Student Financial Aid: Federal Aid Awarded to Students Taking Remedial
Courses (Letter Report, 08/21/97, GAO/HEHS-97-142).

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO examined remedial education
among college freshman and sophomore (underclassmen) financial aid
recipients for the fall 1995 term, focusing on the share of financial
aid dollars: (1) awarded to underclassmen who enrolled in remedial
courses; and (2) used by underclassmen to pay for remedial classes. GAO
also examined why and how colleges provide remedial education and the
demographic profiles of students who take such courses.

GAO noted that: (1) in the 430 schools that responded to GAO's survey,
underclassmen who enrolled in remedial education courses received a
relatively small portion of federal student aid dollars; (2) of all
financial aid awarded to underclassmen at these schools, approximately
13 percent went to freshmen and sophomores who enrolled in at least one
remedial course; (3) only 6 percent of freshmen and sophomores at these
schools both received financial aid and enrolled in remedial courses;
(4) GAO estimated that no more than 4 percent of the financial aid
granted to freshmen and sophomores paid for remedial courses; (5) GAO's
nine case study schools provided remedial courses to raise their
students' proficiency in reading, writing, and math skills to levels
typically attained in high school; (6) representatives from each 2-year
school viewed remedial education as an integral part of their
institution's purpose, with two of three citing such coursework in their
mission statements; (7) spokesmen for the 4-year schools saw these
programs as consistent with their institutions' commitment to meeting
students' educational needs; (8) most schools guided students who needed
remedial education through formal programs; (9) with one exception, the
case study schools used mandatory placement tests to assign students to
courses commensurate with their skill level before enrollment; (10) all
the 4-year public schools required students to enroll in remedial
courses if placement test scores indicated the need; (11) the schools
varied according to limits placed on and the type of credit offered for
remedial courses; (12) some schools required students to complete
remedial coursework by the end of their first term; others allowed
students to take such courses through graduation, and four schools
allowed students to use these courses as electives; (13) freshmen and
racial minorities constituted a higher share of remedial course
enrollments compared with their campuswide enrollments; (14) at three
4-year schools, freshmen were overrepresented in remedial courses; and
(15) at five schools, racial minorities typically enrolled in remedial
courses at twice the proportion of their campuswide enrollments.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  HEHS-97-142
     TITLE:  Student Financial Aid: Federal Aid Awarded to Students 
             Taking Remedial Courses
      DATE:  08/21/97
   SUBJECT:  College students
             Higher education
             Compensatory education
             Student financial aid
             Colleges/universities
             Education or training costs
             Disadvantaged persons
             Educational standards
             Educational testing
IDENTIFIER:  Dept. of Education Title IV Program
             
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major          **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters,    **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and       **
** single lines.  The numbers on the right end of these lines   **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the      **
** document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the  **
** page numbers of the printed 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.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************


Cover
================================================================ COVER


Report to the Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Postsecondary
Education, Training, and Life-Long Learning, Committee on Education
and the Workforce, House of Representatives

August 1997

STUDENT FINANCIAL AID - FEDERAL
AID AWARDED TO STUDENTS TAKING
REMEDIAL COURSES

GAO/HEHS-97-142

Remedial Education and Financial Aid

(104840)


Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV

  ACT - American College Test
  CRP - College Restoration Program
  GED - general equivalency diploma
  GPA - grade-point average
  NCES - National Center for Education Statistics
  PEQIS - Postsecondary Education Quick Information Survey
  REEP - Retention Enhanced Education Program
  SAT - Scholastic Achievement Test
  SBP - Summer Bridge Program
  SSP - Student Support Program
  SSS - Student Support Services

Letter
=============================================================== LETTER


B-271705

August 21, 1997

The Honorable Dale E.  Kildee
Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on
 Postsecondary Education, Training,
 and Life-Long Learning
Committee on Education and the Workforce
House of Representatives

Dear Mr.  Kildee: 

Colleges commonly offer remedial instruction designed to raise
students' proficiency in reading, writing, or mathematics to levels
expected to be achieved in high school.  Recent studies have
documented the prevalence of these courses at postsecondary
institutions.  The American Council on Education found that 13
percent of all undergraduates completed at least one remedial course
in the 1992-93 academic year.\1 In addition, the Department of
Education reported that all 2-year and 81 percent of 4-year
degree-granting colleges offered remedial education courses in the
fall 1995 term.\2 This apparently widespread need for college
remediation has raised concern about possible effects on
appropriations earmarked for postsecondary education. 

Some Congress members disapprove of allowing college students to use
title IV funds (federal student financial aid\3 provided under the
Higher Education Act of 1965 as amended) to help finance remedial
education.  Federal policymakers who take this position often share
some common beliefs about the relationship between college
remediation and financial aid.  For example, these policymakers
typically believe a large portion of financial aid (1) is awarded to
students enrolled in remedial education courses and (2) pays for
remedial education courses.  They therefore believe granting
financial aid to students needing such courses may be compromising
title IV's primary public policy objective:  funding postsecondary
education. 

Because the extent that title IV funds support students taking
remedial education was unknown, you asked us to examine remedial
education\4 among college freshman and sophomore (underclassmen)
financial aid recipients for the fall 1995 term.  Specifically, we
agreed to provide you with information on the share of financial aid
dollars (1) awarded to underclassmen who enrolled in remedial courses
and (2) used by underclassmen to pay for remedial courses.  We also
examined why and how colleges provide remedial education and the
demographic profiles of students who take such courses. 

To develop our information, we used questionnaire surveys and case
studies.  We mailed questionnaires to a stratified random sample of
758 degree-granting 2- and 4-year postsecondary institutions to
obtain data on financial aid and remedial coursework for students who
enrolled in at least one remedial course in the fall 1995 term.  We
conducted our case studies at nine postsecondary institutions to
examine how and why schools provide remedial education and to profile
students taking these courses.  We visited three public 2-year
schools and six 4-year schools (three of which were public and three
of which were private).\5 Because of the subject matter's sensitive
nature, we agreed to maintain the confidentiality of our case study
schools.\6

Our survey results have two limitations.  First, we attained a
relatively low response rate:  about 57 percent, or 430, of the
schools responded.  Consequently, the survey results are not
necessarily representative of the universe of students enrolled in
degree-granting postsecondary institutions or generalizable to that
population.  Second, the assumption underlying our assessment of how
much financial aid paid for remedial education biased our results
toward overestimation.  For example, our estimate implicitly assumed
students exclusively used financial aid to pay for tuition costs. 
The share of financial aid that paid for remedial courses, however,
is lower than our estimate if some aid financed other
education-related expenses such as housing, transportation, or
textbooks.  The influences of such an assumption make our estimate an
upper limit on the portion of financial aid that could have paid for
remedial coursework.\7

Appendix I details our questionnaire scope and methodology; appendix
II discusses in detail each of the case study schools. 


--------------------
\1 Remedial Education:  An Undergraduate Student Profile, American
Council on Education (Washington, D.C.:  Feb.  1996). 

\2 Remedial Education at Higher Education Institutions in Fall 1995,
National Center for Education Statistics, NCES 97-584 (Washington,
D.C.:  Oct.  1996). 

\3 For the rest of the report, we refer to federal student financial
aid as "financial aid," unless otherwise noted. 

\4 We defined remedial instruction as reading, writing, or
mathematics courses designed for college students lacking those
skills necessary to perform at the level required by their
institution.  For more details on our definition of remedial courses,
see app.  III. 

\5 In choosing these schools, we took several variables into account,
including (1) the percentage of freshmen who took at least one
remedial course in the fall 1995 term, (2) Pell grant dollars per
student, and (3) geographic location. 

\6 We identify these schools as Schools A through I. 

\7 For a detailed discussion on our estimation of the portion of
financial aid paying for remedial coursework, see app.  I. 


   RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1

In the 430 schools that responded to our survey, underclassmen who
enrolled in remedial education courses received a relatively small
portion of financial aid dollars.  Of all financial aid awarded to
underclassmen at these schools, approximately 13 percent went to
freshmen and sophomores who enrolled in at least one remedial course. 
In addition, only 6 percent of freshmen and sophomores at these
schools both received financial aid and enrolled in remedial courses. 
Moreover, for our respondents, we estimated that no more than 4
percent of the financial aid granted to freshmen and sophomores paid
for remedial courses. 

Our nine case study schools provided remedial courses to raise their
students' proficiency in reading, writing, and math skills to levels
typically attained in high school.  Representatives from each 2-year
school viewed remedial education as an integral part of their
institution's purpose, with two of three citing such coursework in
their mission statements.  Spokesmen for the 4-year schools saw these
programs as consistent with their institutions' commitment to meeting
students' educational needs. 

Most schools guided students who needed remedial education through
formal programs.  With one exception, the case study schools used
mandatory placement tests to assign students to courses commensurate
with their skill level before enrollment.  All the 4-year public
schools required students to enroll in remedial courses if placement
test scores indicated the need.  The schools varied according to
limits placed on and the type of credit offered for remedial courses. 
For example, some schools required students to complete remedial
coursework by the end of their first term; others allowed students to
take such courses through graduation.  In addition, four schools
allowed students to use these courses as electives; others did not. 

Generally, freshmen and racial minorities constituted a higher share
of remedial course enrollments compared with their campuswide
enrollments.  For example, at three 4-year schools, freshmen were
overrepresented in remedial courses.  In addition, at five schools,
racial minorities typically enrolled in remedial courses at twice the
proportion of their campuswide enrollments. 


   BACKGROUND
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2

The Congress enacted the Higher Education Act of 1965 to promote
equal access to higher education.  To further this goal, title IV of
the act establishes financial aid programs to help make college more
affordable.  Title IV financial aid programs may be used to help pay
for remedial education courses.  Postsecondary education students may
use financial aid to pay for up to 30 semester hours of remedial
courses. 

To reduce the resources devoted to teaching basic skills, several
states are revising remedial education policies for their 4-year
schools.  For example, the regents for California's state university
system plan to reduce the portion of entering freshmen who take
remedial education courses from about 44 percent in 1994 to no more
than 10 percent within the next 10 years.  Along with adopting more
selective admission standards, the Georgia State Board of Regents
decided to reduce the portion of students taking remedial courses by
5 percent each year, beginning in 1997, and eliminate any remedial
courses by 2001.  Last year, the Massachusetts Board of Higher
Education raised its admission standards and limited the enrollment
of new freshmen in remedial courses on 4-year campuses to no more
than 10 percent in 1997 and 5 percent in 1998, down from 21 percent
in the fall of 1995. 

At the federal level, some members of the Congress seek to improve
the targeting of title IV funds by restricting the use of financial
aid to postsecondary education courses.  In speculating that a large
percentage of students receiving financial aid use it to pay for
remedial courses, these members want to eliminate the financial aid
awarded to students needing such courses and reallocate it to more
qualified students.  According to these members, the Congress could
materially augment or enhance the financial aid packages of students
remaining eligible for title IV funding without providing additional
appropriations. 

Proponents of allowing financial aid recipients to take remedial
courses have defended the current policy.  They say the policy is
critical to promoting access to higher education, especially for
economically and socially disadvantaged students.  Because many
students who require college remediation graduated from schools in
resource-poor school districts, these proponents contend that such
students have deficiencies in basic skills through no fault of their
own.  In addition, these proponent point out that nontraditional
students often need such courses because their skills have
deteriorated from being out of school for long periods. 


   PERCENTAGE OF AID AWARDED TO
   STUDENTS TAKING REMEDIAL
   COURSES
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3

At the 430 schools that responded to our survey, underclassmen
enrolled in remedial courses received relatively few financial aid
dollars in the fall 1995 term.  At these schools, about 13 percent of
the financial aid awarded to freshmen and sophomores went to those
who took a remedial education course.  Students who took remedial
courses at the 2-year schools, however, received more than twice the
proportion of financial aid that underclassmen who attended 4-year
schools received (see fig.  1). 

   Figure 1:  Percentage of Aid
   Awarded to Students Taking
   Remedial Courses

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

At the 430 schools responding to our survey, relatively few freshmen
and sophomores both received aid and enrolled in remedial courses in
the fall 1995 term.  Only 6 percent of the freshmen and sophomores at
these schools both received financial aid and took at least one
remedial course.  The proportion of freshman and sophomore aid
recipients enrolled in remedial courses was two times higher at
2-year schools than 4-year schools--about 25 and 12 percent,
respectively. 


   PERCENTAGE OF FINANCIAL AID
   THAT COULD HAVE PAID FOR
   REMEDIAL EDUCATION COURSES
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4

At the 430 schools responding to our survey, only a small portion of
financial aid dollars could have paid for remedial courses in the
fall 1995 term.  Overall, we estimated that no more than about 4
percent of aid dollars awarded to freshmen and sophomores paid for
remedial courses.  A higher proportion of financial aid dollars could
have paid for remedial courses at the 2-year schools than at 4-year
schools.  For financial aid recipients at the 2-year schools, about 8
percent of aid dollars could have paid for remedial courses compared
with about 3 percent at 4-year schools for underclassman aid
recipients (see fig.  2).  On average, students enrolled in remedial
courses at 2-year schools registered for about 4.9 credit hours or
units in remedial courses; similar students attending 4-year schools
registered for about 4.1 remedial credit hours or units. 

   Figure 2:  Percentage of
   Financial Aid Paid for Remedial
   Courses

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)


   REMEDIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5

Our nine case study schools provided remedial courses to raise their
students' proficiency in reading, writing, and math to levels
typically attained in high school.  Consistent with their open
enrollment policy, two of the three 2-year schools' mission
statements specifically cited remedial education as an integral part
of their mission, which emphasized access.  In contrast, the 4-year
schools' mission statements did not specifically address remedial
education, but for retention purposes, provided remedial education to
otherwise capable students who need extra help to meet the challenges
of college-level work. 

Most of our case study schools guided students who needed remedial
education through formal programs, which all six 4-year schools
provided.  The schools' programs combined remedial instruction with
student support interventions reserved for students enrolled in these
courses such as academic counseling and mentoring.  Two schools
administered their programs only during the regular academic year;
two others had both a summer pre-enrollment and an academic year
program.  The other two schools exclusively used summer
pre-enrollment programs and, while offering remedial instruction
during the academic year, did not provide any coordinated services. 
Although the three 2-year schools provided remedial instruction and
student support interventions, they did not combine them into a
formal program. 

Most of the case study schools used mandatory placement tests to
assign students to courses commensurate with their skill level before
enrollment.  Seven schools (four 4-year and three 2-year) used
pre-enrollment placement tests to assign students to either remedial,
regular, or advanced college-level curricula.  These schools
administered placement tests, which focused on reading, writing, and
math skills, to all entering freshmen and in some cases to transfer
students.  Four of these schools (three 4-year and one 2-year)
required students to enroll in remedial courses if test scores
indicated the need; remedial education courses were optional for
students at the remaining three schools (one 4-year and two 2-year). 
On average, students attending 2-year schools who enrolled in
remedial courses registered for about 5.0 credit hours or units in
remedial courses; similar students attending 4-year schools
registered for about 5.6 credit hours or units in the fall 1995 term. 

Restrictions placed on remedial education programs varied among the
case study schools.  For example, two 4-year schools required
students to complete remedial coursework by the end of their first
term; another 4-year school allowed up to 2 years.  The other six
schools allowed students to take remedial courses through graduation. 
Furthermore, two schools (both 4-year) did not allow students to
repeat remedial courses; four schools (two 2-year and two 4-year)
limited the number of times students could repeat remedial courses. 
All nine schools, however, required their students--whether enrolled
in remedial or college-level courses--to progress satisfactorily
toward graduation to qualify for financial aid. 

In addition, the type of credit offered for remedial courses varied
among the case study schools.  Schools awarded either institutional\8
or elective credits.  Five schools (three 4-year and two 2-year)
offered institutional credit for these courses; four schools (three
4-year and one 2-year) allowed students to use these courses as
electives that would count toward graduation. 


--------------------
\8 Courses receiving institutional credit allow students to attain
full-time status and be eligible for financial aid.  These courses do
not count toward graduation requirements, however. 


   FRESHMAN AND RACIAL MINORITY
   ENROLLMENT IN REMEDIAL COURSES
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :6

For most of the case study schools that provided demographic data,
freshmen and racial minorities constituted a larger share of students
enrolled in remedial courses compared with their campuswide
enrollments.  At four of the six 4-year schools that provided
demographic data, freshmen accounted for at least 50 percent of
remedial course enrollments; they accounted for between 18 and 35
percent of overall student body enrollments (see fig.  3).\9 At four
of the six 4-year schools that provided demographic data, racial
minorities' share of remedial course enrollments ranged from 32 to 92
percent, typically almost twice the proportion of their campuswide
enrollments (see fig.  4).\10 At one 2-year school, freshmen
accounted for about 94 percent of the remedial course enrollments but
only about 68 percent of its student body.  Similarly, at this
school, racial minorities accounted for 35 percent of the remedial
education course enrollments but only 20 percent of the student
body.\11

   Figure 3:  Freshmen as a
   Percentage of Remedial Course
   and Campuswide Enrollments

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Note:  Schools B and E limited remedial enrollments to freshmen. 
Schools G and H (2-year schools) did not provide demographic data. 

   Figure 4:  Racial Minorities as
   a Percentage of Remedial Course
   and Campuswide Enrollments

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Note:  Schools B and E were not included.  School B is a historically
black public university.  School E limited remedial course
enrollments to freshmen.  Among freshmen at School E, racial
minorities accounted for 48 percent of all remedial course
enrollments but only 23 percent of all freshmen.  Schools G and H
(2-year schools) did not provide demographic data. 


--------------------
\9 The other 4-year schools limited remedial course enrollments to
freshmen. 

\10 One 4-year school was not included because it is a historically
black public university.  At the remaining 4-year school, which
limited remedial course enrollments to freshmen, racial minorities
accounted for 48 percent of all remedial enrollments but only 23
percent of all freshmen. 

\11 The remaining two 2-year schools did not provide demographic
data. 


   CONCLUSIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :7

The results from the 430 schools responding to our survey raise
questions about some preconceived notions about the relationship
between college remediation and financial aid.  Though not definitive
of the national picture, relatively few financial aid dollars were
associated with college remediation at the schools responding to our
survey.  For these schools, about 13 percent of the financial aid
awarded to underclassmen went to those enrolled in remedial courses. 
In addition, for these schools, our calculations show that no more
than 4 percent of the financial aid granted to underclassmen could
have paid for remedial courses.  Consequently, for the schools
responding to our survey, it is unclear whether eliminating financial
aid associated with remedial education would have presented
meaningful opportunities to reprogram title IV funds. 


   AGENCY COMMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :8

Officials at the Department of Education reviewed this report and
provided no comments. 


---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :8.1

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate House and
Senate committees, the Secretary of Education, and other interested
parties.  We will also make copies available to others on request. 

This report was prepared under the direction of Wayne B.  Upshaw,
Assistant Director.  If you or your staff have any questions
concerning this report, please call me at (202) 512-7014 or Tamara A. 
Lumpkin, Evaluator-in-Charge, at (202) 512-5699.  Other contributors
to this report are listed in appendix III. 

Sincerely yours,

Cornelia M.  Blanchette
Associate Director, Education
 and Employment Issues


QUESTIONNAIRE SCOPE AND
METHODOLOGY
=========================================================== Appendix I

This appendix describes the sampling procedures used in conducting
our survey and its response rate.  It also details the information in
the survey, our efforts to validate the data, and the assumptions
underlying our estimate of the portion of financial aid that paid for
remedial coursework. 


   SAMPLING PROCEDURES AND
   RESPONSE RATE
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:1

For our survey, we developed two questionnaires, one each for 2- and
4-year postsecondary degree-granting institutions.  We mailed the
questionnaires to the financial aid directors at a stratified random
sample of 295 2-year and 495 4-year schools. 

We surveyed schools that constituted the Department of Education's
Postsecondary Education Quick Information Survey (PEQIS) sample.  We
chose this sample because Education, through its National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES), had already surveyed these schools
regarding remedial education.  The PEQIS sample is a stratified
random sample, with several strata, including public and private
(nonprofit and for-profit) 2- and 4-year institutions, categorized by
size.  Because we sought information only for undergraduate students
at degree-granting institutions, we deleted proprietary schools,
schools not considered institutions of higher education,\12 and
graduate or professional schools\13 from this sample.  The adjusted
sample of 758 schools represented an adjusted population of 3,243
schools.  We received responses from 430 of 758 schools in our
adjusted sample--a response rate of 57 percent.  Table I.1 shows the
adjusted populations, adjusted sample sizes, number of respondents,
and response rate from our surveys. 



                               Table I.1
                
                 Adjusted Populations, Adjusted Sample
                   Sizes, Number of Respondents, and
                     Response Rate for Our Surveys

                                                              Response
                              Adjusted  Adjusted                  rate
                              populati    sample  Respondent  (percent
Type of school                      on      size           s         )
----------------------------  --------  --------  ----------  --------
All schools                      3,243       758         430      56.7

2-year schools
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Public                             974       263         134      51.0
Private                            167        31          19      61.3
======================================================================
Total                            1,141       294         153      52.0

4-year schools
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Public                             615       244         154      63.1
Private                          1,487       220         123      55.9
======================================================================
Total                            2,102       464         277      59.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To increase the response rate, we mailed the survey three times and
made several follow-up telephone calls to schools.  In making these
telephone calls, we learned that technical, staffing, and time
constraints prevented schools from responding.  Regarding technical
constraints, many schools lacked integrated registration and
financial aid databases.  Without integrated databases, completing
the survey would have required an extremely labor-intensive effort to
either manually calculate or develop computer programs to reconcile
the two databases.  In addition, many of the schools that had
integrated databases faced staffing and time constraints that
precluded them from developing the computer programs needed to
generate the requested data. 


--------------------
\12 An institution of higher education is an institution accredited
at the college level by an association or agency recognized by the
Secretary of Education. 

\13 We could not identify which schools were graduate or professional
schools in the PEQIS database.  Therefore, these schools were
initially included in our sample and surveyed.  In response to our
survey, however, officials at 32 of these schools identified them as
graduate or professional schools so we deleted them from our survey. 
An unknown number of nonrespondents may also have been only graduate
or professional schools. 


   SCOPE OF INFORMATION
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2

The questionnaires asked for information on freshmen and sophomores
in the fall 1995 term regarding the number of (1) financial aid
recipients and the types and amounts of aid awarded, (2) financial
aid recipients enrolled in remedial courses, (3) students not awarded
financial aid and the number of these students who took remedial
courses, and (4) financial aid recipients' and other students' hours
or units registered in both college-level and remedial courses. 

We also obtained information on juniors and seniors from 4-year
schools on (1) the total number of upperclassmen, (2) upperclassmen
who received aid and the amount they received, (3) these students'
hours or units registered in both college-level and remedial courses,
and (4) upperclassmen who took at least one remedial course.  To
encourage schools to respond to our survey, we aggregated the data to
preclude identifying specific schools. 

Our questionnaire used the term "developmental/remedial courses" and
defined these as reading, writing, or mathematics courses offered by
institutions that are (1) designed for college students lacking those
skills necessary to perform at the level required by the institution;
(2) designed to bring such students up to college-level work; (3)
defined by the institution as developmental/remedial; and (4) counted
for federal aid purposes, regardless of whether or not they granted
degree credit.  We excluded English as a Second Language courses
taught primarily to foreign students who have F-1 visas and courses
offered by other institutions. 

In addition, we gathered information on all title IV federal student
financial aid that these students received.  This included
Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants and Pell grants, Federal
Family Education Loans and Direct Loans, Perkins Loans, and Federal
Work Study.  For campus-based aid programs, we asked schools to
include their portion as well as the federal portion.  We asked
schools to exclude all other types of federal aid such as the federal
portion of State Student Incentive Grants. 


   DATA VALIDATION
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:3

To test the survey's internal validity, we included questions to
which the responses should have been internally consistent.  For
example, we asked for the total number of students receiving aid and
then asked for disaggregated data on students by types of aid
awarded.  In some cases, the disaggregated data did not correspond
with the total number of students receiving aid.  When we identified
discrepancies, we contacted the school for clarification. 


   SAMPLING ERRORS AND SAMPLE
   WEIGHTS
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:4

Because our response rate was inadequate, we did not estimate
population totals or averages or calculate sampling errors.  As such,
our results are sample specific, pertaining only to the 430 survey
respondents. 

We used the PEQIS base sample weights to reflect the PEQIS sample
design.  We adjusted our results using base weights assigned as part
of PEQIS. 


   ESTIMATION OF FINANCIAL AID
   PAYING FOR REMEDIAL COURSES
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:5

Because we lacked data on education-related costs, our estimate of
how much financial aid paid for remedial education has certain
limitations.  Specifically, the assumptions about students' total
education-related costs underlying our estimate biased our results
toward overestimation.  In assuming that students used their
financial aid only to pay tuition, we treated tuition as students'
only educational expense, excluding other education-related expenses
such as housing, transportation, and books. 

To the extent that financial aid pays for more than simply tuition,
our estimate constitutes an upper limit on the percentage of aid
supporting remedial education.  For illustrative purposes, consider
the following example:  If a student received $1,000 in financial aid
and enrolled for 12 credit hours--3 remedial and 9 regular credit
hours--our estimate assumed that a fourth of the financial aid award,
or $250, paid for the remedial course hours.\14 However, if the same
student's tuition equaled $4,000 and other education-related expenses
equaled $4,000, for a total cost of $8,000, it would be reasonable to
assume that half the financial aid award ($500) was used to help pay
for tuition and the remaining half helped pay other education-related
expenses.  Because remedial courses equaled a fourth of the student's
courseload, the proportion of financial aid used to pay for remedial
courses would be a fourth of $500, or $125-- half the amount derived
from our estimate. 


--------------------
\14 We assumed that the percentage of financial aid paying for
remedial work equaled the proportion of a student's courseload of
remedial courses. 


CASE STUDIES OF THE USE OF
REMEDIAL PROGRAMS AT NINE SCHOOLS
========================================================== Appendix II

This appendix describes in detail our case study schools' remedial
education programs.  Besides summarizing school officials' statements
and opinions, it presents data on the retention and graduation rates
of students who enrolled in remedial courses, as well as their
demographic profiles, whenever possible. 


   SITE SELECTION
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1

We selected schools on the basis of two factors:  (1) percentage of
entering freshmen who completed at least one remedial course in fall
1995 and (2) Pell grant dollars per student.  We used data from the
NCES Remedial Education in Higher Education Institutions Survey to
determine freshmen enrollments in remedial courses.  For Pell grants,
we collected data from the National Student Loan Database System on
sample schools' aggregated dollars in the Pell grant program and
divided those dollars by their total student body enrollments to
construct a dollars-per-student measure.  We then assigned schools to
one of the following three categories:  (1) high remedial course
enrollments and high Pell grant awards per student, (2) high remedial
course enrollments and low Pell grant awards per student, or (3) low
remedial course enrollments and high Pell grant awards per
student.\15 From each category, we chose two 4-year schools-- one
public and one private--and one 2-year public school.  We also
considered geographic diversity and school size when selecting the
schools. 

Table II.1 shows each school's category on the basis of these
preliminary data. 



                               Table II.1
                
                   Schools Selected for Case Studies

                                         Remedial enrollments
                                --------------------------------------
Federal aid                     High                Low
------------------------------  ------------------  ------------------
High                            School A            School B
                                School F            School E
                                School G            School I


Low                             School C            No schools
                                School D            selected
                                School H
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For the nine case study schools we visited, table II.2 shows the
percent of (1) financial aid received by students enrolled in
remedial education courses, (2) students awarded financial aid and
enrolled in remedial courses, and (3) financial aid that could have
paid for remedial courses. 



                               Table II.2
                
                  Relationship Between Student Aid and
                Remedial Education at Case Study Schools

                              Percent of     Percent of
                           financial aid       students        Maximum
                             received by      receiving     percent of
                                students  financial aid  financial aid
                             enrolled in   and enrolled     paying for
                                remedial    in remedial       remedial
School                           courses        courses        courses
-------------------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
4-year
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A                                     15              8              5
B                                      8              8              4
C                                     12              5              2
D                                      9              5              2
E                                    0.3            0.2            0.2
F                                     20              9             13

2-year
----------------------------------------------------------------------
G                                     39             16             21
H                                     32              4             17
I                                     17              5              9
----------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------
\15 These categories were defined relative to each sector of public
and private 2- and 4-year schools. 


   PROFILE OF SCHOOL A
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2

We classified School A, a large, west coast public 4-year university,
as a high remedial enrollment (53 percent of freshmen) and a high per
capita Pell grant award ($510 average per student) institution. 
Overall, about 11 percent of its 13,000 undergraduates took remedial
courses. 

School A has a moderately selective admissions policy.  To gain
admission, students must rank in the upper third of their high school
graduating class.  The school uses a special-admissions category,
however, to facilitate access for some students from underrepresented
groups such as low-income and first-generation students.  In total,
the school allots about 388 slots each year for special-admissions
students.  According to school officials, these students account for
approximately 25 percent of the school's first-time freshmen. 

School A has offered remedial courses since 1967.  Its mission states
that it will help students in acquiring and mastering college-level
skills to make them competitive in the marketplace.  School A's
officials said remedial education facilitates this goal.  In
addition, its title III school status emphasizes the need for this
school to offer remedial courses.\16

School A's officials said its remedial education curriculum has
affected student retention rates, although they could only provide
anecdotal evidence.  For example, remedial courses serve as a
refresher for some historically high-achieving students, such as
those graduating from high school honors programs, who sometimes
encounter transition problems once they enter college, these
officials said.  For these students, remedial courses help bolster
their confidence.  Without these courses, the officials said, these
promising students may take college-level classes too soon and become
discouraged.  A large number of students speak a language other than
English at home and are English as a Second Language students.  Many
of these students must take remedial courses as well. 


--------------------
\16 Title III is a federal program for postsecondary institutions
that serve a high percentage of disadvantaged students.  Federal
funds are provided, through grants, to help students succeed
academically through special services. 


      IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL
      PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.1

School A requires that entering freshmen and transfers who have not
satisfied college-level English and math requirements at their
previous institutions take pre-enrollment proficiency exams in
English and math.  If indicated by the tests' results, these students
must take remedial courses.  School A offers remedial courses mainly
in English and math and grants four institutional credits for each of
these courses; however, these credits do not count toward graduation
requirements.\17

School A offers two remedial courses in English to help students
develop writing skills.  Students needing remedial math attend
courses ranging from pre-algebra to intermediate algebra to prepare
them for college math courses.  School A does not limit the number of
remedial courses a student may take; however, it does not permit
students who receive two noncredit grades in a course to re-enroll a
third time. 

School A helps students who need remedial education under two
programs.  The first program, the Student Support Program (SSP),\18
targets low-income first-generation college students.  Most students
enrolled in SSP need remedial coursework. 

School A also conducts a summer program, known as the Summer Bridge
Program (SBP), primarily for Educational Opportunity Program\19
special- admission students.  Students in SBP come from disadvantaged
backgrounds and also are the first generation of their family to
attend college.  The 6-week program is intended to provide students
with a developmental transition from high school to university life. 
SBP, which has about 300 students from diverse cultures, has two core
components:  an academic and a student development core.  The
academic core comprises a general education course, supported by
reading, writing, and study skills components.  The student
development core focuses on personal development, housing, and
physical education.  Both components work together to improve
students in various ways.  For example, students receive help with
time management from both the study group leaders and housing
resident assistants.  Students receive four academic credits for the
general education course, which is not remedial, and three units of
physical education credits. 


--------------------
\17 School A also offers remedial courses in chemistry and speech. 

\18 SSP is part of the Department of Education's TRIO programs.  This
program helps postsecondary students from disadvantaged backgrounds
who need academic support to successfully complete their education. 

\19 The Educational Opportunity Program serves low-income and
underrepresented ethnic students disadvantaged due to their economic
and educational background. 


      DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF
      REMEDIAL STUDENTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.2

In fall 1995, School A's remedial course enrollees were mainly
freshmen, younger and poorer than the school's other students. 
Freshmen accounted for 70 percent of the school's students taking
remedial courses but only 22 percent of all students on campus.  (See
fig.  II.1.) In addition, about 68 percent of School A's students who
registered for remedial courses were under 20 years old.  Moreover,
School A students enrolled in remedial courses had family incomes 10
percent lower than other students ($21,000 compared with $19,000). 

   Figure II.1:  School A--Mostly
   Freshmen Enrolled in Remedial
   Courses

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Note:  Percentages do not add to 100 due to rounding. 

Hispanic students constituted about 42 percent of School A's campus
population but accounted for about 59 percent of its remedial course
enrollees in fall 1995.  In addition, African Americans made up about
9 percent of the school's students, yet accounted for about 11
percent of students enrolled in remedial courses.\20


--------------------
\20 Conversely, Asians, accounting for 25 percent of the student
body, represented only about 18 percent of all students who took
remedial courses.  White students accounted for 12 percent of the
student body and 5 percent of students in such courses. 


   PROFILE OF SCHOOL B
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3

School B, a large, southern, historically black public 4-year
university, has a student body of approximately 7,000 undergraduates. 
We classified School B as a low remedial enrollment (28 percent of
freshmen) and high per capita Pell grant award ($788 average per
student) institution.  About 26 percent of its freshmen--10 percent
of the student body--in fall 1995 participated in a special program
called Retention Enhanced Education Program (REEP) that School B uses
to enhance retention. 

As a historically black institution, School B aims to provide access
to students regardless of whether they took college preparatory
courses in high school.  Its admission standards are relatively
modest, requiring a minimum grade-point average (GPA) of 2.0 and
submission of Scholastic Achievement Test (SAT) or American College
Testing (ACT) scores.  School B's mission states that it will prepare
its students to compete and succeed in various arenas, including the
social, political, commercial, and professional.  To achieve this,
the university offers a broad-based core curriculum consistent with
the needs of its students.  To facilitate its mission and address the
needs of students with academic deficiencies, School B began REEP in
1994.\21 Before REEP, School B offered remedial courses informally
through the school's departments. 


--------------------
\21 Although School B officials did not refer to REEP as a remedial
program, its courses met our definition of remedial education
courses. 


      REEP'S ROLE
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.1

Campus officials described REEP as a comprehensive program that
includes academic advising, mentoring, and other support services. 
REEP is designed for first-time, first-year students; transfer
students may not participate.  REEP is intended to help
intellectually capable students who lacked exposure to typical
academic preparatory courses address any academic deficiencies,
ensuring their retention.  According to campus officials,
fall-to-fall retention of REEP students rose from 58 percent for fall
1994-95 freshmen to 64 percent the following year. 


      IMPLEMENTATION OF REEP
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.2

School B requires all students to take pre-enrollment placement tests
to determine their skill level.  School B assigns students to REEP on
the basis of a combination of placement test results, SAT scores, and
high school GPA and curriculum.  School B tests students
twice--before and after enrollment--to ensure proper placement. 
School B requires students to enter REEP if they fail to meet
standards for these criteria. 

REEP offers three courses:  Math 100, Fundamentals of General
Mathematics; English 100A-B, Introduction to College Communication;
and English 100C-D, Introduction to College Composition.  Students
receive four elective credits for each REEP course, but these courses
do not count toward math or English graduation requirements. 
Students who excel in their REEP courses, however, may take 101-level
coursework while enrolled in REEP.  They may receive 101-level credit
by taking an exam that allows them to register for a 102-level course
the following semester.  Credit for the 101-level course does not
count toward graduation requirements. 

Generally, students have only one opportunity to pass a REEP course. 
To leave the program, REEP students must receive a passing grade in
each course, attain an overall 2.0 GPA, and pass an exit test to show
their competency upon completion of the program. 

In 1996, School B began offering a summer program called REEP Plus. 
Students accepted to School B and identified as likely REEP
candidates are advised to participate in REEP Plus.  REEP Plus offers
math and English courses, as well as seminars that cover topics such
as career planning and time management.  Campus officials said that
REEP Plus helps students acclimate to a university setting.  Although
School B does not require prospective students to enroll in REEP
Plus, those who participate must pass all REEP Plus courses to
matriculate in the fall.  Private and university funds finance REEP
Plus. 


      REEP'S DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.3

REEP students were similar to other first-time freshmen in fall 1995
in age, race, gender, and family income.  REEP students had lower SAT
scores, however.  They averaged an SAT score of 627; freshmen overall
averaged a score of 679. 


   PROFILE OF SCHOOL C
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4

School C is a large, east coast 4-year public institution with a
total undergraduate enrollment of approximately 8,000 in fall 1995. 
We classified School C as a high remedial education enrollment (49
percent of freshmen) and a low per capita Pell grant award ($279
average per student) school.  In the fall 1995 term, 10 percent of
its students enrolled in remedial courses. 

Representatives of School C classified their school as moderately
selective.  Generally, students must have completed college
preparatory courses and submitted SAT or ACT results to be considered
for admission.  To improve access for underrepresented groups,
however, School C has a special admissions program to facilitate
access for nontraditional, minority, and economically disadvantaged
students who do not meet usual academic standards. 

In 1975, School C offered its first remedial course, a writing
course.  By 1977, it had added math and reading and formalized the
program.  School officials said the number of students taking
remedial coursework has declined in the past few years because of
more stringent admissions criteria, a trend they anticipate
continuing.  For example, the portion of the school's incoming
students who enrolled in remedial courses fell from 59 to 46 percent
between fall 1991 and 1996.  Figure II.2 shows how School C's
remedial education enrollment in reading, writing, computation, and
algebra decreased from 1991 to 1996. 

   Figure II.2:  School
   C--Decrease in Need for
   Remedial Coursework

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Along with other services, School C provides remedial education to
improve and strengthen the transition between high school and
college.  In addition, it seeks to increase student retention and
persistence to graduation by creating an integrated academic and
student support service. 


      IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL
      PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.1

School C requires freshmen and students transferring with fewer than
25 college credits to take a statewide pre-enrollment placement test. 
School C requires students to take remedial courses if indicated by
test scores.  Students may challenge reading and math test results by
re-testing, however.  In addition, students enrolled in remedial
writing may forgo the course by writing an essay on the first day of
class, which may place them in a college-level composition course. 

School C limits the length of time students may enroll in remedial
courses.  In general, students must complete their remedial courses
in 1 year.  Special-admission students and those needing remedial
courses in both computation and algebra, however, have an extra year
to complete coursework.  School C suspends students who fail to
complete their coursework in the allotted time.  Once a student is
suspended, he or she has three options to regain good academic
standing:  (1) appeal to the school of major; (2) take courses at
another school; or (3) remain at School C, taking only the needed
remedial courses.  These students must complete these remedial
courses within a year or be dismissed without recourse. 

School C offers support services for all students regardless of their
enrollment in remedial or college-level courses.  It also offers a
summer pre-enrollment program for students in two programs:  the
Educational Opportunity Fund and the Minority Achievement Program.\22
The summer program serves to acclimate students to the college
environment.  According to officials, most of these students need
remedial courses and must attend the summer program to enroll in the
fall.  They only need to show progress in the program, however; they
do not have to pass all courses.  During the program, students
typically take one or two remedial courses as well as a health and
wellness course. 


--------------------
\22 The Minority Achievement Program enrolls qualified minority
applicants on the basis of an evaluation of their secondary school
achievements, recommendations, and assessments of their motivation to
succeed.  The Educational Opportunity Fund provides a college
education to disadvantaged students.  These students are admitted on
criteria, such as financial need and academic promise, rather than
academic achievement alone. 


      DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF
      STUDENTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.2

For the fall 1995 term, remedial enrollments consisted mostly of
freshmen.  (See fig.  II.3.) In addition, racial minorities were
overrepresented in remedial courses compared with their campuswide
enrollments.  Freshmen represented about 82 percent of all remedial
course enrollments, yet only 18 percent of all students on campus. 

   Figure II.3:  School C--Mostly
   Freshmen Enrolled in Remedial
   Courses

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Racial minorities constituted a larger share of students enrolled in
remedial courses compared with their campuswide enrollments. 
Although accounting for only about 19 percent of the total student
body, racial minorities constituted about 42 percent of all remedial
students.  Specifically, African Americans constituted 24 percent of
remedial course enrollees, making up 11 percent of the total student
body.  Likewise, Hispanics and Asians constituted 11 and 7 percent of
the students enrolled in these courses, accounting for only 5 and 3
percent of the total student body, respectively.\23


--------------------
\23 Students enrolled in remedial courses differed little from the
total student body in average age and GPA.  Officials could not
provide income data for remedial course enrollees. 


   PROFILE OF SCHOOL D
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5

School D, a small, private 4-year institution located in the
Mid-Atlantic region, enrolled approximately 4,000 students in fall
1995.  We classified School D as a high remedial enrollment (44
percent of freshmen) and low per capita Pell grant award ($110
average per student) institution on the basis of preliminary data. 
In the fall 1995 term, 7 percent of all students enrolled in remedial
courses. 

School D is a selective institution, granting admission to each of
its six colleges on the basis of academic preparation, achievement,
recommendations, and SAT/ACT scores required for the particular
college.  School D refers some students who do not qualify for
admission, but show potential, to its summer enrichment program. 
This program, designed to help economically disadvantaged students,
also helps the university meet its diversity goals.  School D
automatically admits students who successfully complete this program. 

School D has offered remedial courses since 1970.  Its officials said
School D's mission is to "serve the educational needs of its
students." This includes identifying students' educational needs,
developing programs to meet those needs, and implementing these
programs with credit and noncredit offerings.  School officials view
remedial programs as an integral part of School D's mission. 


      IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL
      PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.1

Once accepted, first-time freshmen take mandatory pre-enrollment
placement tests.  In general, School D does not require transfer
students to take placement tests.  It does require, however, those
who lack courses required by School D to take placement tests. 
Although students do not have to take remedial courses if indicated
by test results, school officials strongly encourage them to. 
Students may appeal for a re-examination if they feel the placement
test results do not reflect their true abilities.  Also, faculty may
recommend students' placement in remedial courses if they have
difficulty with college-level courses. 

School D does not limit the number of remedial courses a student may
take.  Depending on the college, however, students may only apply up
to three remedial credits toward their graduation requirements.  A
total of eight remedial courses are offered, three of which are
intended for international students. 

School D offers a summer enrichment program for applicants who show
academic potential but lack the qualifications for admission.  School
D uses federal and state grants to help finance the program.  The
program's curriculum, which lasts 6-1/2 weeks, consists entirely of
remedial courses.  Though the program is almost 30 years old, school
officials said they began requiring students to enroll in this
program 6 years ago if indicated by their GPA or SAT scores. 
Approximately 90 percent of these students successfully complete the
summer program and are offered admission to School D, officials said,
and about 80 percent eventually matriculate.  According to officials,
an average of 8 percent of their students gained admission through
this program. 


      DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF
      STUDENTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.2

School D enrolled mostly freshmen and males in its remedial courses
in the fall 1995 term.  In addition, racial minorities constituted a
larger share of remedial enrollments compared with their campuswide
enrollments.  (See fig.  II.4.) Freshmen accounted for approximately
92 percent of School D's remedial course enrollees at that time but
only 32 percent of all students on campus.  In addition, males and
minorities constituted a larger share of students enrolled in these
courses compared with their campuswide enrollments.  Although males
made up about 45 percent of the total student body, they accounted
for about 61 percent of the remedial course enrollees.  Similarly,
minorities constituted about 17 percent of the campus population but
32 percent of remedial course enrollees.  Among racial minorities,
African Americans, while accounting for 11 percent of the total
student body, made up about 22 percent of all remedial course
enrollees.  Likewise, Asians made up 4 percent of the undergraduate
enrollees, yet 7 percent of remedial course enrollees. 

   Figure II.4:  School
   D--Remedial and Compuswide
   Enrollments Among Students by
   Race

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Freshmen who enrolled in remedial courses in the fall 1995 term had
lower SAT scores and GPAs than the total freshman class at the time. 
Table II.3 compares SAT scores and GPAs for freshmen who enrolled in
remedial courses with those of the total freshman class. 



                               Table II.3
                
                  Comparison of Average SAT Scores and
                Average GPAs Among Freshmen Enrolled in
                  Remedial Courses and Total Freshman
                      Class at School D, Fall 1995

                                                    Average cumulative
Classification                  Average SAT score   GPA
------------------------------  ------------------  ------------------
All freshmen                    873                 2.59

Freshmen enrolled in remedial   764                 2.36
courses
----------------------------------------------------------------------

   PROFILE OF SCHOOL E
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6

School E is a large, private 4-year university located in the
Northeast with a student body of approximately 9,000.  We categorized
School E as a low remedial enrollment (about 1 percent of freshmen)
and a high per capita Pell grant award ($347 average per student)
institution.  In the fall 1995 term, less than 1 percent of its
students enrolled in remedial courses. 

School E uses highly selective admissions criteria, officials said,
because it chiefly prepares students for technical careers such as
engineering, computer science, and information technology. 
Admissions policies vary by colleges within School E.  In general,
the school considers high school curriculum, rank, and GPA as well as
SAT/ACT scores for admitting students.  As a rule, School E does not
accept students who do not meet these criteria; however, it
occasionally makes exceptions on a case-by-case basis.  For example,
School E admits some nontraditional students without normally
required college entrance examinations at the discretion of the
director of admissions.  These cases constitute less than 2 percent
of total freshman applicants, officials said. 

According to campus officials, because School E's mission is to
prepare students for careers in technical professions, it does not
consider remedial education a formal part of its mission.  It does
offer remedial courses, however, for students who encounter academic
difficulty through a program known as the College Restoration Program
(CRP), which began in 1972.  Before that, School E only offered its
less formal, noncredit supplemental courses for students on a walk-in
basis. 


      IMPLEMENTATION OF CRP
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.1

CRP is intended to address problems that inhibit academic success. 
Enrollment in CRP is optional for students on academic probation, but
suspended students cannot continue at the school without enrolling in
CRP.  School E reclassifies students as freshmen once enrolled in
CRP, regardless of their previous classification.  Students must
complete CRP courses in one quarter. 

The typical courseload for CRP students includes about five remedial
courses and one to two college-level courses.  CRP courses do not
count toward graduation requirements.  Five CRP courses cover topics
such as learning theory, study skills, time management, personal
development, and career exploration.  The remaining two classes cover
remedial English and math.  The English course covers topics such as
grammar, reading, writing, and critical thinking.  The math course,
specific to each student's major and proficiency, includes
precalculus, Calculus I to IV, and differential equations. 

School E provides special mentors for CRP students, a key component
of CRP, according to officials.  Faculty members mentor students at
weekly meetings, where students can discuss their progress.  Mentors
make recommendations on the students' placement once CRP ends. 
Approximately 65 to 70 percent of CRP students either return to their
original program or transfer to a new one. 


      DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF
      STUDENTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.2

In the fall 1995 term, racial minorities constituted a larger share
of students enrolled in CRP compared with their campuswide
enrollments.  Racial minorities accounted for only 23 percent of the
freshman class but constituted 48 percent of CRP students.  Asians
accounted for 17 percent of CRP students, making up about 5 percent
of the freshman class.  In addition, African Americans and Hispanics
made up 13 and 9 percent of CRP students, respectively, while
accounting for 5 and 3 percent of the total freshman class,
respectively. 


      GRADUATION RATE AND
      ATTAINMENT STATISTICS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.3

An analysis by School E showed that CRP students had lower graduation
rates and took longer to graduate than other students.\24 The study
reported that CRP students had a 29-percent graduation rate compared
with 61 percent for others.  The study also found that students who
enrolled in remedial courses took a year longer than other students
to graduate.  Officials attributed this difference to the remedial
courses taken in addition to courses required by their curriculum. 


--------------------
\24 Data provided on the basis of a study of freshmen who entered
School E from 1987 through 1989. 


   PROFILE OF SCHOOL F
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:7

School F is a small, private 4-year institution located in a large,
midwestern urban area.  We classified School F as a high remedial
enrollment (90 percent of freshmen) and high per capita Pell grant
award ($350 average per student) institution.  Of School F's
approximately 1,000 students, about 12 percent enrolled in remedial
courses in fall 1995. 

School F accepts three types of students--high school graduates,
nontransfer students, and transfer students--and the admissions
criteria vary for each.  High school graduates, those entering
directly after completing high school, must have a GPA of at least
2.5 and score at least 850 on the SAT or 18 on the ACT.  Those not
meeting these criteria must take a placement test, which is used for
both admissions and course-level placements.  Nontransfer students,
those entering after being out of high school at least a year, but
who have never attended college, must take the placement test to
matriculate, regardless of their high school GPA and SAT/ACT scores. 
Finally, transfer students--those entering who attended another
college and transferred into School F with the equivalent of 24
semester hours and a minimum college GPA of 2.0--may transfer without
taking the placement test; those not meeting both of these
requirements must take the test to matriculate.  Finally, all
students must pass the state proficiency test to attend. 

Its officials said School F's mission is to educate eligible students
with diverse backgrounds, talents, and experiences to enter into, and
advance in, professional business careers and to fulfill personal
potential.  School F's mission statement does not specifically refer
to the provision of remedial coursework.  Because School F
administers remedial courses through the federal Student Support
Services (SSS)\25 program, however, the program supports the school's
mission to serve students from diverse backgrounds. 

School F began offering remedial courses in the mid-1950s, first
offering remedial composition and math.  School F began offering
credit for these courses in 1974, adding remedial reading by 1976. 
In fall term 1977, School F began receiving federal funding for these
courses through SSS. 


--------------------
\25 SSS is the same federal program as the aforementioned SSP program
at School A; however, Schools A and E use different names for the
program. 


      IMPLEMENTATION OF SSS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.1

After testing students in math, English, and writing, School F
accepts students and places them into either college-level or
remedial courses.  Although School F does not require enrollment in
remedial courses if indicated through testing, the school strongly
encourages students to do so. 

SSS uses a two-tier approach.  Generally, students placed in the
first tier require two semesters of remedial coursework; those in the
second tier require only one.  First-tier students take only remedial
courses in their first semester.  In contrast, second-tier students
enroll in college-level and remedial courses in their first semester. 
Though students can earn 3 credits for each remedial course, School F
only accepts 12 credits in remedial courses toward elective
requirements for graduation.  The school's credit policy for remedial
courses has vacillated, switching between allowing degree credit and
not doing so for several years.  Officials said they decided to offer
degree credit because students took exception to paying for classes
without receiving credits. 

School F limits the number of times a student may repeat a remedial
course.  Students who anticipate difficulty with a course may choose
a pass/fail option rather than receive a conventional letter grade. 
This allows them to repeat the course without having their first
attempt adversely affect their GPA.  In addition, students may earn a
"P" or "progress" grade in SSS courses.  This indicates that the
student, while progressing satisfactorily in study skills, has not
yet mastered the subject area.  The P grade does not count in
computing the GPA but does count in determining financial aid
eligibility.  Generally, a student may receive a P only twice, with
exceptions granted by the SSS director. 

The school's affiliation with the TRIO program requires it to provide
some specific services to SSS students until they graduate to receive
federal funding, officials said.  For example, School F's part-time
faculty members or tutors provide tutoring on a regular basis in
English, math, and accounting.  Other services include counseling,
academic advising, and peer helpers.  Although the Department of
Education and School F fund these services for SSS students, the
school subsidizes the entire cost of tutoring and counseling for
nonparticipants in SSS. 


      DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF
      STUDENTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.2

SSS students predominately consisted of freshmen and racial
minorities.  Freshmen made up approximately 51 percent of SSS
students in the fall 1995 term, yet only 35 percent of all students
on campus.  Racial minorities constituted a larger share of students
enrolled in these courses compared with their campuswide enrollments,
making up 42 percent of the total student body but 87 percent of SSS
students.  African Americans had the largest representation,
accounting for up 81 percent of SSS students but constituting only
about 39 percent of the total student body. 

Although the school officials could not provide data on graduation
rates for students enrolled in remedial courses, they said these
students usually take 5 to 6 years to graduate.  They explained that
the school has many part-time students, however, who have no
intention of finishing in 4 years. 


   PROFILE OF SCHOOL G
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:8

School G is a large community college located in a midwestern urban
area.  We classified School G as a high remedial enrollment (60
percent of freshmen) and a high per capita Pell grant award ($1,134
average per student) institution.  Our survey found that
approximately 25 percent of the school's 6,700 students enrolled in
remedial courses in fall 1995. 

As a community college, School G has an open-admissions policy. 
Certain programs, such as allied health sciences, have selective
admissions, however.  In these cases, the state requires a high
school or general equivalency diploma (GED) for admission.  Students
may apply to these vocational and technical programs after enrolling
in School G and meeting certain curricular requirements. 

School G's officials told us that remedial education is central to
the school's mission, especially in providing access to its
vocational and technical programs.  As such, the school's mission
statement specifically refers to providing remedial education to meet
the educational needs of its students. 


      IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL
      PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:8.1

School G administers a pre-enrollment placement test to all entering
students seeking a degree or certificate; continuing education,
international, and transfer students are not tested.  Transfer
students are placed in college-level courses according to test scores
from previous institutions or by achieving a C or better in math,
English, and writing courses.  School G does not require students to
take remedial courses even if test scores indicate the need.  The
school encourages students to do so, and most students follow this
advice, officials said.  Counselors also work with students to make
sure they take the needed courses. 

School G's remedial education curriculum consists of five English,
one basic science, and four math courses.  Students enrolled in the
English courses have reading proficiencies that range from the fourth
to the twelfth grade level.  Math courses address basic math through
intermediate algebra.  The typical courseload for students consists
of one ninth grade level reading course, one writing course, and
elementary algebra.  Students receive three credits each for these
courses, which, in some programs, may count toward graduation
requirements. 

School G's services are open to all students; none are set aside for
students enrolled in remedial courses. 


   PROFILE OF SCHOOL H
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:9

School H is a large, northwestern public 2-year institution, which
enrolled approximately 9,000 students in fall 1995.  We classified
School H as a high remedial enrollment (63 percent of freshmen) and a
low per capita Pell grant award ($220 average per student)
institution.  About 10 percent of its students enrolled in at least
one remedial course in the fall 1995 term. 

School H has an open-admissions policy, with no requirements for high
school curriculum or GPA or SAT/ACT scores.\26 As such, School H
provides remedial courses to help students achieve success in
postsecondary education, officials told us.  In fact, School H's
mission statement specifically mentions providing remedial coursework
to ensure success and address students' varying needs.  Furthermore,
School H's mission statement specifically states that it will provide
remedial education to help students begin college-level coursework. 
School H has offered remedial instruction since 1962.  Enrollments in
these courses have always been high, officials said, and they expect
that to continue. 


--------------------
\26 To receive financial aid, students at School H must have a high
school diploma or GED or pass an approved Department of Education
Ability to Benefit test. 


      IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL
      PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:9.1

School H uses a variety of ways to determine the appropriate
placement for its students.  First, it requires students entering
degree or certificate programs to complete an assessment of their
reading, writing, and math skills.  In addition, all entering
students who have not completed college- level English at another
accredited college or university and all students completing English
as a Second Language take placement tests.  Furthermore, enrollment
in all but one math course requires one or more placement tests. 
School H requires students to take remedial courses if test scores
indicate the need.  Also, School H students enrolled in remedial
writing courses must pass a post-test before enrolling in
college-level courses. 

Depending on how many remedial courses students need, students may
require one or more quarters of remedial coursework to improve their
proficiency, according to school officials.  Because students must
take remedial courses sequentially, students needing a lot of such
courses take longer to complete them.  According to officials,
however, most students take college-level coursework while enrolled
in remedial courses.  For example, students needing remedial math may
be enrolled in humanities courses.  Therefore, students earn credits
toward graduation for college- level courses while taking remedial
courses.  All remedial courses are worth five institutional credits,
and School H does not limit the remedial courses its students may
take. 

School H's remedial education curriculum focuses on English and math. 
It offers seven remedial math courses, including basic math skills,
preparatory math, elementary algebra, and algebra review/intermediate
algebra.  According to officials, about 85 percent of all students
who took the math placement test needed remedial math in fall 1995. 
In addition, School H offers eight remedial courses in English, which
start at the tenth grade level.  Courses include various levels of
reading, study skills, and writing.  In addition, students enrolled
in remedial English courses must concurrently enroll in a language
lab to get additional help with their coursework.  In the language
lab, students receive help both individually and in small groups,
along with computer-assisted instruction.  Students receive two
institutional credits for the language lab.  About 50 percent of all
students who took the English placement test needed remedial English
in fall 1995. 


   PROFILE OF SCHOOL I
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10

School I is a large, midwestern public 2-year institution.  We
classified School I as a low remedial enrollment (26 percent of
freshmen) and a high per capita Pell grant award ($487 average per
student) institution.  Of approximately 10,000 students attending in
fall 1995, about 12 percent took remedial coursework. 

As a community college, School I has an open-admissions policy,
automatically admitting applicants with high school diplomas and
non-high school graduates 19 years of age and older.  Applicants
under 19 years old who are not high school graduates must have a
GED.\27

School I's remedial education program helps promote access to higher
education, according to school officials.  The school began offering
remedial courses in 1956, first offering refresher courses for math
and English.  By the 1958-59 academic year, School I expanded course
offerings to include basic writing and reading and beginning algebra. 
Through remedial coursework, students gain the skills needed to enter
4-year institutions or the workplace, officials said.  Remedial
courses not only provide basic skills, but also increase students'
self-confidence, according to officials. 


--------------------
\27 School I also has admission criteria for high school students
seeking dual enrollment in high school and college. 


      IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL
      PROGRAMS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.1

School I administers mandatory placement tests to all entering
students before they register for classes, including transfer
students with fewer than 30 credits.  Once test scores are tabulated,
advisers or counselors meet with students to make recommendations
regarding placement.  School I does not require students to enroll in
remedial courses if test scores indicate the need; however, most
students follow the advisers' recommendations. 

In fall 1995, School I offered six remedial courses in English and
three in math.  Each English course is worth 3 credits, and students
may elect to use up to 12 remedial credits as electives.  Among the
English courses, areas covered include spelling, reading, basic
English, basic sentence skills, and basic writing.  The proficiency
level for the reading courses begins at the fifth grade.  Of the math
courses, one primarily serves liberal arts students, for which
students may receive a satisfactory or unsatisfactory grade.  This
course, worth five credits and meeting weekly for 5 contact hours,
covers whole number operations, fractions, and equations.  The
remaining courses--applied mathematics and introductory technical
algebra--serve students in technical-vocational programs. 

The applied mathematics course helps students with the typical
mathematical problem-solving needs of the technical/trade area. 
Course topics include fractions, decimals, measurement, signed
numbers, geometry, and trigonometric functions.  Students earn three
credits and meet weekly for 4 contact hours for this course. 
Introductory technical algebra covers the fundamental concepts in
algebra, linear equations, quadratic equations, and geometric
equations.  Students earn four credits and meet weekly for 4 contact
hours for this course.  Students receive a grade for these courses,
although grades are generally not transferable. 

School I has no limits on the number of remedial courses a student
may take.  It does limit students, however, to three opportunities to
repeat a course if they do not initially succeed.  After that, to
enroll in the course, students must have a counselor's written
approval.  Nonetheless, students only earn credit for taking the
course once.  The grade earned during their final attempt, which
supplants all earlier attempts, is the only grade that affects their
GPA if students earn grades in the course.  School I also has a
policy requiring students to complete remedial coursework before
earning no more than 22 hours of credit at the school.  The school
does not rigorously enforce this policy at this time, however,
officials said. 

School I offers several services for all of its students.  None
specifically serves those who enroll in remedial courses. 


      DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF
      STUDENTS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.2

Both freshmen and racial minorities constituted a larger share of
School I's remedial course enrollments compared with their campuswide
enrollments in fall 1995.  Freshmen accounted for approximately 94
percent of all remedial course enrollees but only 68 percent of all
students on campus.  In addition, racial minorities constituted 20
percent of the student body, yet 35 percent of students enrolled in
remedial courses. 


GAO CONTACTS AND STAFF
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
========================================================= Appendix III


   GAO CONTACTS
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:1

Joseph J.  Eglin, Jr., Assistant Director, (202) 512-7009
Tamara A.  Lumpkin, Evaluator-in-Charge, (202) 512-5699
James W.  Spaulding, Senior Evaluator, (202) 512-7035


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:2

The following team members contributed significantly to this report: 
Wayne B.  Upshaw, Assistant Director; Charles J.  Appel, Benjamin F. 
Jordan, Jr., Nancy Kintner-Meyer, Gene Kuehneman, Arthur Merriam,
Carol Patey, and Timothy Silva, senior evaluators; Catherine Baltzell
and Wayne Dow, methodologists; Daniel Schwimer, attorney; and Brady
Goldsmith, summer intern. 

*** End of document. ***