Cost of higher education: For-profit universities and online learning

Tatyana Guzman, Maureen A. Pirog, Haeil Jung

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The Higher Education Reauthorization Act (HERA) of 2006 eliminated so called the “50 percent rule” that prohibited students enrolled in post-secondary institutions offering 50% or more of their courses exclusively online to receive any federal financial aid (Title IV aid). In this paper we study the net cost of attending colleges and additionally test for so-called “Bennett” hypothesis that assumes that the Title IV aid, that became available after elimination of 50% rule, might have been captured by institutions that could increase tuition and fees and lower the amount and availability of the institutional grants to students. We study the net costs, tuition and fees, and institutional aid for students who study exclusively online, students in for-profit colleges in which exclusive online education is more heavily concentrated, and students who study exclusively online at for-profit universities before and after the elimination of 50% rule. We find a partial support for Bennett hypothesis for profit, but not exclusively online students.

Original languageEnglish
JournalSocial Science Journal
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019 Jan 1

Fingerprint

profit
Learning
Students
Education
Costs and Cost Analysis
university
costs
learning
education
Fees and Charges
student
fee
Government Financing
financial aid
Organized Financing
grant
act

Keywords

  • Bennett hypothesis
  • For-profit colleges
  • Institutional grants
  • Net cost
  • Online education
  • Tuition and fees

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Cost of higher education : For-profit universities and online learning. / Guzman, Tatyana; Pirog, Maureen A.; Jung, Haeil.

In: Social Science Journal, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{63acc84ffa444695a7b0c82c1a2cfd65,
title = "Cost of higher education: For-profit universities and online learning",
abstract = "The Higher Education Reauthorization Act (HERA) of 2006 eliminated so called the “50 percent rule” that prohibited students enrolled in post-secondary institutions offering 50{\%} or more of their courses exclusively online to receive any federal financial aid (Title IV aid). In this paper we study the net cost of attending colleges and additionally test for so-called “Bennett” hypothesis that assumes that the Title IV aid, that became available after elimination of 50{\%} rule, might have been captured by institutions that could increase tuition and fees and lower the amount and availability of the institutional grants to students. We study the net costs, tuition and fees, and institutional aid for students who study exclusively online, students in for-profit colleges in which exclusive online education is more heavily concentrated, and students who study exclusively online at for-profit universities before and after the elimination of 50{\%} rule. We find a partial support for Bennett hypothesis for profit, but not exclusively online students.",
keywords = "Bennett hypothesis, For-profit colleges, Institutional grants, Net cost, Online education, Tuition and fees",
author = "Tatyana Guzman and Pirog, {Maureen A.} and Haeil Jung",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.soscij.2019.03.010",
language = "English",
journal = "Social Science Journal",
issn = "0362-3319",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost of higher education

T2 - For-profit universities and online learning

AU - Guzman, Tatyana

AU - Pirog, Maureen A.

AU - Jung, Haeil

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - The Higher Education Reauthorization Act (HERA) of 2006 eliminated so called the “50 percent rule” that prohibited students enrolled in post-secondary institutions offering 50% or more of their courses exclusively online to receive any federal financial aid (Title IV aid). In this paper we study the net cost of attending colleges and additionally test for so-called “Bennett” hypothesis that assumes that the Title IV aid, that became available after elimination of 50% rule, might have been captured by institutions that could increase tuition and fees and lower the amount and availability of the institutional grants to students. We study the net costs, tuition and fees, and institutional aid for students who study exclusively online, students in for-profit colleges in which exclusive online education is more heavily concentrated, and students who study exclusively online at for-profit universities before and after the elimination of 50% rule. We find a partial support for Bennett hypothesis for profit, but not exclusively online students.

AB - The Higher Education Reauthorization Act (HERA) of 2006 eliminated so called the “50 percent rule” that prohibited students enrolled in post-secondary institutions offering 50% or more of their courses exclusively online to receive any federal financial aid (Title IV aid). In this paper we study the net cost of attending colleges and additionally test for so-called “Bennett” hypothesis that assumes that the Title IV aid, that became available after elimination of 50% rule, might have been captured by institutions that could increase tuition and fees and lower the amount and availability of the institutional grants to students. We study the net costs, tuition and fees, and institutional aid for students who study exclusively online, students in for-profit colleges in which exclusive online education is more heavily concentrated, and students who study exclusively online at for-profit universities before and after the elimination of 50% rule. We find a partial support for Bennett hypothesis for profit, but not exclusively online students.

KW - Bennett hypothesis

KW - For-profit colleges

KW - Institutional grants

KW - Net cost

KW - Online education

KW - Tuition and fees

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063737673&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063737673&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.soscij.2019.03.010

DO - 10.1016/j.soscij.2019.03.010

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85063737673

JO - Social Science Journal

JF - Social Science Journal

SN - 0362-3319

ER -