Skip to main content

Where everyone gets a scholarship

I started with an interesting question: How many private colleges and universities in the country give everyone--100% of freshman--some type of institutional aid?

It was easy to get the answer: 183 of the 1,066 who have enough data in IPEDS to calculate such things. That's 17%. For some, it's understandable: Berea College, Cooper Union, the College of the Ozarks, or Olin, for instance.  They all have special populations and special funding models.  But what about the others?

I arrayed the world of private, not-for-profits on a scatter chart, on top. The x-axis is calculated mean ACT scores (the average of the 25th and 75th percentile as reported in IPEDS).  The y-axis is the draw rate, which is yield rate divided by admit rate.  It's a power measure of market position, notwithstanding some very small non-selective institutions report bad data to IPEDS that makes their draw look high.  (The average draw is about .7, for instance; but Harvard's is 14, and Stanford's is 10.5).

The bubbles are colored by a ratio: The numerator is the average amount of aid for aided students; the denominator is the average aid for all students enrolling.  If everyone gets a scholarship, that ratio is 1:1; if fewer students get aid and the aid is a small amount, it's higher.  I capped it at 3:1.

You can use the filters to look at a smaller group: Region, state, draw rates, religious affiliation, percent aided, or any variables in any combination.  If you want to see the institutions where every single freshman gets a scholarship, you can simply look at the bar charts at bottom, where that information is displayed. They're sorted by IPEDS ID because different colleges often have the same name.

And note: I started with just bachelor's, master's, and doctoral/research institutions, but if you want to add other types, use the Carnegie filter.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Highly Rejective Colleges

If you're not following Akil Bello on Twitter, you should be.  His timeline is filled with great insights about standardized testing, and he takes great effort to point out racism (both subtle and not-so-subtle) in higher education, all while throwing in references to the Knicks and his daughter Enid, making the experience interesting, compelling, and sometimes, fun. Recently, he created the term " highly rejective colleges " as a more apt description for what are otherwise called "highly selective colleges."  As I've said before, a college that admits 15% of applicants really has a rejections office, not an admissions office.  The term appears to have taken off on Twitter, and I hope it will stick. So I took a look at the highly rejectives (really, that's all I'm going to call them from now on) and found some interesting patterns in the data. Take a look:  The 1,132 four-year, private colleges and universities with admissions data in IPEDS are incl

Freshman Migration, 1986 to 2020

(Note: I discovered that in IPEDS, Penn State Main Campus now reports with "The Pennsylvania State University" as one system.  So when you'd look at things over time, Penn State would have data until 2018, and then The Penn....etc would show up in 2020.  I found out Penn State main campus still reports its own data on the website, so I went there, and edited the IPEDS data by hand.  So if you noticed that error, it should be corrected now, but I'm not sure what I'll do in years going forward.) Freshman migration to and from the states is always a favorite visualization of mine, both because I find it a compelling and interesting topic, and because I had a few breakthroughs with calculated variables the first time I tried to do it. If you're a loyal reader, you know what this shows: The number of freshman and their movement between the states.  And if you're a loyal viewer and you use this for your work in your business, please consider supporting the costs

Yes, your yield rate is still falling, v 2020

I started doing this post on a regular basis several years ago, in response (if I recall) to a colleague talking about their Board of Trustees Chair insisting that "all we need to do" to bring enrollment back to its former level is to get the yield rate up.   That's the equivalent of saying all you need to do is straighten your drives and cut ten putts from each round, and you'll be a great golfer.  Moreover, it's based on the assumption that a falling yield rate is based on something you're doing or not doing.  The challenge is much larger, and a lot harder to address.  It's not a switch you flip. So we've got this: A look at applications, admits, and enrolls over the last twenty years, and three key ratios that are based on those numbers: Admit rate, or the percentage of applicants offered admission; yield rate, or the percentage of those offered admission who enroll; and the lesser-known draw rate, which is calculated by dividing the yield rate by t