Higher Education: Information Sharing Could Help Institutions
Identify and Address Challenges Some Asian Americans and Pacific
Islander Students Face (25-JUL-07, GAO-07-925).
As a group, Asian American and Pacific Islanders represent about
5 percent of the U.S. population and hold about 8 percent of the
college degrees. To better understand the educational attainment
and average incomes of the subgroups that comprise this
population, the Committee asked: 1) What are Asian American and
Pacific Islander subgroups' educational attainment and household
income levels? (2) What challenges, if any, Asian American and
Pacific Islander students face in pursuing and completing their
post-secondary education? and (3) What federal and institutional
resources do institutions with large Asian American and Pacific
Islander student enrollment use to address the particular needs
of these students? GAO analyzed data from the U.S. Census Bureau
and the U.S. Department of Education (Education) and spoke with
officials and Asian American and Pacific Islander students at
eight postsecondary institutions.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-07-925
ACCNO: A73268
TITLE: Higher Education: Information Sharing Could Help
Institutions Identify and Address Challenges Some Asian Americans
and Pacific Islander Students Face
DATE: 07/25/2007
SUBJECT: Academic achievement
College students
Colleges and universities
Disadvantaged persons
Higher education
Immigration
Income statistics
Minority education
Policy evaluation
Student financial aid
Surveys
Asians
Policies and procedures
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-07-925
* [1]Results in Brief
* [2]Background
* [3]Federal Aid to Postsecondary Institutions and Individual Stu
* [4]Collectively, Asian American and Pacific Islanders Have Achi
* [5]As a Group, Asian American and Pacific Islanders Have Achiev
* [6]Viewing Asian American and Pacific Islanders as a Group Mask
* [7]Students from Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups
* [8]Levels of Academic Preparedness Differ among Asian American
* [9]Some Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups Face Chal
* [10]Some Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups Find It C
* [11]Institutions Used Both Federal Aid and Their Own Funding and
* [12]Institutions Used Federal Aid Targeted to Institutions That
* [13]Colleges Use Their Own Resources to Provide Asian American a
* [14]Eligible Asian American and Pacific Islander Students Also R
* [15]Conclusions
* [16]Recommendation
* [17]Agency Comments
* [18]Procedures for Determining Asian American and Pacific Island
* [19]Data Collection
* [20]Data Analysis
* [21]Procedures for Identifying What Challenges, If Any, Asian Am
* [22]Data Collection
* [23]Data Analysis
* [24]Procedures for Determining What Federal and Institutional Re
* [25]GAO Contact
* [26]Acknowledgments
* [27]GAO's Mission
* [28]Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
* [29]Order by Mail or Phone
* [30]To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
* [31]Congressional Relations
* [32]Public Affairs
Report to Congressional Requesters
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO
July 2007
HIGHER EDUCATION
Information Sharing Could Help Institutions Identify and Address
Challenges Some Asian Americans and Pacific Islander Students Face
GAO-07-925
Contents
Letter 1
Results in Brief 4
Background 6
Collectively, Asian American and Pacific Islanders Have Achieved High
Levels of Education and Income, but There are Differences among Asian
American and Pacific Islander Subgroups 14
Students from Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups Differ in the
Challenges They Face When Pursuing Postsecondary Education 22
Institutions Used Both Federal Aid and Their Own Funding and Resources to
Address the Needs of Asian American and Pacific Islander Students 30
Conclusions 39
Recommendation 40
Agency Comments 40
Appendix I Scope and Methodology 42
Appendix II Description of Federal Student Aid 56
Appendix III Comments from the Department of Education 57
Appendix IV GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 59
Tables
Table 1: Groupings for Analyses of Asian American and Pacific Islander
Populations 11
Table 2: Estimated Income by Racial and Ethnic Group and College Degree
Attainment in 2005 16
Table 3: Estimated Average Income for Asian American and Pacific Islander
Subgroups by Attainment of College Degree in 2005 18
Table 4: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups
Fluent in English 19
Table 5: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups with
and without College Degree Fluent in English 20
Table 6: Percentage of Students Taking ESL Courses by Asian American and
Pacific Islander Subgroup 24
Table 7: Percentage of Undergraduates Delaying Their Postsecondary
Enrollment, by Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups in 2000 28
Table 8: Description of Federal Institutional Grant Programs Used at
Visited Institutions 32
Table 9: Federal Institutional Grant Programs Used by Institutions Visited
On-site 34
Table 10: Estimated Numbers and Percentages of College Graduates and Non
Graduates, by (1) Broad Racial/Ethnic Categories and (2) Specific Asian
American Subgroups, and Odds and Odds Ratios Derived from Them 46
Table 11: Odds Ratios from Bi-variate and Multivariate Models Estimating
the Effects of Race and Ethnicity, Gender, Age and Nativity-Date of
Arrival on the Odds on Having a College Degree 49
Table 12: Odds Ratios from Bi-variate and Multivariate Models Estimating
the Effects of Ethnicity, Sex, Age, and Nativity/Arrival Status on the
Odds on Having a College Degree for Asian American and Pacific Islander
Subgroups 50
Table 13: Composition of the Asian American and Pacific Islander Student
Discussion Groups 53
Figures
Figure 1: A Map of Asia and the Pacific Islands 8
Figure 2: Estimated Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander and
Other Groups in the U.S. Population Age 25 or Older In 2005 10
Figure 3: Estimated Percentage with at Least a 4-year College Degree and
Average Income by Racial and Ethnic Group in 2005 15
Figure 4: Estimated Percentage with at Least a 4-year College Degree and
Their Average Income by Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroup in
2005 17
Figure 5: Percentage of Foreign Born Asian American and Pacific Islander
Subgroups Arriving before and after 1980 21
Figure 6: High School Academic Program, by Asian American and Pacific
Islander Subgroup in 2002 23
Figure 7: High School Reading and Math Quartiles, by Asian American and
Pacific Islander Subgroup 25
Figure 8: Socioeconomic Status Quartile of High School Students, by Asian
American and Pacific Islander Subgroup in 2004 26
Figure 9: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups
Setting Aside Money for Child's Future Education in 2002 27
Figure 10: Work among Enrolled Undergraduates, by Asian American and
Pacific Islander Subgroups in 2000 29
Figure 11: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Students Who
Applied for and Received Any Federal Aid in 2000 37
Figure 12: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Students Who
Applied for and Received a Federal Loan, Grant, or Work Study in 2000 39
Abbreviations
AAPI Asian American and Pacific Islander
ACS American Community Survey
CS PUMS American Community Survey Public Use Microdata
BRR balanced repeated replication
ELS Education Longitudinal Study
ESL English as a second language
FAFSA Free Application for Federal Student Aid
IPEDS Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
NPSAS National Postsecondary Student Aid Study
MOE margin of error
OR odds ratio(s)
PLUS Parents Loan for Undergraduate Students
SSS Student Support Services
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548
July 25, 2007
The Honorable David Wu
House of Representatives
The Honorable Howard "Buck" McKeon
Ranking Member
Committee on Education and Labor
House of Representatives
Although Asian American and Pacific Islanders represent about 5 percent of
the general population, they hold about 8 percent of the college degrees
in the United States, leading some to characterize them as the "model
minority". However, viewing Asian American and Pacific Islanders as a
homogeneous group may mask differences in educational attainment and
income among Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups. Although Asian
American and Pacific Islanders represent about 5 percent of the general
population, they hold about 8 percent of the college degrees in the United
States, leading some to characterize them as the "model minority".
However, viewing Asian American and Pacific Islanders as a homogeneous
group may mask differences in educational attainment and income among
Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups.
Asian American and Pacific Islanders are a diverse population, comprised
of as many as 43 ethnic groups that differ in their languages, cultures,
and countries of origin. Some Asian American and Pacific Islander
subgroups, such as the Chinese and Japanese, have large numbers of people
who immigrated to the U.S. several generations ago; other subgroups--such
as the Vietnamese, Laotian, and Cambodian populations of Southeast
Asia--arrived in the 1970s and, like other immigrants, may face challenges
in obtaining an education. Asian American and Pacific Islanders also are
one of the fastest growing minority groups in the United States. As a
group, Asian American and Pacific Islanders increased about 76 percent
between 1990 and 2000, from about 7 million to 12 million. Asian American
and Pacific Islanders are a diverse population, comprised of as many as 43
ethnic groups that differ in their languages, cultures, and countries of
origin. Some Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups, such as the
Chinese and Japanese, have large numbers of people who immigrated to the
U.S. several generations ago; other subgroups--such as the Vietnamese,
Laotian, and Cambodian populations of Southeast Asia--arrived in the 1970s
and, like other immigrants, may face challenges in obtaining an education.
Asian American and Pacific Islanders also are one of the fastest growing
minority groups in the United States. As a group, Asian American and
Pacific Islanders increased about 76 percent between 1990 and 2000, from
about 7 million to 12 million.
To assist postsecondary institutions that serve both minority and
low-income students, the Congress appropriated about $514 million in
fiscal year 2007 to fund programs provided under Title III and Title V of
the Higher Education Act, as amended. The U.S. Department of Education
(Education) administers these programs by issuing grants to eligible
postsecondary institutions to help them improve their capacity to serve
minority and low-income students. Education also provides about $270 To
assist postsecondary institutions that serve both minority and low-income
students, the Congress appropriated about $514 million in fiscal year 2007
to fund programs provided under Title III and Title V of the Higher
Education Act, as amended. The U.S. Department of Education (Education)
administers these programs by issuing grants to eligible postsecondary
institutions to help them improve their capacity to serve minority and
low-income students. Education also provides about $270
million in aid annually to postsecondary institutions under its TRIO
program (see Background section for more detail on TRIO) to assist, among
other groups, first generation college students.
To better understand educational attainment and income among the Asian
American and Pacific Islander subgroups, you asked us to determine: (1)
What are Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups' educational
attainment and household income levels? (2) What challenges, if any, Asian
American and Pacific Islander students face in pursuing and completing
their postsecondary education? and (3) What federal and institutional
resources do institutions with large Asian American and Pacific Islander
student enrollment use to address the particular needs of these students.
To answer the first question, we used the Census Bureau's (Census) 2005
American Community Survey (ACS), to examine the present educational
attainment of Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups in the United
States relative to other racial or ethnic groups.1 We conducted
statistical analyses to identify the relationship between educational
attainment and income, gender, level of English fluency, nativity, and
date of arrival.2 We also constructed a multivariate model to analyze the
extent to which certain factors affected the likelihood of having or not
having a college degree. Because of data limitations, including the time
and resources needed to link data sources or re-interview ACS respondents,
we were unable to include parents' education, income, degree status on
entry to the
U.S., and some other factors in the model that research has shown
influence educational attainment. To answer the second question, we
analyzed nationally representative data from two Education databases--the
Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS) and the National Postsecondary
Student Aid Study (NPSAS) of 2000.3 The Asian American and Pacific
Islander demographic data in both databases provided separate categories
for the most populous subgroups, but combines data for the less populous
subgroups, such as Cambodians, Laotians and Hmong.4 We assessed the
reliability of the ACS, ELS, and NPSAS data by performing electronic
testing of required data elements, reviewing existing information about
the data and the systems that produced them, and by interviewing agency
officials knowledgeable about the data. We determined that the data were
sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. We also visited
eight 2-year and 4-year postsecondary institutions in Hawaii, Minnesota
and California and conducted 14 discussion groups with students from 11
Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups. We selected states and
institutions with high concentrations of Asian American and Pacific
Islander students and diverse Asian American and Pacific Islander
subgroups. To answer the third question, we analyzed the NPSAS 2000 data,
interviewed officials at the eight postsecondary institutions we visited,
interviewed Education officials about federal Title III, TRIO, Native
Hawaiian Education, and Native Hawaiian Career and Technical Education
program requirements and reviewed program documentation.
1Unless otherwise noted, the coefficient of variation for all estimates
based on the 2005 American Community Survey data is less than .04. That
is, the standard error for each estimate is less than 4 percent of the
estimate. See appendix I for more information.
2We limited our scope to the U.S population age 25 or older. This was done
to restrict focus to those that might have completed their education. As a
result, our estimates may vary from other published population statistics,
such as American Community Survey population profiles, or other published
Census data. These other estimates would include individuals aged 24 and
younger, whom our analyses excluded. Since different racial and ethnic
groups in the United States may have varied age distributions, we might
expect our results to vary from other published data.
3As a longitudinal study, the ELS database captures data from the same
respondents at different times in their lives. In this report, we use data
from the base year survey of 2002 (when respondents were high school
sophomores) and data from the follow up survey of 2004 (when respondents
were high school seniors). We cite data for "high school students" to
reflect student responses, not the year in which they were collected.
4The ACS data contain categories for over 43 Asian American and Pacific
Islander subgroups, but we collapsed some of the smaller homogeneous
subgroups to allow for more meaningful analysis. For example, the findings
for the Indochinese include Cambodians, Laotians and Hmong. However, in
the ELS data, the Southeast Asian category includes survey respondents who
identified themselves as Southeast Asian, but the countries of origin for
these respondents were not identified. The NPSAS data include some
Southeast Asian categories, but did not identify the smaller subgroups.
The correspondence among the Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroup
categories in our ACS, ELS and NPSAS analyses is described in more detail
in the background.
Appendix I provides a detailed description of our methodology and its
limitations. We conducted our work from July 2006 through July 2007 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Results in Brief
As a group, Asian American and Pacific Islanders have attained high levels
of education and income, but differences among Asian American and Pacific
Islander subgroups exist. According to our analysis of the 2005 ACS data,
almost half of the Asian American and Pacific Islanders in the United
States over the age of 25 had a 4-year college degree. In comparison
almost one third of whites and less than one fifth of African Americans
and Hispanics had degrees. In addition, Asian American and Pacific
Islanders had the highest income of any other group followed by whites.
Viewing Asian American and Pacific Islanders as a single group, however,
masks the fact that there are major differences in educational attainment
and income among their subgroups. For example, a greater percentage of
Asian Indians and Chinese in the United States had college degrees
compared to the Vietnamese, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders and
other Indochinese--the Cambodians, Laotians, and Hmong. In addition,
income among employed Asian American and Pacific Islanders was lowest
among Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders and the Cambodians, Laotians,
and Hmong. The differences among Asian American and Pacific Islander
subgroups are significant, and research indicates that degree status on
entry to the U.S. is an important factor in those differences. In
addition, our multivariate analysis showed that immigration status
explained some of the differences in educational attainment among the
subgroups.
Education's data on Asian American and Pacific Islanders while they were
in high school and college show that subgroups face a range of challenges
when pursuing postsecondary education. Specifically, the data showed that
subgroups differ in their levels of academic preparedness, ability to pay
for college, and their need to balance academic, employment, and family
obligations. For example, half of Southeast Asian high school students
were not in a college preparatory program, nearly one quarter took
English-as-a-second-language courses, and more than half of Southeast
Asian, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, and other Asian
American and Pacific Islander students had lower scores on reading and
math tests. With respect to the ability to pay for college, more than half
of Southeast Asian and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander students were
in the lower socioeconomic quartiles, and Southeast Asian and other Asian
American and Pacific Islander parents set aside less money for their
children's future education than parents in other subgroups. Finally,
Asian American and Pacific Islander students participating in our
discussion groups told us that they faced challenges balancing their work,
family, and academic responsibilities leading some to live at home, work
while enrolled, and even delay their education.
The postsecondary institutions we visited, all of which had large
concentrations of Asian American and Pacific Islander students, used
federal institutional grants and their own resources to address the needs
of Asian American and Pacific Islander students. For example, federal aid
that is targeted to colleges that serve students who are low-income and at
risk of not succeeding in college provided tutoring to college students
and supplemented Pell Grants for students struggling to meet the cost of
college. Similarly, schools used their own funds to provide a range of
services, including outreach to students while they were still in high
school, scholarships, tuition assistance, tutoring, and help applying for
financial aid to enrolled college students. For example, one school
provided scholarships to low-income Hmong students. Another school used
its own resources and offered advising, tutoring, and assistance applying
for financial aid to Native Hawaiians, students of Filipino ancestry, and
other underrepresented ethnicities including Pacific Islanders and
Southeast Asians. These services were established to respond to challenges
the university faced recruiting and retaining underserved groups.
Officials at some of the schools we visited said that these programs and
strategies reached underserved student populations while they were still
in high school and equipped students enrolled in college with the tools
and resources they needed to persist in school. Officials at some of the
schools we visited also told us that they would benefit from learning
about strategies other colleges have used to assist AAPI high school and
college students. In past reports, GAO also has found that a range of
strategies--including providing low-income and minority students with
tutoring, mentoring, and instruction in various subjects, including math
and writing, beginning in high school-- improved the students' educational
attainment.
We are recommending that the Secretary of Education facilitate information
sharing among postsecondary institutions that serve Asian American and
Pacific Islander students about strategies that foster low-income Asian
American and Pacific Islander student recruitment, retention and
graduation and about strategies to reach out to this group beginning in
high school. Education generally agreed with our recommendation and agreed
to examine options to facilitate information sharing by encouraging more
grantees to report successful practices on their own Web pages. However,
we believe that Education is uniquely positioned to serve as a broker for
information sharing, using its own Web site to facilitate the exchange of
information about successful strategies for Asian American and Pacific
Islander students.
Background
Asian American and Pacific Islanders are U. S. residents who are
descendants of immigrants, or are immigrants themselves, from several
countries in Asia and the Pacific Islands. Of the 43 self-identified
subgroups in the 2005 ACS, about half are linked to Asian countries of
origin or ethnic groups and about half are linked to Pacific Island
cultures. The Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Asian Indian, Korean and
Vietnamese subgroups accounted for about 88 percent of the Asian American
and Pacific Islander subgroups in 2005. The map in figure 1 displays the
geographic region of Asia and the Pacific Islands.
Most Asian American and Pacific Islanders entered the country following
passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965 or as
refugees, and a high percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islanders
age 25 or older in 2005--about 83 percent--are foreign born. However,
differences in immigration history and immigrant status also exist among
the Asian subgroups. For example, the Chinese were one of the first Asian
subgroups to immigrate to the U.S., arriving in the midnineteenth century,
whereas most Vietnamese arrived in two waves, one after the U.S. withdrew
from Vietnam in 1972 and the other before the South Vietnamese government
fell in 1975.
As shown in figure 2, among the major racial and ethnic groups, whites
accounted for the majority of the U.S. population (about 71 percent),
followed by Hispanics (12 percent) and African Americans (11 percent).
Asians accounted for about 4 percent of U. S. population members age 25 or
older in 2005. When attempting to study individual Asian American and
Pacific Islander subgroups, the small number of people in some subgroups
makes analysis difficult.
Figure 1: A Map of Asia and the Pacific Islands
Figure 2: Estimated Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander and
Other Groups in the U.S. Population Age 25 or Older In 2005
Note: All estimates have a margin of error of two-tenths of 1 percent or
less.
The Census Bureau, which has developed specialized techniques for
populations with limited English proficiency included questions that
allowed Asian American and Pacific Islanders to self-identify their 43
subgroups in the 2005 ACS survey. Education, which conducts national
surveys of postsecondary institutions and students, such as NPSAS and ELS,
to support program planning and research, includes questions in the
surveys asking respondents to self-identify the most populous subgroups,
such as the Chinese, Asian Indians and Filipinos, but not the less
populous ones. According to Education, collecting reliable information on
Asian American and Pacific Islander students from the small
subgroups--such as the Cambodians, Laotians, and Hmong--is difficult
because: they tend to attend small postsecondary institutions; all schools
don't collect information for Asian American and Pacific Islander
subgroups; Education samples only 25 students at each institution; and
students don't self-identify their subgroup accurately. As a result,
research on Asian American and Pacific Islanders' educational attainment
and income that uses multiple sources of data has incompatible Asian
American and Pacific Islander categories among the data sources. The Asian
American and Pacific Islander groupings used in our analyses are shown in
table 1.
Table 1: Groupings for Analyses of Asian American and Pacific Islander
Populations
Groupings for
Groupings for our ELS our NPSAS
Groupings for our ACS analysis analysis analysis
(South) Asian Indians South Asian--Asian Indian, Asian Indian
Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan
South Asians--Pakistani,
Bangladeshi, and Sri Lankan
Chinese Chinese Chinese
Japanese Japanese Japanese
Korean Korean Korean
Filipino Filipino Filipino
Vietnamese Vietnamese
Southeast Asians --Indonesian, Southeast
Malaysian and Thai Asian--Vietnamese,
Laotian,
Cambodian/Kampuchean,
Thai, Burmese
Indochinese--Cambodian, Laotian
and Hmong
Native Hawaiians and Pacific Native Hawaiians and Native
Islanders--Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islanders Hawaiians and
Samoan, Tongan, Polynesian, Pacific
Guamanian, Chamorro, Islanders
Micronesian, Melanesian, and
other or combined Native
Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders
Other Asians--other specified Other Asian American and Other Asian
Asian, unspecified Asian and Pacific Islander and American and
combinations of Asian groups unspecified Asian American Pacific
and Pacific Islander a Islander and
unspecified
Asian American
and Pacific
Islander a
Source: GAO analysis of 2005 ACS, 2002 ELS, and 2000 NPSAS data.
aFor our ELS 2002 and NPSAS 2000 analyses, we created an "Other Asian
American Pacific Islander/Unspecified Asian American Pacific Islander"
category that we refer to throughout this report as "Other Asian American
and Pacific Islander." For ELS 2002, we developed the category that
included the responses of (1) students who identified themselves as Asian
but did not specify to which Asian American Pacific Islander subgroup they
belonged and (2) students who identified themselves as multiethnic as well
as a member of an Asian American Pacific Islander subgroup. In NPSAS 2000,
we developed a category that included the responses of (1) students who
identified themselves as Asian and selected "Other Asian American Pacific
Islander" as their subgroup, (2) students who identified themselves as
Asian but did not specify an Asian American Pacific Islander subgroup and
(3) students who identified themselves as Thai.
Federal Aid to Postsecondary Institutions and Individual Students
The Department of Education provides grants directly to postsecondary
institutions to help schools improve their capacity to serve low-income
and minority students. Asian American and Pacific Islander students may
receive assistance under these programs either as participants in
institutions that received targeted grants or as individual recipients of
federal student financial aid. Federal assistance in each of these areas
gives special consideration to students from low-income families.
Title III, Institutional Aid, and Title V, Developing Institutions, of the
Higher Education Act, as amended, include a number of programs that
authorize Education to award grants to postsecondary institutions that
serve large proportions of low-income students and have limited financial
resources, such as endowment funds. The grants are generally intended to
increase postsecondary institutions' self-sufficiency and build
institutional capacity by improving academic quality, addressing
institutional management issues, and improving student services and
outcomes. The Title III and Title V programs have broad goals for
strengthening participating postsecondary institutions but also allow them
flexibility in developing approaches that will meet their own objectives.
As part of the program's application, participating postsecondary
institutions submit a plan for achieving growth and self-sufficiency,
focused in one or more authorized areas of activity, and if selected, may
use the grant to pursue the plan's objectives. While funding is not
specifically targeted to institutions that serve Asian American and
Pacific Islanders,5 postsecondary institutions that meet the eligibility
requirements of the Title III and Title V programs may use the funding
they receive to assist Asian American and Pacific Islander students
attending eligible institutions. Authorized uses of grant funds include
o construction, maintenance, or renovation of educational
facilities;
o purchase of telecommunications equipment or services;
o support of faculty development;
o development and improvement of academic programs;
o purchase of library books, periodicals and other educational
materials;
o tutoring, counseling and other student service programs designed
to improve academic success;
o fiscal and administrative management improvement; and
o establishing or improving a development office or endowment
fund.
Title III's , part A, Strengthening Institutions program includes grants
directed at different types of postsecondary institutions that meet the
eligibility criteria specified under the title. These institutions include
Tribal Colleges and Alaskan Natives and Native Hawaiian institutions.
Title III, part B, funds are directed to historically black colleges and
universities, and title V funds are directed to institutions that serve
Hispanic students.6
5However, funds directed to Native Hawaiians are provided under Title III,
part A, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians.
In addition to strengthening institutions, Education also awards grants
under the Student Support Services (SSS) program. One of the original
three of a set of Education programs known as TRIO, SSS awards grants to
institutions to support educational attainment for first generation,
low-income college students, and students with disabilities and in need of
academic support. The program aims to increase college retention and
graduation rates and to help students make the transition from one level
of higher education to the next.
Program services include
o instruction in basic skills;
o tutorial services;
o academic, financial or personal counseling;
o assistance in completing applications for admission and
financial aid for enrollment in 4-year institutions and in
graduate and professional programs;
o information about career options;
o mentoring;
o special services for students with limited English proficiency;
and
o direct financial assistance to current SSS participants.
In addition to institutional funding, Education helps students and
families pay for the costs of postsecondary education through federal
student aid authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act. In the
2004-2005 school year, Education provided approximately $74 billion in new
grant, loan, and work-study programs for undergraduate students, including
eligible Asian American and Pacific Islander students.
Education also has responsibilities for administration and oversight of
the department's postsecondary institutional support and financial aid
programs, including promoting educational quality and usefulness by
supporting research, evaluation, and information sharing. Information
sharing may involve strategies such as posting information on Education's
Web site and identifying and sharing information on best practices.
6See GAO, Low-Income and Minority Serving Institutions: Department of
Education Could Improve Its Monitoring and Assistance, [33]GAO-04-961
(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 21, 2004).
Collectively, Asian American and Pacific Islanders Have Achieved High Levels of
Education and Income, but There are Differences among Asian American and Pacific
Islander Subgroups
As a group, Asian American and Pacific Islanders have attained high levels
of education and income, but differences among Asian American and Pacific
Islander subgroups exist. For example, Asian American and Pacific
Islanders had the highest educational attainment and income of any other
racial and ethnic group. However, when we viewed Asian American and
Pacific Islanders as separate subgroups, a different story emerges, with
some subgroups having relatively low educational attainment. While
available data lend insights into some of the reasons for these
differences, data limitations prevented us from completely exploring them.
As a Group, Asian American and Pacific Islanders Have Achieved High Levels of
Education and Income
A high percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islanders have a college
degree. As shown in figure 3, almost half of Asian American and Pacific
Islanders age 25 or older in the United States in 2005 had a 4-year
college degree. In comparison, almost one third of whites, 17 percent of
African Americans, and 12 percent of Hispanics had degrees. In addition,
the average income of employed Asian American and Pacific Islanders, at
$52,392, was the highest of any of the groups.7 The average income for
whites was $52,097, $36,025 for African Americans, and $32,106 for
Hispanics.
7Average incomes are calculated for individuals reporting that they were
employed.
Figure 3: Estimated Percentage with at Least a 4-year College Degree and
Average Income by Racial and Ethnic Group in 2005
Note: Percentage estimates of racial groups have margins of error of 21/2
percent or less. Overall, average income estimates have a margin of error
of less than $2,500.
Across racial groups, average income was highest for people with at least
a college degree as shown in table 2, compared to those without a degree.
Among the major groups, the difference was highest for Asians and whites
where college graduates earned $35,700 and $35,200 more than non-college
graduates respectively.
Table 2: Estimated Income by Racial and Ethnic Group and College Degree
Attainment in 2005
Average income Difference in average
Average income without at income with and without
withat least a least a college at least a college
Major groups college degree degree degree
Asian American and
Pacific Islander $68,549 $32,887 $35,662
White 74,760 39,554 35,206
Some other race and
more than one race 60,083 33,914 26,168
African American,
non-Hispanic 55,271 30,481 24,790
American Indian 56,537 30,860 25,677
Hispanic $56,506 $27,916 $28,590
Source: GAO analysis of 2005 ACS data.
Note: Average income estimates by degree status have a margin of error of
less than $2,500, except for estimates for the American Indian subgroup,
which has a margin of error of less than $3,400 and Native Hawaiian and
Pacific Islander subgroup estimates, which have a margin of error of less
than $7,500.
Viewing Asian American and Pacific Islanders as a Group Masks Differences in
Educational Attainment and Income among the Subgroups
Viewing Asian American and Pacific Islanders as a group, however, masks
major differences in educational attainment and income among their
subgroups. As shown in figure 4, a high percentage of Asian Indians (68
percent) and Chinese (53 percent) had at least a college degree. These
groups also had much higher percentages of graduate degrees. These two
subgroups accounted for 41 percent of the Asian American and Pacific
Islander population. In comparison, 25 percent of Vietnamese, 17 percent
of Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders and 13 percent of other
Indochinese--Cambodians, Laotians and Hmong--had a college degree. They
are among the smaller Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups and
combined account for 17 percent of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders.
Cambodians, Laotians, and Hmong also had the highest percentage of adult
subgroup members who had not completed high school. In addition, the
estimated average income of Asian Indians and Chinese at $65,500 and
$56,000 was relatively high compared to other subgroups. In contrast,
average income among employed Asian American and Pacific Islanders was
lowest among Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders ($37,718) and other
Indochinese ($31,614).
Figure 4: Estimated Percentage with at Least a 4-year College Degree and
Their Average Income by Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroup in
2005
Notes: Percentage estimates of ethnic groups have margins of error of 4
percent or less.
Overall, average income estimates have a margin of error of less than
$3,000. Exceptions include estimates for the Pakistani, Bangladeshi and
Sri Lankan subgroup, which has a margin of error of less than $3,400 and
estimates of the "Other" subgroup, which has a margin of error of less
than $4,300.
Within Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups estimated average
income was again higher for individuals with at least a college degree. As
shown in table 3, Asian Indians and Chinese with at least a college degree
had the highest estimated average incomes at $76,630 and $72,755
respectively. There was also a range in estimated income differences
between those with and without at least a college degree. This difference
was most pronounced with Asian Indian and Chinese college graduates
earning $42,000 more than their counterparts without college degrees. The
difference in average income between graduates and non graduates was
smallest for the other Indochinese at $17,000. Many factors may explain
the differences among subgroups. For example, the proportion with an
advanced degree may be an important factor in differences in income. For
those with less than a college degree, subgroup differences in age and
thus time on the job, along with having an associates degree, may also be
important.
Table 3: Estimated Average Income for Asian American and Pacific Islander
Subgroups by Attainment of College Degree in 2005
Average income Difference in
Asian American and Average income without at averageincome with and
Pacific Islander with at least a least a without atleast a
subgroup college degree college degree college degree
Asian Indian $76,630 $34,585 $42,046
Chinese 72,755 30,515 42,240
Japanese 71,862 42,654 29,208
Vietnamese 65,782 29,783 36,000
Other Asians 65,547 33,773 31,774
Korean 64,462 35,241 29,221
South Asians 60,987 28,796 32,190
Native Hawaiians
and Pacific
Islander 58,482 32,705 25,777
Filipino 57,388 34,363 23,025
Southeast Asians 50,227 30,936 19,291
Indochinese $45,549 $28,849 $16,700
Source: GAO analysis of 2005 ACS data.
Note: Average income estimates by degree status have a margin of error of
less than $5,500, except for estimates for the South Asian, Native
Hawaiian and Pacific Islander and Other subgroups which have a margin of
error of less than $7,800.
We looked at other characteristics of the population, such as date of
arrival in the U.S. and ability to speak English, to better understand
differences in education and income between groups. We found differences
in ability to speak English among the Asian American and Pacific Islander
subgroups. (See table 4.) Many of these differences may be attributed to
whether the subgroup came from a country where English was a second
language or whether the group has been in the United States for a long
period of time. For example, we found that over 90 percent of Filipino,
Asian Indians, and Japanese identified themselves as fluent in English. In
comparison, only 70 percent of Koreans, 62 percent of Vietnamese, and 60
percent of the other Indochinese subgroups, whose members are more likely
to have arrived in the United States more recently, identified themselves
as fluent.
Table 4: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups
Fluent in English
Asian American and Pacific Islander Total fluent forsubgroup
subgroup (percent)
Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander 97
Filipino 93
Asian Indian 90
Japanese 90
South Asian 87
Other Asians 85
Southeast Asian 85
Chinese 71
Korean 70
Vietnamese 62
Indochinese 60
Source: GAO analysis of 2005 ACS data.
Note: Overall, percentage estimates of English fluency have margins of
error of three percent or less.
Among the Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups, for the most part
those with college degrees were more fluent than those without. Even among
those with a degree, however, there was some variation among the groups.
(See table 5.) For example, almost all Filipino, Asian Indian, and other
South Asians with college degrees (99 to 97 percent) identified themselves
as fluent compared to 80 percent of Koreans with a degree. Among those
without college degrees, only about one-half of Koreans, other
Indochinese, Chinese, and Vietnamese said they were fluent in English.
Table 5: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups with
and without College Degree Fluent in English
Asian American and Pacific Fluent withcollege Fluent withoutcollege
Islander subgroup degree(Percentage) degree(Percentage)
Native Hawaiian and Pacific 99 96
Islanders
Filipino 98 89
Asian Indian 98 75
South Asians 97 76
Other Asians 96 75
Japanese 93 87
Chinese 92 48
Vietnamese 91 53
Southeast Asians 89 82
Indochinese 88 56
Korean 80 58
Source: GAO analysis of 2005 ACS data.
Note: Percentage estimates of English fluency by degree status have
margins of error of four and a half percent or less.
Among foreign born Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroup members
age 25 or older in 2005, the majority of the subgroups arrived in the
United States after 1980. As shown in figure 5, for example, over three
quarters of Cambodian, Laotian and Hmong, and Asian Indians arrived after
1980. Almost 85 percent of South Asians arrived after 1980.
Figure 5: Percentage of Foreign Born Asian American and Pacific Islander
Subgroups Arriving before and after 1980
Note: The majority of the Native Hawaiian-Pacific Islanders and Japanese
subgroups were native born. Percentage estimates by nativity and arrival
status have margins of error of 4 percent or less.
To further analyze factors related to differences in Asian American and
Pacific Islander educational attainment, we constructed a multivariate
logistic regression model to analyze the relationship between educational
attainment and population groups. We used the model to measure the extent
to which gender, age, nativity, and date of arrival in the U. S. affected
the likelihood of having or not having a college degree. However, we did
not include income or the ability to speak English in the model because of
data limitations. In addition, the data did not provide information on
such things as the parents' income or educational level, which a large
body of research has shown is a strong predictor of their children's
educational attainment.8 The ACS also did not provide the date or in which
country a degree was attained.
The model showed that, while significant, the factors for which we had
data do not account for the differences in the likelihood of various
groups' having a college degree. We caution that the results of this model
do not imply differential treatment of the groups with respect to access
to higher education. Since many Asian American and Pacific Islander
immigrants arrive in the U.S. with at least a college degree, the
experience of Asian American and Pacific Islanders attending high school
or college in the U.S. may provide more illumination into possible
differences among subgroups. Appendix I provides additional information
about our multivariate model and results.
Students from Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups Differ in the
Challenges They Face When Pursuing Postsecondary Education
Data on Asian American and Pacific Islanders while they were in high
school and college in the United States show that subgroups face a range
of challenges when pursuing and persisting in postsecondary education.
Specifically, the data showed that some Asian American and Pacific
Islander subgroups are less academically prepared for college, less able
to afford college, and have difficulty balancing their education, work,
and family responsibilities.
8The research literature on status attainment, beginning in the 1960s with
the work of sociologist Otis Dudley Duncan at the University of Michigan,
firmly established parents' education as a predictor of socioeconomic
status, a measure that includes income, occupation, and educational
attainment.
Levels of Academic Preparedness Differ among Asian American and Pacific Islander
Subgroups
Our analysis of ELS data showed that the percentage of high school
students in a college preparatory program differed among Asian American
and Pacific Islander subgroups. As shown in figure 6, fewer Southeast
Asian students than students in other Asian American Pacific Islander
subgroups reported being in a college preparatory program.9
Figure 6: High School Academic Program, by Asian American and Pacific
Islander Subgroup in 2002
9All differences reported were statistically significant at the 95 percent
confidence level unless otherwise noted. If no difference actually existed
in the population, we would only expect to find a difference as large as
the one found in the ELS and NPSAS samples less than 5 percent of the
time.
The percentage of students taking English as a Second Language (ESL)
courses also differed among Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups,
as shown in table 6. Southeast Asian students--Vietnamese, Laotian,
Cambodian/Kampuchean, Thai, Burmese--were unique among the subgroups in
that they reported the highest percentage of students taking ESL courses
and the lowest percentage of students with English as their native
language. Part of the reason that Southeast Asian students are unique in
this way is that among Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups,
Southeast Asian students have the highest percentage of parents with a
high school education or less and the lowest percentage of parents who
speak English as their native language. On the other hand, Japanese
students, many of whom come from families that have been in the United
States for generations, have a higher percentage of native English
speakers than Southeast Asian students, many of whom arrived in the United
States since 1980 and speak a language other than English in the home. As
a result, Southeast Asian students may have less familiarity with the
English language and may require additional language support.
Table 6: Percentage of Students Taking ESL Courses by Asian American and
Pacific Islander Subgroup
Asian American and Percentage of Percentage of students
Pacific Islander studentswho have taken withEnglish as their native
subgroup ESL courses language
Southeast Asian 23 13
Native Hawaiian/ Other
Pacific Islander 21 74
Korean 19 48
Chinese 16 31
Other Asian American
and Pacific Islander 15 70
South Asian 13 34
Filipino 11 59
Japanese 8 71
Source: GAO analysis of ELS 2002 base-year survey data.
Students' reading and math ability also differed by Asian American and
Pacific Islander subgroup, with half or more of the students in each of
the Southeast Asian, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, and Other Asian
American Pacific Islander subgroups in the lower reading and math
quartiles, as shown in figure 7.
Figure 7: High School Reading and Math Quartiles, by Asian American and
Pacific Islander Subgroup
Note: The reading and math quartile rankings were derived from student
respondents' scores on cognitive reading and math tests administered as
part of the ELS 2002 base-year (reading) and first follow-up (math)
surveys. The reading and math tests used questions selected from tests
that were part of Education's other assessments, including the National
Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, the National Assessment of
Educational Progress, and the Program for International Student
Assessment.
Some Asian American and Pacific Islander students participating in our
discussion groups told us that they had been placed into remedial English
and math courses when they first enrolled in college. In addition, some
students told us that they felt that their high schools had not prepared
them well, saying that they had felt ignored by their teachers, uninformed
about their postsecondary options, and unprepared for the changes that
accompany the transition from high school to college.
Some Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups Face Challenges Meeting
Postsecondary Education Costs
The amount of savings that parents set aside for their children's
postsecondary education differed across Asian American and Pacific
Islander subgroups. The Southeast Asian and the Other Asian American
Pacific Islander subgroups had larger proportions of their population in
the lower socioeconomic quartiles, as shown in figure 8, and reported
lower savings amounts, as shown in figure 9. Of note, when we compared
these two subgroups with African Americans and Hispanics, we found similar
rates of savings.
Figure 8: Socioeconomic Status Quartile of High School Students, by Asian
American and Pacific Islander Subgroup in 2004
Figure 9: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups
Setting Aside Money for Child's Future Education in 2002
Note: This figure does not include findings for Native Hawaiian and other
Pacific Islanders due to insufficient sample size around which to build a
confidence interval.
Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups also differed in the extent
to which they could afford school without working. Our analysis of NPSAS
data showed that larger percentages of undergraduates in some Asian
American and Pacific Islander subgroups had parents help in paying their
tuition. For example, 33 percent of Japanese undergraduates reported that
their parents paid all their tuition. In contrast, 81 percent of
Vietnamese undergraduates reported that their parents paid none of their
tuition. Subgroups also differed in the extent to which students could
afford school without working, ranging from 36 percent of Vietnamese to 68
percent of Chinese undergraduates reporting that they could afford school
without working. Finally, our analysis of NPSAS data showed that subgroups
with less savings and who were less able to afford college had larger
percentages of students who applied for financial aid to help pay college
expenses.
Some Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups Find It Challenging to
Balance Their Academic, Work, and Family Obligations
Our analysis of NPSAS data showed that a greater percentage of
undergraduates in some Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups than
in others delay their college education. Nearly one-half of Vietnamese
undergraduates reported that they delayed their education and one-third of
them delayed their education by 1 year or more, as shown in table 7. Some
Asian American and Pacific Islander students participating in our
discussion groups told us that they faced challenges balancing their work,
family, and academic responsibilities leading some to delay their
education.
Table 7: Percentage of Undergraduates Delaying Their Postsecondary
Enrollment, by Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups in 2000
Asian American and Pacific Islander More than 1
subgroup year 1 year Did not delay
Vietnamese 33 12 54
Other Asian American and Pacific Islander 31 9 60
Filipino 23 12 64
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 23 13 63
Chinese 20 8 72
Asian Indian 16 19 66
Korean 12 11 77
Japanese 9 19 71
Source: GAO analysis of NPSAS 2000 undergraduate data.
Our analysis of NPSAS data showed that undergraduates' working while
enrolled differed by Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroup, with
undergraduates in some Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups
working more hours than others, as shown in figure 10.
Figure 10: Work among Enrolled Undergraduates, by Asian American and
Pacific Islander Subgroups in 2000
The primary reasons that undergraduates gave for working varied among the
Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups. More than half of
undergraduates from all Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups
except Asian Indian and Korean said that they worked primarily to pay
tuition, fees, and living expenses. In addition, 43 percent of Korean
undergraduates said that they worked primarily to earn spending money, and
about 30 percent of Chinese and Asian Indian undergraduates said that they
worked primarily to gain job experience.
Asian American and Pacific Islander students participating in our
discussion groups provided several reasons why they worked, including the
need to pay for school; the need to pay such bills as rent, insurance, and
food; and the desire to have their own spending money for entertainment.
Others said that they worked to relieve their family's financial burden,
to gain financial independence from their parents, or to fulfill their
obligation as the eldest child by financially supporting the family.
Several discussion group participants also said that they supported their
families in other ways, including living at home to share expenses,
providing transportation, tutoring, translating, reading mail, writing
letters, paying bills, answering calls, and doing household chores. Large
percentages of some Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups lived at
home or attended schools within driving distance of home. Our analysis of
NPSAS data showed that 42 percent of Vietnamese undergraduates lived at
home while enrolled--the highest percentage among Asian American and
Pacific Islander subgroups. It also showed that a greater percentage of
Vietnamese undergraduates (96 percent) attended institutions in their home
states compared to 85 percent of Chinese and Koreans, and 80 percent of
Japanese undergraduates. Finally, 59 percent of Native Hawaiian and
Pacific Islander undergraduates, and 58 percent of Vietnamese
undergraduates attended institutions within 10 miles of home.
Institutions Used Both Federal Aid and Their Own Funding and Resources to
Address the Needs of Asian American and Pacific Islander Students
The colleges we visited used federal aid and institutional resources to
address the needs of Asian American and Pacific Islander students. Using
these resources, colleges funded a range of services, including services
to enhance students' academic performance and scholarships. Additionally,
students also received federal financial aid to help them pay for college.
Institutions Used Federal Aid Targeted to Institutions That Serve Minority,
Low-income, and First-Generation College Students to Assist Asian American and
Pacific Islander Students
The institutions we visited--all of which serve large Asian American and
Pacific Islander populations--used federal funding that is awarded to
schools for serving low-income, disabled, minority, and first-generation
college students to respond to the needs of Asian American and Pacific
Islander students. As shown in table 8, colleges that meet the eligibility
criteria for funding had available a range of funding from federal
sources. A prior GAO report contains additional information on the types
of services that institutions provide with Title III and V grants.10 For
example, one college we visited received a Title III Strengthening
Institutions grant because the college served a significant portion of
low-income students and had below average expenditures for institutions
that offer similar instruction, two key eligibility criteria for the
grant. In addition, some of the colleges we visited that serve low-income
students, first-generation college students, and disabled students,
received TRIO Student Support Services (SSS) grants. In addition, some
colleges also received funding under federal programs for Native Hawaiian
students.
10GAO, Low-Income and Minority Serving Institutions: Department of
Education Could Improve Its Monitoring and Assistance, GAO-04-961
(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 21, 2004).
Table 8: Description of Federal Institutional Grant Programs Used at
Visited Institutions
Dollars in millions
Fiscal
year2006
Program name Program objective Eligibility criteria fundinga
Title III, part Improve academic o An institution's $80
A, Strengthening quality, address average educational and
Institutions institutional general expenditures are
management issues, low compared to
and improve institutions that offer
student services similar instructionb
and outcomes o At least 50 percent of
its students receive
need-based federal
financial assistance or
a substantial percentage
of students receive Pell
Grants compared with
those in other
institutionsb
o Is legally authorized
to provide a bachelor's
degree program or is a
junior or community
college
o Is accredited by a
nationally recognized
accrediting agency
Title III, part Improve academic Institution must meet the 2c,d
A, Alaska Native quality, address eligibility requirements
and Native institutional for the Strengthening
Hawaiian management issues, Institutions program and
and improve have an enrollment of
student services undergraduate students that
and outcomes is at least 10 percent
Native Hawaiian students
TRIO Student Provide An institution must assure 271
Support Services opportunities for in its application that at
academic least two thirds of the
development, students served with the
assist students grant will be low-income
with basic college individuals who are
requirements, and first-generation college
serve to motivate students or individuals
students toward with disabilities. The
the successful remaining students served
completion of will be low-income
their individuals,
postsecondary first-generation college
education. students, or individuals
with disabilities. In
addition, at least one
third of the individuals
with disabilities will be
low-income individuals. An
institution must also show
that students participating
in the grant program will
be offered sufficient
financial assistance to
meet their full financial
need.
Native Hawaiian Develop innovative Organizations must be a 34
Education education programs Native Hawaiian educational
to assist native organization, Native
Hawaiians and to Hawaiian community-based
supplement and organization, or a public
expand programs or private nonprofit
and authorities in organization, agency, or
the area of institution with experience
education in developing or operating
Native Hawaiian programs or
programs of instruction in
the Native Hawaiian
language.
Native Hawaiian Provide assistance Community-based $3
Career and to plan and organizations primarily
Technical administer serving and representing
Educational Grant programs or Native Hawaiians. A
portions of community-based
programs that organization means a public
provide vocational or private nonprofit
training and organization that provides
related activities career and technical
to native education, or related
Hawaiians services, to individuals in
the Native Hawaiian
community.
Source: GAO analysis of program documentation from Education.
aThis represents full funding to all grant recipients in fiscal year 2006.
Figures are rounded.
bThese criteria may be waived.
cThis figure represents grants awarded to institutions with at least 10
percent Native Hawaiian students.
dEducation has proposed discontinuing funding for Title III, Part A,
Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian Institutions in its fiscal year 2008 budget
proposal. According to Education, the types of activities supported by
this program may be carried out under the Title III Strengthening
Institutions program. Institutions whose projects would be discontinued
would be eligible to seek funds under the Strengthening Institutions
program.
The schools we visited funded a range of services with the federal
institutional grants they received, and more schools received funding
under the TRIO SSS grants than other grants. (See table 9). For example,
Century College in Minnesota, San Francisco State University, and City
College of San Francisco all received a TRIO SSS grant. Century College
provides tutoring and counseling services with its grant and supplements
Pell Grants to help students struggling to meet college costs. The TRIO
SSS director at Century College said that each of the Pell Grants awarded
to 30 students is supplemented with $414 each year. He also said that 90
percent of the students in the TRIO SSS program are Hmong. San Francisco
State University uses its TRIO SSS grant to fund a program that provides
eligible students, many of whom are Asian American, with academic
advising, tutoring, counseling and workshops. City College of San
Francisco uses its TRIO SSS to fund the Writing Success Project which
provides writing instruction, group tutoring, academic counseling, and a
variety of workshops. City College of San Francisco also uses a Title III
Strengthening Institutions grant to fund an instruction lab. Through the
lab, students receive instruction in English, math, and ESL. A university
official said that about 80 percent of the students who are served by the
lab are Asian. Kapi'olani Community College in Honolulu uses a portion of
its Title III Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian grant to provide freshman
Native Hawaiians with mentoring and peer tutoring. It also provides its
broader student body with remedial courses. It also used the grant to help
fund courses on Hawaiian and Pacific Islander cultures and history and
provide academic services to students including peer mentoring and
academic advising, tutoring, and help applying for financial aid.
Table 9: Federal Institutional Grant Programs Used by Institutions Visited
On-site
City San
Century College of Kapi'olani Leeward Francisco University
College San Concordia De Anza Community Community State of
in Franciscoin Universityin Collegein College in College Universityin Hawaii-Manoa
Program Minn. Calif. Minn. Calif. Ha. in Ha. Calif. in Ha.
Title III, X
part A,
Strengthening
Institutions
Title III, X
part A,
Alaska Native
and Native
Hawaiian
TRIO Student X X X X X
Support
Services
Native X
Hawaiian
Education
Grant
Native X Xa
Hawaiian
Career and
Technical
Educational
Grant
Source: GAO analysis of on-site interviews and related documentation.
aInformation on Leeward Community College's use of Native Hawaiian Career
and Technical Educational Grant was not available at the time of our site
visit.
Federal grants targeted to Native Hawaiians also supported a range of
services. The University of Hawaii at Manoa runs three programs for Native
Hawaiian students using its Native Hawaiian Education Grant. Under one
program, the university helps prepare 25 Native Hawaiian students for
college, by providing, among other things, a 6-week-remedial-writing
course. This program also funds up to 50 tuition scholarships each year
for Native Hawaiian students. Another program provides tuition stipends to
30 Native Hawaiian students who are enrolled or interested in Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM)-related degrees. These students
receive academic guidance and counseling and exposure to professionals in
their fields of study. Lastly, the Native Hawaiian Science and Engineering
Mentorship Program provides summer internships for 30 freshmen engineering
students. Kapiolani provides Native Hawaiian students in certificate or
associates programs with computer access, peer mentoring, academic
advising, career counseling, leadership training, and internships through
a Native Hawaiian Career and Technical Educational Program grant.11
Colleges Use Their Own Resources to Provide Asian American and Pacific Islander
Students with Tuition Assistance or Academic Services
Officials at some of the institutions we visited reported that
institutional resources supported a diversity of approaches including,
outreach to high school students as well as scholarships and academic
services for Asian American and Pacific Islander college students. For
example, officials at Concordia University located in Minnesota and at
Leeward Community College in Hawaii both reported that they make
presentations to recruit high school students to their institutions and
inform them about federal student aid. The schools also offer to help
students and parents complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid
(FAFSA), which is often a stumbling block for some students in the student
financial aid application process. An official at Concordia University
said one staff member who conducts outreach to high school students is
Hmong, a factor that helps recruiting because he is aware of Hmong
cultural norms and is able to share information in the Hmong language. The
official also said that this staff member is vital to the retention of
Hmong students at Concordia University because his role extends beyond
admissions into general counseling. Century College also has a Hmong staff
member who successfully recruited Hmong students to the college from area
high schools.
Officials at some of the schools we visited said that these programs and
strategies reached underserved populations while they were still in high
school and equipped students enrolled in postsecondary education with the
tools and resources needed to persist in earning their certificate or
degree. In past reports, GAO also has found that providing low-income and
minority students with tutoring, mentoring, and instruction in various
subjects, including math and writing, beginning in high school, improved
the students' educational attainment. The officials we interviewed also
said that they wanted to know about the diversity of strategies other
institutions were using to assist Asian American and Pacific Islanders.
For example, one community college official had taken the initiative to
collaborate with colleagues at her institution and other community
colleges to develop strategies for improving the retention rates of
minority students, including Asian American and Pacific Islanders. In
another state, state college and university officials meet each year to
share information about best practices they use to assess and assist
students, including Asian American and Pacific Islander students.
11This grant was awarded to ALU LIKE, Inc. which is a nonprofit
organization for Native Hawaiians based in Honolulu. Kapi'olani Community
College is a subgrantee. An official said non-Native Hawaiian students who
request these services (except for internship placements) may be served as
long as they do not displace Hawaiian students who take priority.
The University of Hawaii at Manoa offers in-state tuition rates to
students who come from Pacific Islands that do not have postsecondary
public institutions that offer bachelor's degrees.12 The funding assists
Pacific Island students who are severely underrepresented on campus.
Similarly, Concordia University in Minnesota has a scholarship that
targets Hmong students, who we were told comprise the majority of Asian
American and Pacific Islander students on campus and tend to come from
low-income families. An official said the scholarship fund is about
$1,000, and it is typically awarded to one or two students annually. His
office is trying to find ways to provide Hmong and other needy students
with additional assistance. University of Hawaii at Manoa provides Native
Hawaiian students with advising, tutoring, and assistance applying for
financial aid through the Office of Student Affairs. The services were
established in 1988 to respond to challenges the university faced in
recruiting and retaining Native Hawaiian students. The university also
provides institutional resources to help fund similar services for
students of Filipino ancestry and other underrepresented ethnicities
including Pacific Islanders, Southeast Asians, and African Americans
through the Office of Multicultural Student Services.
12This includes residents of American Samoa, Commonwealth of the Northern
Marianas, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Futuna, Kiribati,
Nauru, New Caledonia, Niue, Republic of Belau, Republic of the Marshall
Islands, Solomon Islands, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and Wallis.
Eligible Asian American and Pacific Islander Students Also Received Federal
Student Aid
Federal student financial aid is available to eligible Asian American and
Pacific Islander students, and according to the NPSAS 2000, many of them
received financial aid. See appendix II for the types of federal student
aid. According to the 2000 NPSAS, the percent of Asian American and
Pacific Islander students who reported applying for and receiving any
federal aid varied by subgroup. Twenty-nine percent of Japanese students,
a subgroup with a high average income, applied for and received federal
aid, compared to 46 percent of students identified as other Asian American
and Pacific Islander in the NPSAS data.13 A significant percent of Korean
students, 45 percent, also reported applying for and receiving any federal
aid. (See fig. 11).
Figure 11: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Students Who
Applied for and Received Any Federal Aid in 2000
13As noted above, the amount of federal aid a student receives depends
partly on the cost of attendance, except for Unsubsidized Stafford loans.
However, NPSAS data does not include information on the cost of
attendance. As a result, we could not determine how cost differences
affected which subgroups received federal aid.
A small percentage of Japanese students, 12 percent, applied for and
received grants. By contrast, nearly 35 percent of the other Asian
American and Pacific Islander students in the NPSAS data and 39 percent of
Vietnamese students reported applying for and receiving grants. The
percent of students who reported applying for and receiving a federal
loan14 was 20 percent or more across all subgroups. Over a quarter of
Filipino, Indian, and Vietnamese students and over a third of Korean
students said they had applied for and received federal student loans. The
percent of students that reported applying for and receiving federal
work-study was 8 percent or below across all subgroups. Just over 1
percent of Japanese students applied for and received work-study grants.
By contrast, close to 8 percent of Korean students reported applying for
and receiving work-study grants. Few Japanese students may have received
federal grants and work-study because they come from a subgroup with high
average incomes and both types of aid have family income limits. (See fig.
12.)
14These data include students who applied for and received Perkins and/or
Stafford federal loans and/or PLUS loans and/or federal loans through the
Public Health Service in 1999 to 2000.
Figure 12: Percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander Students Who
Applied for and Received a Federal Loan, Grant, or Work Study in 2000
Conclusions
Because Asian American and Pacific Islanders are a rapidly growing
population, an increasing number of postsecondary institutions may find a
higher percentage of Asian American and Pacific Islander students
represented in their student bodies. While Asian American and Pacific
Islanders, as a group, have high levels of education and income, members
of some subgroups are more likely to face challenges, especially with
English as a second language and math, in pursuing and persisting in
postsecondary education. The schools such students attend will need to
identify strategies and services to support these students. The
institutions that we visited had a range of programs, activities, and
efforts in place to reach out to underserved Asian American and Pacific
Islander students in high school and support them academically when they
enroll in postsecondary institutions. Moreover, GAO's prior work has
confirmed that providing supports to both to low-income and minority
students and the institutions that serve them improves educational
attainment. GAO has also acknowledged the value of information sharing as
an effective method for disseminating information more broadly on diverse
practices aimed at improving educational attainment. Postsecondary
institutions with a new influx of Asian American and Pacific Islander
students needing assistance could learn from the experience of those we
visited. However, currently, no effective mechanism exists for sharing
these approaches among institutions that serve Asian American and Pacific
Islander students.
Recommendation
To assist postsecondary institutions that serve Asian American and Pacific
Islander students, particularly students from low-income families, we
recommend that the Secretary of Education facilitate the sharing of
information among institutions about strategies that foster low-income
postsecondary student recruitment, retention, and graduation and also
sharing of information about strategies to reach out to Asian American and
Pacific Islanders beginning in high school. There are various ways that
Education could facilitate sharing information. For example, Education
might develop a link on the department's Web site that postsecondary
institutional officials could use to share information about their student
assistance activities or develop a compendium of best practices for
assisting Asian American and Pacific Islander students.
Agency Comments
We provided a draft of the report to the Department of Education for
review and comment. Education generally agreed with our recommendation
concerning sharing information among postsecondary institutions about
strategies for assisting Asian American and Pacific Islander students.
Education pointed out two types of efforts that are in place. The first
effort is information about minority-serving institutions' successful
practices that the Office of Postsecondary Education makes available to
the public and all grantees on its program " [34]Success Stories" Web page
. However, Education provided us with examples of Hispanic-serving
institutions' successes from this Web page, not of strategies for
assisting Asian American and Pacific Islander students. Education also
said that minority-serving institutions make a project abstract for each
grantee available on the institutions' own Web pages. Education agreed to
examine options for facilitating information sharing by encouraging more
grantees to report successful practices on their Web pages. However, we
believe that Education is uniquely positioned to serve as a broker for
information sharing, using its own Web site to facilitate the exchange of
information about successful strategies related to Asian American and
Pacific Islander students.
Education also interpreted our recommendation to suggest that increased
efforts be made in the area of outreach to Asian American and Pacific
Islanders students while in high school. While the postsecondary officials
we interviewed and our own prior work confirm that outreach to students
beginning in high school improves educational attainment, the intent of
our recommendation was sharing information about outreach strategies to
Asian American and Pacific Islander students. In response, we have made
some minor revisions in wording to clarify the recommendation.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Education,
relevant congressional committees, and other interested parties. We also
will make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report
will be made available at no charge on the GAO Web site at
[35]http://www.gao.gov .
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact
me at (202) 512-7215 or [email protected]. Contact points for our Office of
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page
of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are
listed in appendix IV.
George A. Scott
Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
This appendix discusses in detail our methodology for determining whether
differences exist in Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups'
educational attainment and income and the resources available to address
any challenges they may face in pursuing and completing postsecondary
education. The study was framed around three questions: (1) What are Asian
American and Pacific Islander subgroups' educational attainment and
household income levels? (2) What challenges, if any, Asian American and
Pacific Islander students face in pursuing and completing their
postsecondary education? (3) What federal and institutional resources
institutions with large Asian American and Pacific Islander student
enrollment use to address the particular needs of these students?
Procedures for Determining Asian American and Pacific Islander Subgroups'
Educational Attainment and Household Income Levels
To determine the educational and other demographic characteristics of the
Asian American and Pacific Islander population and subgroups, we analyzed
data from the 2005 American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample
(ACS PUMS) file.
Data Collection
The ACS survey data were the most recent existing data source available
containing complete information on Asian and Native Hawaiian and Pacific
Islander subgroups. The ACS is an annual household survey conducted by the
Census Bureau that obtains estimates of the demographic and social
characteristic of the US population, including racial and ethnic groups,
income, educational attainment, age, and others. The ACS annually surveys
a sample of 3 million households and currently provides estimates for
population areas of at least 65,000. To ensure that most ACS respondents
in our analyses would have had enough time to complete their postsecondary
education, we limited our analysis to adults in the sample 25 years of age
or older.
We used the SUDAAN software package for statistical analyses to produce
the weighted estimates, standard errors, and tests of significance.
Estimates calculated from the ACS data are weighted based on each
individual's weight in the sample. Standard errors for estimates for Asian
American and Pacific Islander subgroups were calculated using the 80
balanced repeated replicate weights with a Fay's adjustment of k=0.5
supplied by Census in the 2005 ACS PUMS data. Standard errors for
estimates for the entire population were calculated using Taylor series
variance estimation. The precision of estimates based on the ACS data is
identified as the 95 percent confidence level margin of error (MOE) and is
footnoted in tables and figures where estimates are presented.
To assess the reliability of the ACS, we reviewed the technical
documentation for these data files, including the coding and definition of
variables of interest, the procedures for handling missing data, coding
checks, and imputation procedures for missing data. We also interviewed
Census Bureau staff about selected variables--such as race, ethnicity and
English fluency--used in our analysis. We considered the response rate,
allocation rate--the rate at which responses are imputed for unanswered
questions--and size of confidence intervals. Because the ACS had a very
high response rate, a low allocation rate, and narrow confidence
intervals, we found the 2005 ACS data to be sufficiently reliable for our
study objectives.
Data Analysis
We analyzed the ACS data using both descriptive statistical analysis
procedures and a multivariate logistic regression model. For our
descriptive analyses, we reviewed summary statistics of the individual
variables as well as bi-variate and three-way analyses of the broad racial
and ethnic groups--American Indian, white, black, Hispanic,
Asian-American, and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islanders--and the
individual Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups by educational
attainment, mean (or average) income, gender, level of English fluency,
nativity, and date of arrival in the United States. In addition, we
conducted multivariate analysis of the likelihood of graduating from
college across racial and ethnic groups and Asian American and Pacific
Islander subgroups. The multivariate analysis is discussed in more detail
below.
To analyze the individual Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups in
both the descriptive and multivariate analyses, we used the ACS definition
of "Asian", that is, a person who resides in the United States and has
origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asian,
or the Indian subcontinent. The ACS definition of Native Hawaiian or Other
Pacific Islander is a person who resides in the United States and has
origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other
Pacific Islands.
To minimize sampling error in Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroup
estimates, we combined some of the ACS racial and ethnic categories with
limited sample size. Any distinct category with a sample size of at least
1,000 individuals age 25 or older was included as an Asian subgroup for
this analysis. Those that had fewer than 1,000 individuals were combined
with other subgroups based on geographic origins. For example, `other
South Asians' included individuals with origins from Pakistan, Bangladesh,
and Sri Lanka. Further, there were six ACS categories with origins in
Southeast Asia which we combined into two different subgroups based on
grouping subpopulations with similar college degree attainment, mean
income, and fluency in English. The resulting ACS categories that were
used as Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups in our analyses were
o (South) Asian Indian,
o South Asians (Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Sri Lankan),
o Chinese,
o Japanese,
o Korean,
o Filipino,
o Vietnamese,
o Southeast Asians (Indonesian, Malaysian and Thai),
o Indochinese (Cambodian, Hmong, and Laotian),
o Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders (Native Hawaiian,
Samoan, Tongan, Polynesian, Guamanian, Chamorro, Micronesian,
Melanesian, and other or combined Native Hawaiian and Pacific
Islanders), and
o other Asians (other specified Asian, unspecified Asian, and
combinations of Asian groups).
Having found in our descriptive analyses that there were differences in
educational attainment among Asians and other racial and ethnic groups and
among subgroups of Asians themselves, we were interested in whether these
differences were affected, or could be accounted for, by differences in
selected factors. To investigate this, we used data from the 2005 American
Community Survey, restricted our attention to adults in that sample who
were 25 years of age or older, and considered how many of them did and did
not graduate from college, an important indicator of educational
attainment. We first considered the numbers and percentages of individuals
in the broad racial and ethnic categories who had and had not completed
college, and then did the same for the individual Asian American and
Pacific Islander subgroups. After first obtaining estimates of the
bi-variate differences between groups of the likelihood of being a college
graduate, we then used multivariate logistic regression models to
re-estimate those differences after controlling for gender, age (under 45
versus 45 or over), nativity (native-born versus foreign born), and date
of arrival in the United States (before 1980 and in or after 1980).
Because date of arrival is pertinent only for foreign-born individuals,
nativity and date of arrival were represented by a single three-category
composite variable that contrasted individuals who were 1) native born, 2)
foreign born and arrived before 1980, and 3) foreign born and arrived in
or after 1980. We chose these variables because, unlike others--linguistic
isolation, income, ability to speak English, and so forth--they clearly
were causally prior to educational attainment. In addition, the data did
not provide information on such things as parents' income or educational
level that might have been predictive of the respondent's educational
attainment.
Table 10 shows the weighted numbers and percentages of adults who were and
were not college graduates, first across broad racial and ethnic
categories and then across the Asian American and Pacific Islander
subgroups. The top panel of the table shows that, among those identified
as a specific race or ethnicity, Asian American and Pacific Islanders had
the highest percentage of college graduates (48 percent), followed by
whites (30 percent), African Americans (17 percent), American
Indian/Alaskan Natives (14 percent), and Hispanics (12 percent). The other
non-Hispanics--mostly persons who indicated that they belonged to multiple
racial categories--had 26 percent college graduates. The bottom panel
shows the marked differences in percentages of college graduates across
the Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups. More than two thirds
(68 percent) of Asian Indian adults were college graduates, and the same
was true of 54 percent of South Asians in the same region--Sri Lankan,
Pakistani, and Bangladeshi--and just over half of all adults among the
Koreans (54 percent) and Chinese (53 percent). Slightly less than half of
all Filipino adults (48 percent) were college graduates, as were 44
percent of Southeast Asians--Indonesians, Malaysians and Thai--and 44
percent of Japanese adults. The groups that were behind in terms of
college graduation rates included Vietnamese adults (25 percent), other
Indochinese (17 percent), and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders (13
percent). The other Asians category--which included other specified Asian,
unspecified Asian and combinations of Asian groups--had a 47 percent
graduation rate.
Table 10: Estimated Numbers and Percentages of College Graduates and Non
Graduates, by (1) Broad Racial/Ethnic Categories and (2) Specific Asian
American Subgroups, and Odds and Odds Ratios Derived from Them
Racial/ethnic College graduate Odds
group Non-Graduate Graduate Total Odds ratios
White
non-Hispanic 93,900,456 40,199,138 134,099,594 0.43 REF
70.0% 30.0% 100.0%
Hispanic 19,887,007 2,784,588 22,671,595 0.14 0.33
87.7 12.3 100.0
Black
non-Hispanic 16,715,992 503,929 20,219,921 0.21 0.49
82.7 17.3 100.0
American
Indian and
Alaska Native
non-Hispanic 1,060,964 176,376 1,237,340 0.17 0.39
85.7 14.3 100.0
Asian
non-Hispanic 4,445,008 4,181,071 8,626,079 0.94 2.20
51.5 48.5 100.0
Other
non-Hispanic 1,543,436 532,601 2,076,037 0.35 0.81
74.3 25.7 100.0
Total 137,552,863 51,377,703 188,930,566 0.37
72.8 27.2 100.0
Asian
American and
Pacific College graduate
Islander
subgroups Non graduate Graduate Total Odds Odds ratios
Chinese 952,420 1,056,270 2,008,690 1.11 REF
47.4 52.6 100.0
Korean 399,283 464,533 86,816 1.16 1.05
46.2 53.8 100.0
Japanese 380,346 301,075 681,421 0.79 0.71
55.8 44.2 100.0
Vietnamese 685,592 230,885 916,477 0.34 0.30
74.8 25.2 100.0
Other
Indochinese 266,411 38,674 305,085 0.15 0.13
87.3 12.7 100.0
Filipino 814,657 739,667 1,554,324 0.91 0.82
52.4 47.6 100.0
Other
Southeast
Asians 92,802 72,287 165,089 0.78 0.70
56.2 43.8 100.0
Asian
American
and College graduate
Pacific
Islander Odds
subgroups Non-Graduate Graduate Total Odds ratios
Asian
Indian 495,114 1,058,139 1,553,253 2.14 1.93
31.9 68.1 100.0
Other
South
Asians 76,663 90,051 166,714 1.17 1.06
46.0 54.0 100.0
Native
Hawaiians
and
Pacific
Islanders 174,757 34,855 209,612 0.20 0.18
83.4 16.6 100.0
Other
Asians 106,963 94,635 201,598 0.88 0.80
53.1 46.9 100.0
Total 4,445,008 4181,071 8,626,079
51.5 48.5 100.0 0.94
Source: GAO analysis of 2005 ACS data for individuals 25 years of age or
older.
An alternative way to estimate the difference between groups is to
calculate odds and odds ratios, which are the parameters that underlie the
logistic regression models that we used to estimate those differences
before and after adjusting for other factors. The odds on being a college
graduate for each group, which are shown in the next to last column of
table 10, are simply the number of graduates divided by the number of
non-graduates or, alternatively, the percentage of graduates divided by
100 minus the percentage of graduates. For whites, the odds on being a
college graduate are 40,199,138/93,900,456 = 0.43, which can be
interpreted as meaning that among whites 0.43 graduate for every 1 who
does not (or that 43 graduate for every 100 who do not). For Hispanics, by
contrast, the odds of being a college graduate are considerably lower, and
equal to 2,784,588/19,887,007, or 0.14. The odds on being a college
graduate for the other broad groups, and for the Asian American and
Pacific Islander subgroups, can be similarly calculated, and then
differences between groups can be calculated by choosing one group as the
referent category and calculating how different other groups are by taking
the ratios of these odds, or odds ratios (OR). These are shown in the last
column of table 10. When we choose whites as the referent category to
estimate the differences across the broad racial categories, we find that
prior to controlling for other factors Asian American and Pacific
Islanders have higher odds than whites of being a college graduate (by a
factor of 0.94/0.43 = 2.20), all other groups have lower odds than whites,
by factors ranging from 0.33 (for Hispanics) to 0.81 (for the other
non-Hispanic category). Similarly, when we choose the Chinese--the largest
group of Asian Americans for whom the odds of being a college graduate are
1.11--as the referent category for comparing AAPI subgroups, we find that
Asian Indians have markedly higher odds than the Chinese (by a factor of
1.93), and that Koreans (OR = 1.05) and other South Asians from the India
region (1.06) have slightly higher odds. All other groups had lower odds
of being a graduate than the Chinese and, as the percentages showed
previously, the lowest odds ratios were for the Vietnamese (OR = 0.30),
other Indochinese from that region (OR = 0.13) and Native Hawaiians and
Pacific Islanders (OR = 0.18).
In tables 11 and 12 below, we show how much or little these differences
change as a result of controlling for other factors. The first column of
numbers in table 11 shows the unadjusted odds ratios reflecting the gross
differences in the odds on graduating across the broad racial and ethnic
categories and across categories of sex, age, and the nativity-date of
arrival composite variable from bi-variate logistic regression models, and
the latter columns show the adjusted odds ratios from models which adjust
for each of the non-racial and ethnic factors one at a time and then all
together. The odds ratios from the bi-variate logistic regression models
for race and ethnicity are the same as those calculated directly from the
weighted numbers in the top panel of table 10, and all but one of them are
significant at the .01 level. As mentioned previously, the bi-variate odds
ratios in the first column of table 11 indicate that in general, when
other factors are ignored, Asian American and Pacific Islanders are the
only minority group that have higher odds (by a factor of 2.20) of being a
college graduate than whites. African Americans, Hispanics, and American
Indian/Alaskan Natives all have lower odds of being a college graduate
than whites, by factors ranging from 0.49 to 0.33. Models 1 thru 3, shown
in table 11, re-estimate the differences between groups after controlling
for sex, age, and nativity-date of arrival variable one at a time,
respectively. Very little change in the estimated difference in the
likelihood of being a college graduate between groups is produced by
controlling for these factors individually, though controlling for the
nativity-date of arrival variable does reduce the odds ratio indicating
the difference between Asian American and Pacific Islanders and whites
from 2.20 to 1.96. When all of the factors are controlled simultaneously,
as in Model 4, the odds on being a college graduate for Asian American and
Pacific Islanders remains 1.92 times greater than for whites, and the
differences between other minorities and whites are virtually unaltered.
Table 11: Odds Ratios from Bi-variate and Multivariate Models Estimating
the Effects of Race and Ethnicity, Gender, Age and Nativity-Date of
Arrival on the Odds on Having a College Degree
Odds ratios from
multivariate
models
Bi-variate Model Model Model
Odds Ratios Model (1) (2) (3) (4)
White Non-Hispanic REF REF REF REF REF
Hispanic (All Races) 0.33a 0.33a 0.30a 0.30a 0.28a
Black Non-Hispanic 0.49a 0.49a 0.47a 0.48a 0.47a
American Indian Alaskan 0.39a 0.39a 0.38a 0.39a 0.38a
Native Non-Hispanic
Asian Non-Hispanic 2.20a 2.20a 2.11a 1.96a 1.92a
Other Non Hispanic 0.81a 0.81a 0.77a 0.79a 0.76a
Male REF REF REF
Female 0.89a 0.88a 0.89a
Under 45 REF REF REF
Over 45 0.80a 0.73a 0.73a
Native Born REF REF REF
Foreign born - before 1980 0.91a 1.01 1.11a
Foreign born - after 1980 1.00a 1.20a 1.14a
Source: GAO analysis of 2005 ACS data.
aIndicates differences with the referent category that are statistically
significant at the 0.01 level.
Notes: "REF" identifies the group chosen as the referent category.
In the first column of numbers, table 12 shows the odds ratios indicating
the unadjusted differences in the odds on being a college graduate across
Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups and across gender, age and
nativity-date of arrival, from bi-variate logistic regression models, and
the latter columns show the adjusted odds ratios from models which adjust
for each of the factors one at a time and then all together. Odds ratios
from the bi-variate logistic regression models that estimate differences
between racial and ethnic groups are the same as those calculated directly
from the weighted numbers in the top panel of table 10. All of them are
significant at the .01 level, with the exception of the odds ratios
indicating the differences between the Koreans, (OR=1.05), other South
Asians (OR=1.06) and the Chinese, and the odds ratio indicating the
difference between foreign born Asian American and Pacific Islanders who
arrived before 1980 (OR = 0.98) and native born Asian American and Pacific
Islanders. Here too very little change in the estimated difference in the
likelihood of being a college graduate between groups is produced by
controlling for these factors simultaneously. That is, all of the odds
ratios comparing subgroups of Asian American and Pacific Islanders after
the individual controls (in Models 1 through 3) and the full set of
controls (in Model 4) are similar to the unadjusted odds ratios, even
though here the effects of gender (OR = 0.74), age (OR = 0.46), and being
a foreign born Asian American and Pacific Islander who arrived after 1980
(OR = 0.83) are significant and fairly pronounced. Even after controls,
Asian Indians (OR = 1.78) have much higher odds than the Chinese of being
a college graduate, while the Vietnamese (OR = 0.28), other Indochinese
(OR = 0.11) and Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (OR = 0.15) have
much lower odds of being a college graduate than the Chinese.
Table 12: Odds Ratios from Bi-variate and Multivariate Models Estimating
the Effects of Ethnicity, Sex, Age, and Nativity/Arrival Status on the
Odds on Having a College Degree for Asian American and Pacific Islander
Subgroups
Odds ratios from
multivariate
models
Bi-variate Model Model Model
Odds Ratios Model (1) (2) (3) (4)
Chinese REF REF REF REF REF
Korean 1.05 1.06 1.03 1.07 1.04
Japanese 0.71a 0.73a 0.76a 0.65a 0.73a
Vietnamese 0.30a 0.30a 0.28a 0.31a 0.28a
Other Indochinese 0.13a 0.13a 0.11a 0.13a 0.11a
Filipino 0.82a 0.83a 0.83a 0.82a 0.82a
Other Southeast Asians 0.70a 0.72a 0.64a 0.71a 0.65a
Indian 1.93a 1.90a 1.77a 1.96a 1.78a
Other south Asians 1.06 1.03 0.98 1.08 0.99
Native Hawaiians and 0.18a 0.18a 0.17a 0.16a 0.15a
Pacific Islanders
Other 0.80a 0.79a 0.73a 0.78a 0.72a
Male REF REF REF
Female 0.73a 0.74a 0.74a
Under 45 REF REF REF
Over 45 0.49a 0.48a 0.46a
Native Born REF REF REF
Foreign born - before 1980 0.98 0.78a 1.06
Foreign born - after 1980 1.06 0.81a 0.83a
Source: GAO analysis of 2005 ACS data.
aIndicates differences with the referent category that are statistically
significant at the 0.01 level.
Notes: "REF" identifies the group chosen as the referent category.
Procedures for Identifying What Challenges, If Any, Asian American and Pacific
Islander Students Face in Pursuing and Completing Their Postsecondary Education
To determine what challenges Asian American and Pacific Islander students
face when pursuing postsecondary education, we first conducted an
extensive literature search on Asian American and Pacific Islander
students' experiences in postsecondary education. We synthesized our
findings to identify the challenges and develop a framework for our
analyses. We also interviewed representatives from a variety of Asian
American and Pacific Islander organizations, including umbrella
organizations and groups devoted to a single Asian American and Pacific
Islander subgroup, to gain their views on Asian American and Pacific
Islander student challenges.
Data Collection
Existing data: We reviewed publicly available Education databases seeking
quantitative data on Asian American and Pacific Islander students'
challenges. While many of the databases contained aggregate data on Asians
and Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, we found only two data
sources--the Education Longitudinal Study (ELS) of 2002 and the National
Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) of 2000--that contained categories
for individual Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups.
o ELS 2002 follows a nationally representative cohort of students
from the time they were high school sophomores through the rest of
their high school careers. In 2004, the sample was augmented to
make it representative of seniors as well. We selected ELS because
it contains a variable "NBASIAN" that provides breakout data on
the following Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups:
Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, South Asian, and Southeast
Asian. We used data from the 2004 First Year Follow-up Survey of
high school seniors because we assumed that responses made closer
to the time period when they attended postsecondary education were
more likely to influence their decisions to attend postsecondary
education than responses made 2 years earlier. We decided to use
variables from the 2002 base year survey if they were not
available in the 2004 follow-up.
o NPSAS 2000 is a comprehensive nationwide study designed to
determine how students and their families pay for postsecondary
education, and to describe some demographic and other
characteristics of those enrolled. The study uses data from
nationally representative sample surveys of students in
postsecondary education institutions, including undergraduate,
graduate, and first-professional students. Students attending all
types and levels of institutions are represented, including public
and private not-for-profit and for-profit institutions, and
less-than-2-year institutions, community colleges, and 4-year
colleges and universities. Although not the most recent iteration
of the database, we decided to use the NPSAS 1999 to 2000
Undergraduate Survey because unlike the NPSAS 2004 Undergraduate
Survey it included a "type of Asian origin" variable that provides
breakout data on the following Asian American and Pacific Islander
subgroups: Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Other Asian
American and Pacific Islander, Asian Indian, and Vietnamese.
We reviewed the data dictionaries for each database to select variables
that represented the Asian American and Pacific Islander student
challenges identified in our literature search. We determined that the
data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report.
On-site visit data: To obtain more in-depth information on the challenges
that Asian American and Pacific Islander students face, we visited eight
colleges and universities in three states--California, Minnesota, and
Hawaii--and conducted discussion groups with Asian American and Pacific
Islander students. We selected institutions in urban areas with high
concentrations of Asian American and Pacific Islander students and diverse
Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups. To locate urban areas with
high concentrations of Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups, we
analyzed data from the 2000 U.S. Census. Next, we analyzed data contained
in Education's Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) 2004
database to identify accredited 2-year and 4-year institutions that
reported Asian American and Pacific Islander undergraduate student
enrollment of at least 10 percent. From this list, we selected a
nonprobability sample of seven public institutions located in the
Honolulu, San Francisco, and St. Paul metropolitan areas to visit. Wanting
also to obtain the views of Asian American and Pacific Islander students
in a private institution, we selected an additional private 4-year
institution in Minnesota.
In the course of our on-site visits in January and February 2007, we
conducted 14 discussion groups with 84 Asian American and Pacific Islander
students. The number of participants in the discussion group ranged from 2
to 11. We relied on administrative officials at the postsecondary
institutions to recruit and select participants for our discussion groups.
Table 13: Composition of the Asian American and Pacific Islander Student
Discussion Groups
Postsecondary Asian American and Pacific Number of
State institution Islander subgroup participants
Hawaiia University of Hawaii Samoan 11
at Manoa
Filipino 11
Hawaiian 2
Kapi'olani Community Japanese 2
College
Pacific Islander 6
Minnesota Concordia University Hmong 7
of St. Paul
Century College Hmong 7
California DeAnza College Vietnamese 7
Cambodian 3
San Francisco State Japanese, Filipino, Asian 3
University Indian
8
Vietnamese, Filipino, Chinese
and Taiwanese 3
Filipino
City College of San Vietnamese 7
Francisco
Chinese 8
Source: GAO analysis.
aWe also visited Leeward Community College in Hawaii but did not conduct
student discussion groups.
To guide the discussions, we developed a standard set of open-ended
questions about the following topics
o decision to attend college,
o college affordability,
o academic preparation,
o institutional climate,
o work, and
o family expectations.
All 14 discussion groups were lead by the same team member to ensure
consistency. Small group discussions are designed to gain in-depth
information about specific issues that cannot easily be obtained from
single or serial interviews. Methodologically, discussion groups are not
designed to provide results generalizable to a larger population or
provide statistically representative samples or reliable quantitative
estimates. Discussion group findings represent the responses only of the
students who participated in our 14 groups. In addition, while the
composition of the groups was designed to include students from different
Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups, the discussion groups were
not random samples of Asian American and Pacific Islander students.
Data Analysis
We conducted descriptive statistical analyses of the ELS and NPSAS data
using means and proportions and tested the statistical significance of any
differences in proportions that we identified.
During our exit conference with the Department of Education, an Education
official expressed concern that the weights in the ELS and NPSAS samples
may have affected our estimates. He was concerned that the weights
themselves might produce differences in the estimates. He said that an
unusual respondent with a large weight could control an estimate that
appears to be different from the others. He said that it is possible that
the sampling errors for the estimates might not reflect this problem. The
official suggested that we calculate the estimates with and without the
weights. He believed that the differences we saw in the data might
disappear when the unweighted results are compared. He recommended that we
use either the balanced repeated replication (BRR) or "jackknife"
procedures to calculate the variances for the variables of interest. To
respond to these concerns, we calculated the estimates with and without
weights, as suggested. The results showed only a few percentage points
difference between the weighted and unweighted data on our variables of
interest and thus it was not necessary to change the methodology for
calculating the confidence intervals. The variance estimation procedure we
used--Taylor Series--is a conservative method for calculating the
confidence intervals. It was also one of two recommended in the NPSAS 2000
documentation. The ELS 2002 documentation also recommended using a
statistical package that could handle complex sample designs and we used
SUDAAN. However, to ensure the quality of our results, GAO's Chief
Statistician reviewed the methodology and tabulations from NPSAS prepared
for our draft report.
Procedures for Determining What Federal and Institutional Resources That
Institutions with Large AAPI Student Enrollment Use to Address the Particular
Needs of These Students
To determine what federal and institutional resources institutions with
large Asian American and Pacific Islander student enrollment use to
address the particular needs of these students, we visited the same states
and postsecondary institutions identified to select student discussion
groups, listed in table 13. At each of the eight postsecondary
institutions, we interviewed officials responsible for the financial aid,
academic support services, and student life support services available to
Asian American and Pacific Islander students and collected related
documentation. To guide the interviews, we asked a standard set of
questions about
o types of assistance provided to Asian American and Pacific
Islander students with federal and institutional resources,
o postsecondary institutions' efforts to inform students about the
availability of financial aid,
o types of academic support services available to Asian American
and Pacific Islander students and students' use of the services,
and
o initiatives the institutions had undertaken to foster Asian
American and Pacific Islander students' involvement in campus
life.
To collect information about the eligibility criteria and objectives of
the federal programs used to fund the academic and student support
services the postsecondary institutions provided, we also interviewed
Education officials about Title III, TRIO, Native Hawaiian Education, and
Native Hawaiian Career and Technical Educational Program grants and
reviewed program documentation. Lastly, we analyzed NPSAS 2000 data to
determine the extent to which Asian American and Pacific Islander students
applied for and received federal student aid, including loans, grants, and
work-study.
Appendix II: Description of Federal Student Aid
Federal student aid
program Description
Subsidized Stafford loans Loans made to students enrolled at least
half-time in an eligible program of study who
have federally defined financial need. The
federal government pays the interest costs on
the loan while the student is in school.
Pell Grants Grants to undergraduate students who are
enrolled in a degree or certificate program and
have federally defined financial need.
Perkins Loans Low-interest loans to undergraduate and graduate
students. Interest does not accrue while the
student is enrolled at least half time in an
eligible program. Priority is given to students
who have exceptional federally defined financial
need.
Supplemental Educational Grants for undergraduate students with federally
Opportunity Grants (SEOG) defined financial need. Priority given for this
aid is given to Pell Grant recipients.
Work-study On-or-off-campus jobs in which students who have
federally defined need earn at least the current
federal minimum wage. The institution or
off-campus employer pays a portion of their
wages.
Unsubsidized Stafford Non-need-based loans made to students enrolled
loans at least half-time in an eligible program of
study. Although the terms and conditions of the
loan (i.e., interest rates, etc.) are the same
as those for subsidized loans, students are
responsible for paying all interest costs on the
loan.
Parent Loan for Non-need-based loans made to credit worthy
Undergraduate Students parents of dependent undergraduate students
(PLUS) loan enrolled at least half-time in an eligible
program of study. Borrowers are responsible for
paying all interest on the loan.
Source: [36]GAO-03-508 .
Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Education
Appendix IV: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
GAO Contact
George A. Scott (202) 512-7215, [email protected]
Acknowledgments
Sherri Doughty, Assistant Director
Sara Edmondson, Analyst-in-charge
Jonathan McMurray, Susan Pachikara, Luann Moy, Carol Bray, Douglas Sloane,
Nancy Hess, John Mingus, James Rebbe, and Susannah Compton, also made
significant contributions to this report.
(130592)
GAO's Mission
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( [37]www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To
have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
[38]www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000\
TDD: (202) 512-2537
Fax: (202) 512-6061
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
Contact:
Web site: [39]www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [40][email protected]
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Congressional Relations
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [41][email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
D.C. 20548
Public Affairs
Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [42][email protected] (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
[43]www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-925 .
To view the full product, including the scope
and methodology, click on the link above.
For more information, contact George Scott at (202) 512-7215 or
[email protected].
Highlights of [44]GAO-07-925 , a report to congressional requesters
July 2007
HIGHER EDUCATION
Information Sharing Could Help Institutions Identify and Address
Challenges That Some Asian American and Pacific Islander Students Face
As a group, Asian American and Pacific Islanders represent about 5 percent
of the U.S. population and hold about 8 percent of the college degrees. To
better understand the educational attainment and average incomes of the
subgroups that comprise this population, the Committee asked: 1) What are
Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups' educational attainment and
household income levels? (2) What challenges, if any, Asian American and
Pacific Islander students face in pursuing and completing their
post-secondary education? and (3) What federal and institutional resources
do institutions with large Asian American and Pacific Islander student
enrollment use to address the particular needs of these students? GAO
analyzed data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Department of
Education (Education) and spoke with officials and Asian American and
Pacific Islander students at eight postsecondary institutions.
[45]What GAO Recommends
GAO recommends that the Secretary of Education facilitate sharing of
information among postsecondary institutions that serve Asian American and
Pacific Islanders about strategies that foster low-income postsecondary
student recruitment, retention, and graduation and about strategies to
reach out to low-income students beginning in high school. Education
officials generally agreed with our recommendation.
As a group, Asian American and Pacific Islanders have attained high levels
of education and income, but differences among Asian American and Pacific
Islander subgroups exist. For example, a greater percentage of Asian
Indians and Chinese in the United States had college degrees than
Vietnamese, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders and
Indochinese--Cambodians, Laotians, and Hmong. Asian Indians had the
highest and Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders and Indochinese had the
lowest average income among employed Asian American and Pacific Islander
subgroups. Data limitations, including challenges linking data sources,
prevented GAO from fully exploring the reasons for the differences among
subgroups.
Education and Average Income, by Asian American and Pacific Islander
Subgroup (2005)
Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups--while in high school--face
a range of challenges that may affect their ability to persist in college.
According to GAO's analysis of Education's data, Asian American and
Pacific Islander subgroups differ in their levels of academic
preparedness, ability to pay for college, and their need to balance
academic, employment, and family obligations.
The postsecondary institutions that GAO visited used both federal grants
and their own resources to address the needs of Asian American and Pacific
Islander students. The schools used federal aid to institutions to provide
tutoring services and to supplement Pell Grants for selected students. The
schools also applied their own funds to provide a range of services,
including outreach to high school students, scholarships, tutoring, and
financial aid application and tuition assistance. School officials told
GAO that they could benefit from learning about programs and strategies
other schools might be using to assist high school and college students.
References
Visible links
33. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-961
34. http://www.ed.gov/programs/iduestitle3b/success-stories.html
35. http://www.gao.gov/
36. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-508
37. http://www.gao.gov/
38. http://www.gao.gov/
39. http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
40. mailto:[email protected]
41. mailto:[email protected]
42. mailto:[email protected]
43. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-925
44. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-925
*** End of document. ***