The power of certainty: Experimental evidence on the effective design of free tuition programs
Burland, E., Dynarski, S., Michelmore, K., Owen, S., & Raghuraman, S. (2023). American Economic Review: Insights, 5(3), 293-310.
-
examining1,205Students, grade12
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2025
- Single Study Review (findings for Go Blue Encouragement)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Applied to University of Michigan |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
43.60 |
35.40 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Admitted to University of Michigan |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
25.50 |
23.00 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Admitted to University of Michigan |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
25.50 |
32.60 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Applied to University of Michigan |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
43.60 |
63.40 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Enrolled at University of Michigan |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
18.20 |
17.40 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any college |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
79.80 |
79.60 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled at a highly competitive college (other than University of Michigan) |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
3.70 |
3.90 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Enrolled in any 2-year college |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
8.30 |
7.10 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any 2-year college |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
8.30 |
7.30 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any 4-year college |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
71.50 |
72.40 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any college |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
79.80 |
83.70 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any 4-year college |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
71.50 |
76.30 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled at a highly competitive college (other than University of Michigan) |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
3.70 |
4.90 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled at University of Michigan |
Go Blue Encouragement vs. High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
18.20 |
26.00 |
Yes |
|
||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 56%
Other or unknown: 44% -
Rural, Suburban, Town, Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Michigan
-
Race Asian 8% Black 9% Native American 2% White 82% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 7% Other or unknown 93% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 477 public high schools across Michigan. The locations of the schools included urban, suburban, and rural areas.
Study sample
Students were eligible for the study if they were high-achieving and low-income high school seniors. These terms were defined by the researchers as including students with SAT scores of at least 1100, a GPA average of a B or higher, and a family income below 185 percent of the federal poverty line. The researchers randomly assigned 159 schools to each of three intervention conditions, with approximately 1,796 students meeting these academic and income criteria. The sample was overwhelmingly White (82%) and mostly rural (53%). A slight majority of students in the sample were female (56%). All students in the study were eligible for the free- or reduced-price meal program.
Intervention Group
The Go Blue Guarantee offers free tuition to the University of Michigan (UM) to in-state admitted students who apply for financial aid and fall below specified income and asset levels. In this study, an informational brochure about this program is the focal intervention. Eligible students in each school were mailed an informational brochure explaining the Go Blue Guarantee financial aid program and encouraging them to apply. In addition, principals received an email explaining the program, a list of eligible students, and encouragement to share this information with their staff members who supported students with college applications. Two weeks after the brochure mailing, parents received a letter explaining the program which provided encouragement to support their child in applying. The second intervention condition in this study is High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL). HAIL is a financial aid program offered by UM that promises free tuition and four years of aid without the requirement of demonstrating financial need. In this condition, eligible students received a similar brochure but explaining HAIL and a conditional offer of free tuition for students that successfully apply to UM.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group schools received brochures encouraging them to apply to the University of Michigan but did not receive an offer of tuition assistance from HAIL or a brochure about the Go Blue Guarantee program.
Support for implementation
The intervention was conducted by the Office of Enrollment Management at the University of Michigan, which had access to administrative data through which to identify eligible students.
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2025
- Single Study Review (findings for High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Applied to University of Michigan |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
63.40 |
35.40 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Admitted to University of Michigan |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
32.60 |
23.00 |
Yes |
|
||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Applied to University of Michigan |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Go Blue Encouragement |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
63.40 |
43.60 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Admitted to University of Michigan |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Go Blue Encouragement |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
32.60 |
25.50 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Enrolled at University of Michigan |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
26.00 |
17.40 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Enrolled in any college |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
83.70 |
79.60 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled at a highly competitive college (other than University of Michigan) |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
4.90 |
3.90 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Enrolled at University of Michigan |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Go Blue Encouragement |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
26.00 |
18.20 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Enrolled at a highly competitive college (other than University of Michigan) |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Go Blue Encouragement |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
4.90 |
3.70 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any 4-year college |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Go Blue Encouragement |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
76.30 |
71.50 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any college |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Go Blue Encouragement |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
83.70 |
79.80 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any 4-year college |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
76.30 |
72.40 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any 2-year college |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Business as usual |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
7.30 |
7.10 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrolled in any 2-year college |
High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) vs. Go Blue Encouragement |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
7.30 |
8.30 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 56%
Other or unknown: 44% -
Rural, Suburban, Town, Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Michigan
-
Race Asian 8% Black 9% Native American 2% White 82% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 7% Other or unknown 93% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 477 public high schools across Michigan. The locations of the schools included urban, suburban, and rural areas.
Study sample
Students were eligible for the study if they were high-achieving and low-income high school seniors. These terms were defined by the researchers as including students with SAT scores of at least 1100, a GPA average of a B or higher, and a family income below 185 percent of the federal poverty line. The researchers randomly assigned 159 schools to each of three intervention conditions, with approximately 1,796 students meeting these academic and income criteria. The sample was overwhelmingly White (82%) and mostly rural (53%). A slight majority of students in the sample were female (56%). All students in the study were eligible for the free- or reduced-price meal program.
Intervention Group
The High Achieving Involved Leader (HAIL) Scholarship is the focal intervention in this review. HAIL is a financial aid program offered by the University of Michigan (UM) Ann Arbor that promises free tuition and four years of aid without the requirement of demonstrating financial need for students who successfully apply to UM. HAIL is aimed at helping lower income, high-achieving students. In this study, eligible students in each school were mailed a recruitment brochure about HAIL in the early fall preceding anticipated high school graduation. In addition, principals received an email explaining the program, a list of eligible students, and encouragement to share this information with their staff members who supported students with college applications. Two weeks after the brochure mailing, parents received a letter explaining the program which provided encouragement to support their child in applying. The second intervention condition in this study is Go Blue Encouragement. In this condition, eligible students received a similar brochure as the HAIL program. This letter described a state program called Go Blue Guarantee, a need-based tuition-assistance program with eligibility determined through students' submission of a FAFSA. Students in this condition therefore were informed about the existence of a state aid program offering tuition assistance to UM Ann Arbor, but were not offered free tuition.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group schools received brochures encouraging them to apply to the University of Michigan but did not receive an offer of tuition assistance from HAIL or a brochure about the Go Blue Guarantee program.
Support for implementation
The intervention was conducted by the Office of Enrollment Management at the University of Michigan, which had access to administrative data through which to identify eligible students.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, statistical significance, and sample size of the findings within a domain, the WWC assigns effectiveness ratings as one of the following: Tier 1 (strong evidence), Tier 2 (moderate evidence), Tier 3 (promising evidence), uncertain effects, and negative effects. For more detail, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).