,
    Families and Taxpayers,'' on Wednesday, April 24, 2013. I appreciate
    your participation.
        I have enclosed an additional question for inclusion in the final
    hearing record. Please provide a written response no later than June
    19, 2013. Responses should be sent to Amy Jones, Brian Melnyk or Emily
    Slack of the committee staff who can be contacted at (202) 225-6558.
        Thank you again for your important contribution to the work of the
    committee.
                Sincerely,
                                     Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman,
               Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training.
        During the hearing, you mentioned a study that looked at the
    effects of providing better information about the full range of
    college-going opportunities to low-income, high-achieving students.
    Could you please provide the committee with a copy of that study and an
    explanation of whether or not it is evidenced based and data driven? If
    it is not evidence based and data driven, do you know of any studies
    that are which show similar results?
                                     ______

           Dr. Hurd's Response to Questions Submitted for the Record_

                             college advising corps
    Recommended Reading on Access
    Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (2002). Access
            denied: Restoring the nation's commitment to equal educational
            opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.*

    Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (2002). Empty
            promises: The myth of college access in America. Washington,
            DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.*

    Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (2006). Mortgaging
            our future: How financial barriers to college undercut
            America's global competitiveness. Washington, DC: U.S.
            Government Printing Office.*

    Beasley, Sarah and Neal Holly. (2013) To improve completion, remember
            the countryside. http://chronicle.com/article/To-Improve-
            Completion/139183/

    Bowen, W.G. and Bok, D. (1998). The Shape of the River: Long-term
            consequences of considering race in college and university
            admissions. Princeton University Press.

    Bowen, W.G., Chingos, M.M., McPherson, M.S. (2009). Crossing the Finish
            Line: Completing college at America's Public Universities.
            Princeton University Press.

    Bowen, W.G., Kurzweil, M.A., Tobin, E.M. (2005) Equity and Excellence
            in American Higher Education. University of Virginia Press.

    Castleman, Benjamin L. and Lindsay S. Page. (2009). Stemming the summer
            flood: An experimental study of college counselor intervention
            the summer after high school graduation on low-income students'
            college enrollment.

    Ibid. (2010). A trickle or a torrent? Understanding the extent of
            summer ``melt'' among college-intending high school graduates.

    Ibid. (2012). The forgotten summer: Does the offer of college
            counseling the summer after high school mitigate attrition
            among college-intending low-income high school graduates?

    Clinedinst, Melissa E., et al. (2011). 2011 State of Admissions
            (National Association for College Admissions Counseling).
            http://www.nacacnet.org/research/research-data/Documents/
            2011SOCA.pdf

    College Cost and Financial Aid Handbook. (2006). College Board
            Publications.

    College Counseling Sourcebook: Advice and Strategies from Experienced
            School Counselors, 6th edition. College Board Publications.

    Corwin Z., & W. Tierney. (2007). Getting there and beyond: Building a
            culture of college-going in high schools. Los Angeles: Center
            for Higher Education Policy Analysis.

    Cushman, Kathleen. (2005). First in the family: Advice about college
            from first-generation students; Your High School Years. (Vol.
            1). Providence, RI: Next Generation Press.

    Cushman, Kathleen. (2006). First in the family: Your college years:
            Advice about college from first-generation students. (Vol. 2).
            Providence, RI: Next Generation Press.

    Dowd, A.C., E. M. Bensimon, G. Gabbard, S. Singleton, E. Macias, J. R.
            Dee, T. Melguizo, J. Cheslock, and D. Giles. 2006. Transfer
            access to elite colleges and universities in the United States:
            Threading the needle of the American dream--The study of
            economic, informational, and cultural barriers to community
            college student transfer access at selective institutions.
            http://www.jkcf.org/grants/community-college-transfer/research/
            transfer-access-to-elite-colleges-and-universities-in-the-
            united-states-threading-the-needle-of-the-/

    Heller, D., ed. (2002). The condition of access: Higher education for
            lower income students. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

    Hoxby, Caroline and Sarah Turner. (2013). Expanding college
            opportunities for high-achieving, low income students.

    Kozol, Jonathan. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of
            apartheid schooling in America. New York: Three Rivers Press.

    Kravets, Marybeth &Wax, Imy. (2007). The K & W Guide to Colleges for
            Students with Learning Disabilities or Attention Deficit/
            Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) 9th Edition. Random House, Inc.
            NY.

    Lerner, J. B. Brand. (2006). The college ladder: Linking secondary and
            postsecondary education for success for all students.
            Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum.

    Lumina Foundation, The. (2012). A stronger nation through higher
            education: How and why Americans must achieve a Big Goal for
            college attainment. http://www.luminafoundation.org/
            publications/A_stronger_nation_through_higher_education.pdf

    Mathews, Jay. (2003). Harvard Schmarvard: Getting beyond the Ivy League
            to the college that is best for you. Roseville, CA: Prima
            Publishing.

    McPherson, M. S., & Schapiro, M. O. (Eds.). (2006). College access:
            Opportunity or privilege?. New York: The College Board.

    Meece, Judith, et al. Educational aspirations of rural adolescents.
            http: / / www.nrcres.org / Research % 20Briefs / HSA / HSA %
            20Educational % 20Aspirations % 20brief.pdf

    Pope, Loren. (2006). Colleges that change lives: 40 schools that will
            change the way you think about colleges (Rev. Ed.). New York:
            Penguin Books.

    Ramsey, J. (2008). Creating a high school culture of college-going: The
            case of Washington State achievers. Washington, DC: Institute
            for Higher Education Policy.

    Roderick, M., et al. (2008). From high school to the future: Potholes
            on the road to college. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School
            Research. http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/publications/
            CCSR_Potholes_Report.pdf

    Rugg, Frederick. (2007). Rugg's Recommendations on the Colleges, 24th
            Edition.

    Sacks, Peter. (2007). Tearing down the gates: Confronting the class
            divide in American education. Berkeley: University of
            California Press.

    Sherwin, Jay. (2012). Make me a match. Helping low-income and first-
            generation students make good college choices. http://
            www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/policybrief_24.pdf

    Smith, Jonathan. (2011). Can applying to more colleges increase
            enrollment rates? http://advocacy.collegeboard.org/sites/
            default/files/
            11b_4313_College%20App%20Research%20Brief_WEB_111026.pdf

    Stephan, Jennifer L. and James E. Rosenbaum. (2012). Educational
            Evaluation and Policy Analysis: Can high schools reduce college
            enrollment gaps with new counseling model? http://
            epa.sagepub.com/content/35/2/200

    Suskind, Ron. (1998). A hope in the unseen: An American odyssey from
            the inner city to the Ivy League. New York: Broadway Books.

    The College Admissions Data Hyper-Handbook. Wintergreen Orchard House.
            www.wintergreenorchardhouse.com/wgoh_hyper_handbook.html

    Tierney, William G., et al. (2009). Helping students navigate the path
            to college: What high schools can do. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/
            wwc/pdf/practice_guides/higher_ed_pg_091509.pdf

    U.S. Department of Education. (2011). College Completion Tool Kit.
            http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
            college_completion_tool_kit.pdf

    Wyner, J.S., J. M. Bridgeland, J. J. Diiulio Jr. 200y. Achievement
            trap: How America is failing millions of high-achieving
            students from lower-income families. http://www.jkcf.org/news-
            knowledge/research-reports/
                                     notes
        *The first three reports can be found at http://www.ed.gov/about/
    bdscomm/list/acsfa/edlite-publications.html.

        Another helpful site is the Pathways to College Network, an online
    library of access practice and research: http://
    www.pathwaystocollege.net/PCNLibrary/ListTopics.aspx.
        For literature related to specific populations, check out
    Excelencia in Education (http://www.edexcelencia.org/), which has
    reports on serving Hispanic/Latino students, and the Institute for
    Higher Education Policy (http://www.ihep.org/), which has a report on
    increasing higher education access for immigrant students.
        The Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis (CHEPA) at the
    University of Southern California's Rossier School of Education has an
    excellent repository of online papers about college access and
    financial aid: http://www.usc.edu/dept/chepa/papers_publications.html.
                                     ______

        [Whereupon, at 11:34 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]