IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/buecrs/v54y2002i4p393-407.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Good, the Poor and the Wealthy: Who Responds Most to College Financial Aid?

Author

Listed:
  • Singell, Larry D, Jr
  • Stone, Joe A

Abstract

Financial aid programmes for students in the United States focus increasingly on academic merit, rather than financial need. There is little empirical evidence, however, on the distributional effects of merit-based aid--who benefits or responds most. We develop a bivariate probit model of the enrolment process estimated using data for a large public university over several years. Results show that merit-based aid increases enrolment for all students, but that financially-able students respond disproportionately, even with academic merit held constant. Thus, increased emphasis on merit in financial aid may exacerbate the trend toward greater income inequality in the US, even among students of equal academic merit. Copyright 2002 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the Board of Trustees of the Bulletin of Economic Research

Suggested Citation

  • Singell, Larry D, Jr & Stone, Joe A, 2002. "The Good, the Poor and the Wealthy: Who Responds Most to College Financial Aid?," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 393-407, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:buecrs:v:54:y:2002:i:4:p:393-407
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eric Bettinger & Oded Gurantz & Laura Kawano & Bruce Sacerdote, 2016. "The Long Run Impacts of Merit Aid: Evidence from California’s Cal Grant," NBER Working Papers 22347, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Stone, Joe A., 2016. "A Poison Pell for Public Colleges? Pell Grants and Funding for Public Colleges in the U. S," MPRA Paper 71761, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Singell, Larry Jr., 2004. "Come and stay a while: does financial aid effect retention conditioned on enrollment at a large public university?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 459-471, October.
    4. Eckhard Janeba & Alexander Kemnitz & Nick Ehrhart, 2007. "Studiengebühren in Deutschland: Drei Thesen und ihr empirischer Gehalt," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 8(2), pages 184-205, March.
    5. Monks, James, 2009. "The impact of merit-based financial aid on college enrollment: A field experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 99-106, February.
    6. Elisa Rose Birch & Paul W Miller, 2007. "The Characteristics of ‘Gap‐Year’ Students and Their Tertiary Academic Outcomes," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 83(262), pages 329-344, September.
    7. Meneses, Francisco & Blanco, Christian, 2010. "Financial Aid and Higher Education Enrollment in Chile: A Government Policy Analysis," MPRA Paper 23321, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Larry D. Singell & Glen R. Waddell & Bradley R. Curs, 2006. "HOPE for the Pell? Institutional Effects in the Intersection of Merit‐Based and Need‐Based Aid," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 73(1), pages 79-99, July.
    9. Blanco, Christian & Meneses, Francisco, 2013. "Impacto de la ayuda financiera en la matrícula técnica y universitaria [Impact of financial aid in higher education enrollment in Chile]," MPRA Paper 32025, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Oct 2012.
    10. Griffith, Amanda L., 2011. "Keeping up with the Joneses: Institutional changes following the adoption of a merit aid policy," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 1022-1033, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:buecrs:v:54:y:2002:i:4:p:393-407. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0307-3378 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.