Carlson, Deven E.; Elwert, Felix; Hillman, Nicholas; Schmidt, Alex; Wolfe, Barbara L. (2019). National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED604461
Reviewed: September 2021
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
First-Year GPA |
Wisconsin Scholars Grant (WSG) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
4-year university sample (all cohorts);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Post-BA enrollment |
Wisconsin Scholars Grant (WSG) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
4-Year University students in the following cohorts: 2009-10 through 2013-14.;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
in-state earnings |
Wisconsin Scholars Grant (WSG) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
4-Year University students in the following cohorts: 2009-10; 2010-11; 2011-12; 2012-13.;
|
13319.60 |
13709.98 |
No |
-- | |
|
in-state earnings |
Wisconsin Scholars Grant (WSG) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
2-Year Institution students in the following cohorts: 2009-10 through 2014-15.;
|
12726.22 |
12669.79 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
in-state employment |
Wisconsin Scholars Grant (WSG) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
2-Year Institution students in the following cohorts: 2009-10 through 2014-15.;
|
87.70 |
87.80 |
No |
-- | |
|
in-state employment |
Wisconsin Scholars Grant (WSG) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
4-Year University students in the following cohorts: 2009-10; 2010-11; 2011-12; 2012-13.;
|
80.80 |
81.40 |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Other or unknown | 23% | |
| White | 77% |
The study was conducted in postsecondary institutions in Wisconsin including all four-year universities, two-year colleges and two-year technical colleges that are part of the of University of Wisconsin System or the Wisconsin Technical College System.
Within four-year institutions, 4,568 students were randomly assigned to the Fund for Wisconsin Scholars (FFWS) offer intervention group and 29,653 students were randomly assigned to the No FFWS offer comparison group. Within two-year institutions, for the first six cohorts, 3,918 students were randomly assigned to the FFWS offer intervention group and 13,279 students were randomly assigned to the No FFWS offer comparison group. Of the study sample, 77% of students were white; 55% were female; 9% were ever English language learners; and 20% received Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits.
The Fund for Wisconsin Scholars (FFWS) grant provided up to $4,000 per year for students at four-year institutions and $1,800 per year for students at two-year institutions. FFWS is designed as a “last-dollar” aid program, meaning that it is designed to satisfy unmet financial need and, for a given student, will only be applied after all other sources of grant aid have been exhausted. Students do not directly apply for the FFWS grant. Rather, early in the fall of each academic year, every institution with the potential to enroll eligible students uses internal data to identify all newly eligible students who meet the award criteria. The institutions then send their lists of eligible students to the Wisconsin Higher Educational Aids Board (HEAB), which randomly assigns students to receive a FFWS grant offer.
Students in the comparison condition were eligible to receive an FFWS grant but did not receive an offer. These students could have received other financial assistance through other grant programs.
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, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, 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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube