Increasing the effectiveness of two- to four-year college transfer is critical for meeting national goals for college attainment and promoting upward social mobility. Efforts to improve institutional effectiveness in serving transfer students and state transfer policy have been hampered by a lack of comparable metrics for measuring transfer student outcomes.

In this report, we propose a common set of metrics for measuring the effectiveness of two- and four-year institutions in enabling degree-seeking students who start college at a community college to transfer to four-year institutions and earn bachelor's degrees. These include three community college measures -- transfer-out rate, transfer-with-award rate, and transfer-out bachelor's completion rate -- and one measure for four-year institutions -- transfer-in bachelor's completion rate. We also examine a fifth measure: the overall rate at which the cohort of students who start at a community college in a given state go on to earn a bachelor's degree from a four-year institution.

In the conclusion of the report, we discuss implications for institutional leaders and policymakers and identify areas for further research.

America's top colleges and universities should institute an admissions preference for low-income students because such students -- even when they are high-achievers academically -- now face unjustified barriers and make up a mere 3 percent of enrollment at the elite schools, according this report from the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation. The Cooke Foundation found that such a "poverty preference" for admissions to selective higher education institutions, akin to existing preferences for athletes and the children of alumni, would create a more level playing field for disadvantaged students.

The Cooke Foundation report shows dramatic differences between enrollment rates at the most selective schools for students from families with the highest and lowest incomes. It highlights the major challenges low-income, high-achieving students face when seeking admission to these colleges and universities.

Perhaps the most significant new finding of the report is that the vast majority of students in America's most competitive institutions of higher education -- 72 percent -- come from the wealthiest 25 percent of the U.S. population. In sharp contrast, only 3 percent of students in the most selective schools come from the 25 percent of families with the lowest incomes. The report is the first comprehensive analysis conducted on the postsecondary admissions process as it affects high-achieving, low-income applicants.

A task force of faculty members, students and administrators has recommended significant changes to undergraduate education at Northwestern University, including changing the University's academic calendar, addressing student workload requirements, enhancing support for teaching and improving advising, as well as a number of related improvements.

Chaired by Indira Raman, the Bill and Gayle Cook Professor of Biology in the department of neurobiology in the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, the task force on the Undergraduate Academic Experience recently delivered its final report and recommendations to Provost Daniel Linzer. The task force spent the spring, summer and fall quarters gathering data and meeting with a wide range of University stakeholders.

The task force's recommendations are grouped into three types of changes: structural changes to be made at the University level; programs and projects to address identified issues; and cultural shifts to enhance the academic and broader University environment.

The transition from high school to college is a critical milestone for many young people, often representing the first time they leave the comfort and support of their childhood home to experience a more independent lifestyle. It is a time of excitement and opportunity, but it can also be a stressful period in life that takes a toll on students' emotional and mental health. This past spring, Harris Poll conducted an online survey of 1,502 U.S. college students to better understand their experiences during their first year at college. The study, commissioned by The JED Foundation, Partnership for Drug-Free Kids, and The Jordan Porco Foundation has significant implications for parents, educators and students alike.

The results of this study provide critical information that can inform the discussion around college mental and emotional health. It reveals the true extent of the struggles faced by first-year college students and shows that silence and isolation continue to pervade college life. It also highlights the pivotal role that external pressures like social media, school prestige, and other non-academic challenges play in the emotional health of students.

The transition from high school to college is a critical milestone for many young people, often representing the first time they leave the comfort and support of their childhood home to experience a more independent lifestyle. It is a time of excitement and opportunity, but it can also be a stressful period in life that takes a toll on students' emotional and mental health. This past spring, Harris Poll conducted an online survey of 1,502 U.S. college students to better understand their experiences during their first year at college. The study, commissioned by The JED Foundation, Partnership for Drug-Free Kids, and The Jordan Porco Foundation has significant implications for parents, educators and students alike.

The results of this study provide critical information that can inform the discussion around college mental and emotional health. It reveals the true extent of the struggles faced by first-year college students and shows that silence and isolation continue to pervade college life. It also highlights the pivotal role that external pressures like social media, school prestige, and other non-academic challenges play in the emotional health of students.

The dramatic increase in wealth inequality over the past several decades now forms the backdrop for many of today's most pressing public policy debates. Currently, the top 1 percent of U.S. households controls 42 percent of the nation's wealth, and nearly half of the wealth accumulated over the past 30 years has gone to the top 0.1 percent. Simultaneously, the wealth held by the bottom 90 percent of U.S. households continues to shrink, just as people of color are a growing percentage of the U.S. population. These trends have converged to produce a wealth divide that is apparent not just by class, but by race as well. The average white family owns $13 for every $1 owned by a typical Black family, and $10 for every $1 owned by the typical Latino family.

This analysis uses the Racial Wealth Audit, a framework developed by the Institute on Assets and Social Policy (IASP) to assess the impact of public policy on the wealth gap between white and Black households. We use the framework to model the impact of various student debt relief policies to identify the approaches most likely to reduce inequities in wealth by race, as opposed to exacerbating existing inequities. We focus specifically on the Black-white wealth gap both because of the historic roots of inequality described above, and because student debt (in the form of borrowing rates and levels) seems to be contributing to wealth disparities between Black and white young adults, in particular.

The dramatic increase in wealth inequality over the past several decades now forms the backdrop for many of today's most pressing public policy debates. Currently, the top 1 percent of U.S. households controls 42 percent of the nation's wealth, and nearly half of the wealth accumulated over the past 30 years has gone to the top 0.1 percent. Simultaneously, the wealth held by the bottom 90 percent of U.S. households continues to shrink, just as people of color are a growing percentage of the U.S. population. These trends have converged to produce a wealth divide that is apparent not just by class, but by race as well. The average white family owns $13 for every $1 owned by a typical Black family, and $10 for every $1 owned by the typical Latino family.

This analysis uses the Racial Wealth Audit, a framework developed by the Institute on Assets and Social Policy (IASP) to assess the impact of public policy on the wealth gap between white and Black households. We use the framework to model the impact of various student debt relief policies to identify the approaches most likely to reduce inequities in wealth by race, as opposed to exacerbating existing inequities. We focus specifically on the Black-white wealth gap both because of the historic roots of inequality described above, and because student debt (in the form of borrowing rates and levels) seems to be contributing to wealth disparities between Black and white young adults, in particular.

The dramatic increase in wealth inequality over the past several decades now forms the backdrop for many of today's most pressing public policy debates. Currently, the top 1 percent of U.S. households controls 42 percent of the nation's wealth, and nearly half of the wealth accumulated over the past 30 years has gone to the top 0.1 percent. Simultaneously, the wealth held by the bottom 90 percent of U.S. households continues to shrink, just as people of color are a growing percentage of the U.S. population. These trends have converged to produce a wealth divide that is apparent not just by class, but by race as well. The average white family owns $13 for every $1 owned by a typical Black family, and $10 for every $1 owned by the typical Latino family.

This analysis uses the Racial Wealth Audit, a framework developed by the Institute on Assets and Social Policy (IASP) to assess the impact of public policy on the wealth gap between white and Black households. We use the framework to model the impact of various student debt relief policies to identify the approaches most likely to reduce inequities in wealth by race, as opposed to exacerbating existing inequities. We focus specifically on the Black-white wealth gap both because of the historic roots of inequality described above, and because student debt (in the form of borrowing rates and levels) seems to be contributing to wealth disparities between Black and white young adults, in particular.