[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-603013-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-603013-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","unmet-need-evaluating-pell-as-a-lever-for-equitable-dual-enrollment-participation-and-outcomes","Unmet Need - Evaluating Pell as a Lever for Equitable Dual Enrollment Participation and Outcomes","","Evaluating Pell as a lever for equitable dual enrollment participation and outcomes, this study analyzes a federal pilot program that enabled eligible high school students to use Pell Grants for dual enrollment coursework. Using a difference-in-differences design, the research finds the pilot reduced dual enrollment participation while showing no impact on subsequent college attendance. Qualitative evidence indicates the initiative fell short of students’ specific needs, required strong school partnerships for counselor outreach, and created substantial financial and administrative burdens for participating institutions.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/unmet-need-evaluating-pell-as-a-lever-for-equitable-dual-enrollment-participation-and-outcomes/603013/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/unmet-need-evaluating-pell-as-a-lever-for-equitable-dual-enrollment-participation-and-outcomes/603013.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"MrHarris58","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",5,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the main focus of the study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The study evaluates how a federal Pell-funded dual enrollment pilot (“Pell Sites”) affected students’ dual enrollment participation and later college attendance.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What quantitative effect does the pilot program have?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The findings show a negative effect on dual enrollment participation and no effect on subsequent college attendance.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Why might the pilot program have underperformed, according to qualitative analysis?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"The qualitative analysis suggests the program did not sufficiently meet students’ specific needs, depended on strong high school partnerships for counselor information, and imposed substantial financial and administrative burdens on institutions.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},603013,1792165042,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},687212988360,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","Research Article  \nEducational Evaluation and Policy Analysis December 2022, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 783–807 DOI: 10. 3102/01623737221091574  \nArticle reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)© 2022 AERA. [https://journals.sagepub.com/home/epa](https://journals.sagepub.com/home/epa)  \nUnmet Need: Evaluating Pell as a Lever for Equitable Dual Enrollment Participation and Outcomes  \nEric P. Bettinger*  \nAmanda Lu*  \nKaylee T. Matheny*  \nStanford University  \nGregory S. Kienzl  \nUniversity of Pittsburgh  \nDual enrollment is an increasingly popular avenue for high school students to earn college credit.  \nHowever, low-income students are underrepresented among dual enrollment participants. In this study, we use a difference-in-differences design to evaluate a unique federal pilot program that allowed highschool students to access Pell Grants to fund their dual enrollment. Generally, we find a negative effect of the pilot program on dual enrollment participation, with no effect on subsequent college attendance.  \nOur qualitative analysis suggests this initiative did not sufficiently meet students’specific needs, required strong partnerships with high schools to ensure high school counselors informed students about the program, and involved substantial financial and administrative burden for participating institutions.  \nKeywords: colleges, community colleges, educational policy, higher education, mixed methods, econometric analysis, qualitative research, quasi-experimental analysis, in-depth interviewing  \nas national demand for a more educated workforce increases, many states have sought to expand college access. Likewise, as the cost of college has increased, students have sought ways to complete college more quickly and affordably. One potential avenue to meet both states’ and students’ needs is dual enrollment, or taking college courses while still in high school. Dual enrollment participation has increased substantially over the past few decades: By 2003, dual enrollment participation was growing faster than participation in other credit-based transition programs, including Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), and middle college high schools (Bailey & Karp, 2003) . From 2003 to 2011, dual enrollment participation  \nnearly doubled, growing by 80%. Although it has *Denotes joint first author.  \nnot yet caught up to AP and IB participation—among students who entered high school in 2009, only 11% took at least one dual enrollment course, while 42% took at least one AP or IB course (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2019)—it is still an increasingly popular option among high school students.  \nIndeed, evidence suggests dual enrollment improves students’ postsecondary outcomes. For example, studies have found participating in dual enrollment reduces students’ time-to-degree and increases 2- and 4-year college attendance, college grade point averages (GPAs), persistence in college, and college completion (Allen & Dadgar, 2012; Giani et al., 2014; Speroni, 2011) . Participating in dual enrollment may be particularly meaningful for low-income students, who tend to enter college less academically prepared than their higher income counterparts. However,  \nBettinger et al.  \nparticipation in dual enrollment is stratified by race and class (An, 2013b) . The typical dual enrollment student is middle or high income, has parents who went to college, and is White (An, 2013b; NCES, 2019). While dual enrollment may offer an opportunity for elevating low-income students’ access to and successful completion of college, it can only do so if they participate in it.  \nTo date, few studies have explored how different funding policies affect dual enrollment participation or how effective initiatives are at increasing low-income students’ access to dual enrollment. However, in 2016, the U. S. Department of Education’s Office of Federal Stud","cbCaibrPQxzN1XMV","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaibrPQxzN1XMV","pdf",601372,25,"English","# Background and policy context\n# Research design and data sources\n# Findings on participation and attendance\n# Qualitative explanation of mechanisms","[{\"question\":\"What is the main focus of the study?\",\"answer\":\"The study evaluates how a federal Pell-funded dual enrollment pilot (“Pell Sites”) affected students’ dual enrollment participation and later college attendance.\"},{\"question\":\"What quantitative effect does the pilot program have?\",\"answer\":\"The findings show a negative effect on dual enrollment participation and no effect on subsequent college attendance.\"},{\"question\":\"Why might the pilot program have underperformed, according to qualitative analysis?\",\"answer\":\"The qualitative analysis suggests the program did not sufficiently meet students’ specific needs, depended on strong high school partnerships for counselor information, and imposed substantial financial and administrative burdens on institutions.\"}]","Unmet Need - Evaluating Pell as a Lever for Equitable Dual Enrollment Participation and Outcomes | PDF",1792095580,63]