ED 363 200

AUTHORTITLE

INSTITUTIONSPONS AGENCY

REPORT NOPUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

DOCUMENT RESTIME

HE 026 810

Immerwahr, John; Farkas, SteveThe Closing Gateway: Californians Consider TheirHigher Education System.

Public Agenda Foundation, New York, NY.California Higher Education Policy Center, SanJose.

CHEPC-93-6Sep 9335p.

California Higher Education Policy Center, 160 W.Santa Clara St., Suite 704, San Jose, CA 95113(free).

Viewpoints (Opinion/Position Papers, Essays, etc.)(120) -- Reports Research/Technical (143)

MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.*Access to Education; Comparative Analysis; EqualEducation; Futures (of Society); Government Role;Higher Education; *Public Colleges; *RegionalAttitudes

IDENTIFIERS *California

ABSTRACT

A study was done of Californians' attitudes towardpublic higher education and its future in comparison to attitudesacross the nation. The study conducted eight focus groups inCalifornia and used those findings to generate hypotheses testedthrough two telephone surveys. A California survey was conducted with832 residents 18 years of age or older. A national survey wasconducted with 502 residents of the continental United States 18years old or over. The survey found that Californians view a collegedegree as key to employment and economic security and yet difficultto attain. The study also found that Californians: (1) are likely tothink that educational opportunity is currently available but theyare pessimistic about the future of higher education; (2) blame stategovernment for higher education's troubles; (3) want a system thatprovides opportunity to every qualified person, and value personalresponsibility and reciprocity as 68 percent think that unlessstudents have some personal responsibility for paying the cost theywill not appreciate its value; (4) are opposed to ideas that wouldrestrict opportunity (cutting enrollments or raising fees) foreducation but are more likely to consider changes in how education isdelivered, and (5) overwhelmingly support providing students with anopportunity to work for their financial aid. Contains appendixes onnational attitudes and study methodology. (JB)

************************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EARS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

p?'oe10,1 Pt 4

ril:t gen

Or 44 400-

API' re- .44%if,t;totrer5bAtretf*.0:6;V:tor-t

t̀r,4.- rc-Ate

if.:"CLIE-*tiir6e "CA'

15? t.f4:4% rft.".414.t.4.0

440016:410.A.

4.01*;

* as4444.5,C63'.*. Zj'ePrd.sOk. #1.1.4

.51111. .04 e:44 136AiA#:*r" ;

or1641.

Covton'

41-,6'er .6beePiofett

914317,0*.

If6* 4orve.:'00 ell 411.

1:141esP:06" 010* 414 "IIPe7e,20°)Vr.1.010,041.110, U.S. DEPARTMENT Of EDUCATION

sort Office of Edocafionel Reeesuch and Improvement411:14 . EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER (ERICI

- -.411 Car,

go, 4tieoPpl, its

THE CLOSE%GATEWAYA REPORT FROM

Nein* I:btu/nom nos boon flproduCoO asrocolvs0 trom r4s 046on or orgeruz &bon

ong.natino0 'Amor chives h..- Won matie to mprove

riOroductron quefify

a ,°':

PognIs Ofvow 04 0Ormons VOW rn th'IdOeu"mint 6o not nocosoardy ro0rollont ("tailOEM oositan or policy

THE CALIFORNIAHIGHER EDUCATION

POLICY CENTERra

1°5.1,4-40):4111"-et .se" :044V6314

2

nril

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS

MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

California Higher

FAilratinn PrO icy rertter

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES

INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)"

THE CLOSING GATEWAY:Californians Consider

Their Higher Education System

by John Immerwahrwith Steve Farkas

A Report by the Public Agenda Foundationfor the California Higher Education Policy Center

September 1993

Table of Contents

Foreword

Executive Summary iv

Introduction

Section One: Why is Higher Education So Important to Californians 1

Section Two: Concerns About Access 5

Focus on Latinos 8

Section Three: What Has Gone Wrong? 12

Section Four: Principles for Evaluating Solutions 14

Focus on Older People 15

Appendix One: National Attitudes Toward Higher Education 19

Appendix Two: Research Methodology 21

Acknowledgements 23

About the Public Agenda Foundation 24

4

Foreword

The California Higher Education Policy Center recently commissioned the Public AgendaFoundation of New York to conduct a series of focus groups and public opinion surveys onnational and state attitudes toward higher education. The Closing Gateway reports on theresults.

The Center is committed to stimulating public awareness, concern and involvement in issuesaffecting the future of California higher education. Ultimately, higher education in Californiawill be as available and as effective as the public expects, demands, and supports. Therefore, theCenter was particularly interested in assessing public concern about higher education and inunderstanding what value the public places on the accessibility of higher education. Thisreport offers important insights into these and other public perceptions of higher education.

The Closing Gateway contains a particularly powerful message about the importance of accessto higher education for Californians. State and higher education policy makers who have advo-cated, supported, or acquiesced in rolling back opportunity and sharply raising prices asresponses to state financial problems are clearly out of synch with public preferences. And thepublic appears to be open to rearrangement of priorities and significant innovation to keep thedoors of opportunity open. There appears to be a classic mismatch between the recent choicesof leaders and the wishes of voters and ta::payers as of the summer of 1993.

The Center was fortunate to enlist the Public Agenda Foundation in this effort. The authorsare John lmmerwahr. senior research fellow of the Public Agenda Foundation and departmentchair of philosophy at Villanova University, and Steve Farkas, senior research associate at thePublic Agenda Foundation. Deborah Wadsworth. executive director of the Public AgendaFoundation, played a central role in all aspects of the organization, coordination, and design ofthe project. The Center and the Public Agenda Foundation were assisted in this work by anadvisory committee consisting of Virginia Smith, Arturo Madrid, and Joanne Hurley. JoniF1nney was project director at the California Higher Education Policy Center.

The Center welcomes the reactions of readers to our reports.

Patrick M. CallanExecutive Director

Executive SummaryWhen Californians think about the state's higher education system, they immediately find themselves with

two opposing concerns. On the one hand, they are convinced that a college education is, more than ever

before, a key to a good job and to a secure economic life. Three out of four Californians (76 percent) agreethat even in today's tough economic climate, a young person who goes to college has better economicprospects than one who takes a job right out of high school. Because a college education is such acritical

gateway to a good job and a good future, the vast majority of Californians (84 percent) believe that no quali-

fied and motivated student should be barred from attending college because of cost. Findings from this studysuggest that a college degree has increasingly taken on the status of a high school degree in the past: the

basic entry ticket to life in the American mainstream.

At the same time that Californians are convinced of the necessity of a college degree, they are also becomingmuch more worried about the attainability of college education. Fifty-two percent think that many qualifiedpeople are currently unable to get a college education in California, 67 percent feel that opportunity for high-er education has decreased in the last ten years, and an even higher number (73 percent) believe that getting

a college education will become even more difficult in the future. Most Californians are convinced thatdeclining educational opportunity is hitting hardest at those who can least afford itstudents from lowincome families. As a result, Californians are deeply concerned about higher education: 53 percent report ahigh level of concern, even in comparison to top-drawer issues such as the economy. N _arly two-thirds saythey would support a fundamental overhaul of the state's higher education system.

Compared to the nation as a whole. Californians are more likely to think that educational opportunity is cur-rently available, but they are much more pessimistic than other Americans about the future of higher educa-tion. They are also more likely to think that their state's educational system should be substantially over-hauled, \kith 64 percent of Californians calling for basic changes versus 54 percent nationwide.

When it comes to assigning blame. Californians point first to state government. Sixty-three percent see cut-backs in state funds as a very important factor in the troubles faced by higher education, and almost the samenumber (61 percent) point specifically to state mismanagement. Direct educational costs. such as professors'salaries, equipment and buildings, are less likely to be cited as very important factors.

Certain basic values seem to drive the public's attitudes about solutions. Californians kvant a system that pro-vides opportunity to every qualified person (84 percent support this fundamental value). Californians alsovalue personal responsibility and reciprocity. the sense that people should give something back for ,:hat theyreceive. Sixty-eight percent. for example. think that unless students have some personal responsibility forpaying for the cost of education they will not appreciate its value. An overwhelming majority (70 percentcompared to 18 percent) is convinced that individual motivation is more important for a good education thanthe quality of a college.

These values explain the way Californians think about proposed-solutions. They are opposed to ideas whichrestrict opportunity to education (such as cutting enrollments or raising fees) but they are more likely toconsider changes in how education is delivered (including less research, less money spent on buildings, andhigher student-faculty ratios). Presumably. Californians feel that a motivated student can compensate for big-ger classes, but can't get any education if he or she is excluded from college attendance. Similarly, the publicgives the greatest support to financial aid structures that maximize the values of rei:nrocity. Providing stu-dents with an opportunity to work for their financial aid has overwhelming support. Oti.0 approaches, suchas loans, direct aid to colleges. and grants to students are somewhat less popular.

iv

6

Introduction

When people are asked to name the issues that concern them most, they typically mentioneither major national issues, such as the economy, unemployment, or health care, or moredramatic, emotionally charged problems like AIDS, crime, or terrorism. For most people,higher education is an issue of somewhat lesser national importance. In their personal lives,however, the question of how to provide a college education for their children takes on a largersignificance. In our survey of 832 California residents, and in a series of eight focus groupsconducted in different parts of the state, we found high levels of concern about higher educa-tion and its role in California's future.

Public Anxietyit is tempting to think that concerns about higher education are merely an extension of thepublic's general displeasure with public education. This study suggests, however, thatCalifornians' concerns about higher education are radically different from the usual com-plaints expressed about elementary and secondary (K-12) education.

What most concerns people about K-12 schooling is its quality. In many of the focus groupsconducted for this study, we began by asking people to say the first thing that came to mindwhen they thought of primary and secondary schools. Invariably, the first associations werelack of discipline, teachers who don't teach, students who won't learn, and an environmentplagued by crime and drugs.

Californians' concerns about higher education are quite different. What people typically men-tion first is not the quality of public higher education, but its cost and inaccessibility. As onewoman in Bakersfield said, "I don't know how I am going to be able to afford to send mydaughter. I will have to work two or three jobs. She already works and goes to high school now.and it's hard on her. I don't know how we will manage." Compared to the way they feel aboutprimary and secondary education. Californians seem to be relatively sanguine about the qualityof higher education.

The source of public anxiety is a colli-sion between two deeply held con-cerns. On the one hand, people feelthat a college education is ircreasinglyimportant for young people. 'he vastmajority of Californians believe thatfor a young person today, a collegeeducation is the gateway to a middle-class life. At the same time Californians see opportunityfor higher education slipping out of their grasp. Their fear is that the costs of sending a youngperson to college will soon be so high that only the well-off will be able to afford it.

This fear is further heightened by a sense of loss. In the past. Californians could take comfortfrom the fact that one of the world's finest higher education systems was virtually free to anyCalifornia resident. Today, California's youthful and diverse population seems to sense that adoor that used to be wide open is being slowly closed to them.

People feel that a college eduvItion isincreasingly important for young people. Thevast majority of Californians believe that for ayoung person today, a college education isthe gateway to a middle-class life.

7

Not surprisingly, people are deeply concerned about the problem as they see it develop. Whilethey don't know .exactly what to do about it. they feel that the situation cannot be allowed tocontinue. A substantial majority of Californians, as we shall see, believe that the state's publichigher education system needs to be fundamentally overhauled to keep higher education avail-able to any qualified and motivated student.

As it turns out, one useful way to understand attitudes toward higher O. cation is to comparethem to the way people feel about health care, rather than comparing them to attitudes aboutelementary and secondary education. Although concerns about higher education may be lessintense than concerns about health care. the dynamics of the two issues are similar. In bothcases, we find that Californians feel at least some satisfaction with the quality of the institu-tions (much higher in the case of health care), but grave concerns about access. What con-cerns people about health care is that rising costs may push health care out of reach for them-selves and their families. Although people don't know what they want done about the situation,they call for basic (but as yet nonspecific) changes in the health care system. In the minds ofmany Californians, higher education raises the same problema critically important good isperceived as spiralling out of reach, and they want the problem addressed.

In the first two sections of this report, we explore both sides of this equationCalifornians'increasing conviction that higher education is an essential need in contemporary society andtheir escalating concern about access. In sections three and four, we describe reactions to vari-ous proposals for change and the deep-seated values underlying people's views. In AppendixOne, we compare Californians' attitudes and concerns about higher education with those ofother Americans. And in Appendix Two, we describe our research methodology.

vi

8

1

SFCTION ONE

Why is Higher Education So Important to Californians?

There is no mystery about why highereducation is such an important value for somany people. Americans have traditionallybelieved that a good job is an essential ele-ment for obtaining a satisfying lifestyle, andfor most Californians. a higher education isthe prerequisite to a good job. By an over-whelming majority of nearly six to one (76percent to 13 percent) Californians endorsethe view that "high school graduates shouldgo on to college because in the long runthey'll have better job prospects" and rejectthe view that "high school graduates shouldtake any decent job offer they get becausethere are so many unemployed peoplealready."

Chart 1Necessity of a College Education

for Job Prospects

"Ithich statement comes closer to your own riew? Highsclmol graduates should go on to college because ht thelong run they'll /mil, better job prospects. or high schoolgraduates should take any decent jolt ofter they getbecause there are so mmty unemployed pmple already.-

Reflecting on his own experiences as animmigrant to this country, James Harvey,chief staff writer ofl Nation at Risk, explainsthe significance of a college degree this way:"When I came to this country 30 years ago.

my uncle, who was already established heresaid, 'If you want to be someone in America.you need to graduate high school.' Today, hewould say the same thing about a collegedegree." For many Californians, a collegedegree has taken on the status traditionallyheld by a high school diploma.

In focus groups across the state, peopleemphasized that a college degree is a neces-sary requirement for almost any good job:

Y9I1 have to have it to get a job. The moreeducation the more you have a chance toget a job.

in San Jose

It is important to go to college, becauseyou can get a better job. If you look in thepaper, most of the jobs say that you needa degree.

in Hayward

The same picture emerged when Califor-nians were asked to rank their expectationsabout a college education. Three things topthe list of most important goals. Californiansbelieve a college education should providemarketable skills, teach problem-solvingskills for a variety of careers, and give low-income people an opportunity to succeed.Other goalshelping minorities succeed,retraining people in the workforce, teachingstudents citizenship, and promoting respectfor diversityalso commanded support, butat significantly lower levels.

For most Californians, access to an afford-able higher education is regarded virtually as aright, at least for students who are qualified.

Ores Students Merksesble Sk

Oho See lents Preb gm Iverg Sle

Ova Low Inwrne Peep. Opp°, tumble

Oleo Worms Opporture

Turn Studens into Good Cremes

Teach SLotont To Rec..? rkenulY

Raton Workers

Chart 2Goals for Higher Education System

80%

.178%

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percentages gMng tughest ratings (6 or 7)

66%

161%

60%

54%

60 70

76%

Percent

80 90 100

"flilferen1 people expect a college education to accomplish different you& ... Please tell me theextent to which you think each of /the following goalsl is important. !Ice a scale from I to 7.in which I means you think the goal not at all important and 7 means you think the goal is

extremely important.-"Gicing students marketable skills so they can get good jobs when they graduate.-

Q: "Giving students problem solving skills so they can be readg for a wriety of careers.-

Q: "Giving people from low income backgrounds opportunities to succeed."Q: "Retraining people who hare already been in the work force for new jobs."

Q: "Giving minorities such as blacks and Latinos opportunities to succeed."(2: "Exposing students to other cultures and teaching them to respect dii.ersity."

(2: "Helping to turn students into good citizens."

As we point out later, this does not mean thatpeople think higher education should be free.They believe strongly, however, that financial

not put higher educa-concerns alone shouldtion out of reach forsomeone who canbenefit from it. Thereis virtual unanimity(84 percent) on theproposition that "weshould not allow theprice of a college edu-cation to keep stu-dents who are quali-fied and motivated togo to college fromdoing so." In focusgroups, many peopleechoed the thoughtsof a Hayward manwho said, "I thinkeveryone should havean opportunity to go

2

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

to college, but it ishard to go, and theprice is skyrocketing."

This is one areawhere the parallelwith health care isparticularly close.Most Americans arevery uncomfortablewith the idea thatpeople should not getthe health care theyneed just because ofincome; they seem tobe equally uncom-fortable with the ideathat low incomeshould prevent aqualified studentfrom getting a col-lege education.

Support for theimportance of highereducation transcendsideological and dem-ographic categories.

It is widely endorsed by Republicans.Democrats, and independents, and by peoplefrom various income levels and ethnicgroups. California is a large and diverse state

PercE

100

90 .

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

0

Chart 3Money Should Not Prevent Qualified

Students from Attending College

Strongly orSorneveur

Agree

Strong?), OfSomewhatDisagree

(2: "Th what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement: lie should tua allowthe price of college education to keep students who are qualified z.nd motirated to go 1,, cr.1-lege from doing All. 11.0Uld you say you agree strongly. agree somewnat, neither agreenor

disagree. disagree somewhat. or disagree strongly?"

1 0 MP";%. ,hiLA

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Chart 4Money Should Not Prevent Qualified Students from Attending College:

Support from Different Segments

676600.

$26.000.650.000

Lees than 610.000

84%

84%

86%

Demoaats 1

Independents

Ropubl.cans

189%

84%

83% Percent

10 20 30 40 SO 60 70 BO 93 100

Percentages saying "somewhat agree" or 'agree strongly"

Q: "To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? We ,hould not allowthe price of a college education to keep students who are qualified and motwated to go tocollege from doing so."

and, as one might expect, we did find sometopics which were controversial (see sidebar:FOCUS ON OLDER PEOPLE, p. 15). On themost basic questions about higher education,however, the consensus is much more strik-ing than the differences.

A College Degree vs. a College Education

Although Californians are nearly unani-mous about the necessity of a college. aegree.there is much more controversy about theimportance of a college education. Most peo-ple seem to be convinced that young peoplewho do not have college credentials will belocked out of good jobs, but they are notnearly so convinced that there is somethingintrinsically valuable about college educationitself For many Californians. the demand fora degree by potential employers is often akind of credentialism. But the fact that thedegree may only he a piece of paper dus not.for most people, make it any less importantin today's harsh economic climate.

Many Californians seem to feel that, espe-cially in times of high unemployment.employers often demand a college degree,not because it is essential for the joh, but as away to limit the number of applicants. Nearlytwo-thirds of Californians (62 percent) thinkit is a problem that "too many employers hire

college graduates forjobs that could bedone as well or betterby people without acollege degree."

There is also awidespread sense thatnot everyone canprofit from a collegeeducation and thatmany young peopleare pressured intogoing to college bypeers, parents, or so-ciety. Nearly two-thirds (62 percent)think that it is aproblem that "manypeople are just wast-

ing their time and money in college becausethey don't know what else to do with theirlives." Fifty-five percent say they are con-cerned that "society has made going to col-lege seem more important than it is."

In focus groups, people talked about tradeschools and apprenticeship programs andseemed genuinely concerned by the percep-tion that college was increasingly becomingthe only path to a decent job. Nearly 55 per-cent expressed a concern that "too many peo-ple are going to college instead of to alterna-tives to college. where they can learn tradeslike plumbing or computer repair." Concernsabout the intrinsic value of a college educa-tion were often connected to pessimismabout California's economy. In an economywhere many people with college degrees areunemployed or taking jobs which used to beheld by high school graduates, there is agreat deal of gloom about opportunities gen-erally, and a certain amount of cynicismabout higher education.

In focus groups, Californians who did notthemselve: have a college education wereespecially skeptical about the intrinsic valueof higher education and about college cours-es that are not directly joh-related. As oneSan Jose woman said: "If I am going to he an

1 1

Chart 5Concerns about the Value of a College Education

Er Voyers Hire College Gradsto( Jcbe HS Can Do

Young People Wasting TheirTime and Maley in College

Society Overemphzsizes College

.Too Many People Going toCollege Instead of Alternatives

62%

162%

55%

54%

I I i i i i f

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Percentages saying a "very" or "somewhat serious" problem

Percent

80 90 100

"I am going to read you several concerns about California's public college system which somepeople have talked about. For each one, please tell me whether you think it is a very seriousproblem, a somewhat serious problem, a not very serious problem or not a serious problem

at all."Q: "Too many people are going to college instead of to alternatives to college where they can

learn trades like plumbing or computer repair."

Q: "Society has made going to college seem more important than it really is."

Q: "Many young people are just wasting their time and money in college because they don'tknow what else to do with their lives."

Q: "A lot of employers hire college graduates for jobs that could be done as well or better by peo-ple without a college degree."

accountant, what do I care what someonedid back in ancient Egypt? It is ridiculous tostudy that stuff." We also heard bitter com-plaints, especially from non-college educat-ed respondents, about young college gradu-ates who supervise older expe, ienced work-

4

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

ers without a degree.A woman from Ba-kersfield said: "Myhusband's boss is 24years old. He is a kid;he still has a babyface. He has no ideawhat is going on, buthe is the boss. Theyhired him because hehas a degree, and itimpresses the bigwigsbecause they have thesame education."

Concerns aboutcrec'entialism, how-ever, do not affect thestrong convictionthat, without a col-lege education, ayoung person is se-verely hampered. In-deed, the fact that acollege degree mayonly be a piece of pa-per increases the

public's anxieiy. It is as though society istelling them: "Your child might be a realasset to a company, but without a collegedegree he or she won't even be consideredfor a position."

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

SECTION TWO

Concerns About Access

The growing sense that a college degree isessential to a comfortable, secure, middle-class life is accompanied by a widely sharedperception that college education is becom-ing less accessible. Two-thirds of Californiaresidents (64 percent) think that higher edu-cation prices are going up faster than otherthings in California. As a result, a majority(52 percent) think there are many qualifiedpeople who currently do not have the oppor-tunity to go to college in California. Th.:.re isalso a widespread concern that even thosewho are going to college cannot get theclasses they need. Eighty-three percent ofCalifornians rate "students having trouble

Chart 6Rate of Inflation in College Prices

Perceny.007/9047

BC

70

60

50

AO

30

4

17%

5%

RAW AMA IN Sam.

I'wnpared to other things in California. are collegeprices go* up at a fitster rale. are C011e(1e pricesgoing up at a slower rate. or are they going up alabout the same rate?"

Opportunity for Higher Education

ManyOualinKSCAINCI

Moat

aualhedCan Go

Not Sure

Q: -Do you believe that currently in California the rustmajority of people who are qualified to go to collegehare the opportunity to do so, or do you think thereare many people who are qualified to go but don'thare the opportunitk to do so?"

Problems Getting Classes Needed for Graduation

PercentA

r

12/0

VdryStme.AetSox..woor,

Not YorySow. NolPa Nob.,

Ms Suns

Q: -Please tell me whether you think Ithisj is a seriousprobb,m. a somewhat serious problem. a not veryserious problem or not a serious problem at all.Students hare trouble getting the classes they needin order to graduate."

getting the classes they need in order tograduate- as a very serious or somewhat seri-ous problem. As one San Diego woman said."At San Diego State. my daughter can't getthe classes she needs: she could only getthree of them. She may have to go to privateschool. I can understand that California hasbudget problems, but the students arecaught in the middle of it.-

Californians also believe that the situationhas deteriorated and that it will continue toworsen in the future. Sixty-seven percentthink that it is more difficult to get a collegeeducation now than it was ten years ago. andan even higher percentage (73 percent) feelthat college will be even more inaccessible inthe future. Once again, these views areshared by substantial majorities of all seg-

135

Compared to 10 YearsFrom Now

Compared to 10 Years Ago

Chart 7Difficulty in Getting a College Degree

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

reach for many peo-ple who should begoing to college. Onlya minority t27 per-

73% cent) think that thecuts will mostly dis-courage people "whoare not committed togoing to college inthe first place."

Californians alsooverwhelminglyagree that low-in-come families havethe most difficulttime getting a collegeeducation. Although"giving people fromlow-income back-grounds opportuni-ties to succeed" was

rated as one of the most important goals forhigher education, qualified students fromlow income families are thought to have theleast opportunity to attend college. Whilemiddle-class people sometimes complain that

67%

Percent

0 10 20 30 40

Percentages saying "more difficult"

50 60 70 BO 90 100

Q: "And do you think getting a college education will be more difficult or less difficult, or aboutthe same. 10 years from now?"

Q: "In your view, has getting a college education become more difficult than it was 10 years ago.less difficult than it was 10 years ago. or is it about as difficult as it was 10 years ago?"

ments of the population. As one San Diegoman said: "I see the costs escalating higherand higher. You hear on the news that thefees have gone up 80 percent, but it will goeven higher still."

Those MostVulnerable AreHardest Hit

Californians mightbe somewhat lessconcerned about in-creasing costs if theyfelt that higher costswould weed out stu-dents who reallydon't belong in col-lege anyway. Butmost Californians areconvinced that cut-backs hit hardest atprecisely those whomost need a collegeeducation. Nearlytwo-thirds (63 per-cent) agree that rais-ing college fees willput college out of

6

Chart 8Which Groups Have Less Opportunity to Attend College?

Low Income Students

Ethnic or Racial Minorities

Older Workers SeekingRetraining

Middle Class Students 22%

29%

35%

61%

Percent

0 10 20 30 40

Percentages saying less opportunity'

50 eo 70 BO 90 100

Q: "Do you think qualified students from low income families regardless of ethnic background- ham less opportunity, more opportunity or about the same opportunity as others to get acollege education?"

Q: "How about qualified students who are ethnic or racial minorities such as blacks or Latinos?"

Q: "I low about people who ore older and are going back to school for retraining?"

Q: hni. about qualified students from middle-class families regardless of their ethnic back-ground?"

1 4

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

they are "too rich for scholarships but toopoor to afford college," they too, along withminority group members, identify low-income families as hardest hit by rising col-lege costs. As one person in L.A. said, "thebiggest problem is the elitist problemtheseparation of the poor and the wealthy. Poorpeople will have a hard time getting an edu-cation, and that will leave everything in thehands of the wealthy."

As a result of these perceptions.Californians are deeply troubled by the situa-tion in higher education. Indeed, whenspecifically asked about higher education, 53percent report a high level of concern, evenin comparison to other issues such as theeconomy and health care. Obviously, thisfinding cannot be taken literally; higher edu-cation is not an issue of the same magnitudeas the economy or health care (most surveyscurrently show these issues as the topnational concerns). But this study does sug-gest that when people specifically focus onhigher education, they are deeply troubled byit.

What is even more striking is the high

percentage of Californians who believe thatthere should be drastic changes in the waythe state's higher education system is orga-nized. By a more than two-to-one margin (64percent to 28 percent), Californians believethat the state's "public college and universitysystem should be basically overhauled."

Calls for a basic overhaul of higher educa-tion in California do not appear to be drivenprimarily by concern about quality. Given thepessimistic picture that focus group respon-dents painted of California generally and,specifically, of K-12 schooling, Californiansgive the quality of higher education a quali-fied vote of confidence. Fifty-five percentthink that the quality of public higher educa-tion is the same or better than it was tenyears ago, and a plurality of 46 percent to 37percent think that the public colleges anduniversities are teaching students the"important things they need to know."

Our interpretation is that what unsettlespeople is precisely the dual problem of theincreasing importance of a higher educationand the diminishing opportunity to get one.People may not have a clear idea about spe-

Perai

100 'V90

B3 /Z.70 /

60

50

Level of Concern

26%

Sono Ccnoens en Lesene.ne uss Coven,

Q: "Compared u-ith other issues facing L'alifornia such asthe economy and health care, how concerned are youabout California s public colleges and universities?ItOuld you say that you are touch more concerned, ahit more concerned. have the same level of concern. ahit less concerned, or much less concerned?

Chart 9

Support for Fundamental Overhaul

Perceyloo

90 Zeo

70

60

50

40

30 .

20

10

0

8%

Q: "Some people think that California's public college anduniversity system needs to he fundamentally over-hauled. Other people think that California's collegesystem should be basically left alone. Which of thosecloys at:nes closer to your owni.

7

15

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Focus on LatinosThe attitudes of California's Latino population differ from the population at large in anumber of ways. Perhaps the biggest difference concerns the most desirable goals of a

college education. For Latinos, the single most important goal is "giving minoritiessuch as blacks and Latinos opportunities to succeed." Seventy-three percent of Latinosdescribe this goal as "extremely important" as compared to only 43 percent of the non-Latino population. Latinos are also more likely to describe a college education as neces-

sary for almost everyone. This view is held by 75 percent of California Latinos as com-pared to only a narrow majority (51 percent) of non-Latinos. California's Latino popula-tion, then, is even more likely to see higher education as an essential path to opportuni-

ty and success.

The centrality of this goal for Latinos may explain other differences between Latinos and

the rest of the population. Latinos are particularly concerned about access to highereducation as it exists currently. Over two-thirds (68 percent) of Latinos believe thatmany qualified people currently do not have an opportunity to attend college, as com-pared to only 48 percent of non-Latinos. And Latinos are more likely to think that theprice of a college education is higher in California than in other states (49 percent ofLatinos believe this as compared to 30 percent of the rest of the population).

Latinos are also more likely to look to government for support in obtaining this impor-tant goal. By margins of more than two to one (61 percent compared to 26 percent),Latinos support the idea that government should support needy students throughgrants and loans (even if other programs have to be cut), rather than requiring the stu-dents to make sacrifices and work part-time. The rest of the population is more eveniydivided on this question, w'th 47 percent supporting grants and loans and 44 percentcalling for more sacrifice. Similarly, the Latino population is more supportive of statefinancial aid to students and more supportive of direct aid to colleges. (To insure thatLatino attitudes were accurately measured, respondents were given a choice aboutwhether to do the interview in English or Spanish. Five percent of the interviews were

conducted in Spanish.)

cific solutions, but they are frustrated by asituation that seems to be difficult now andgetting worse every day. As one Bakersfieldman put it, the situation in higher education"just can't keep going on this way." Peoplewant an "overhaul" that will keep the doorsof the state's higher universities open tothose who are qualified and motivated.

As suggested earlier, this is one way inwhich attitudes toward higher educationresemble attitudes about health care.National surveys show that most people (74percent in one recent survey) are satisfiedwith the quality of the health care they

8

receive (NBC NewslWall Street Journal,1993), but at the same time, a very largemajority (85 percent) call for a completeoverhaul or major changes in the healthcare system (Martina and Kiley Inc./HarvardSchool of Public Health, 1993). What alarmspeople about health care, in other words, isnot lack of quality, but fears that escalatingcosts may cause them to lose their healthinsurance. Calls for an overhaul of thehealth care system do not necessarily trans-late into support for any particularapproach. Instead, they register a generalconcern that the situation is becomingincreasingly intolerable.

16

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Matrix 1: Health Care and Higher Education

Health Care(from national surveys)

Higher Education(for California only)

Money should notbe an obstacle

91% think that "everybodyshould have the right to getthe best possible healthcareas good as the treat-ment a millionaire gets." *

84% believe we should notallow the price of a collegeeducation to prevent studentswho are qualified and moti-vated from going to college.

Costs are rising fasterthan inflation

64% think that health carecosts are rising "much faster"than the overall rate of infla-tion. **

64% think college prices aregoing up at a faster rate.

Basic satisfaction withquality

74% say they are satisfiedwith the quality of care avail-able to themselves and theirfamilies. ***

55% think quality of educa-tion is the same or betterthan ten years ago, althoughonly a plurality (47 percent)think colleges are teachingimportant things studentsneed to know.

Concerns about access 59% worry that they mightlose health insurance if theylose or change jobs.****

73% think getting a collegeeducation will be more diffi-cult in the future.

Waste fraud and abuse:a big part of the prob-lem

67% think greed and profitsin the health care system area major reason for escalatingcosts. ****

61% think state mismanage-ment is a major factor inescalating fees for public col-leges and universities.

Support for basicchanges in system

85% want complete overhaulor major changes in healthcare system. ****

64% want fundamental over-haul.

* Louis Harris & Associates, 1987.** Public Agenda/EBRI, 1991.*** NBC News/Wall Street Journal, 1993.**** Martilla and Kiley/ Harvard School of Public Health, 1993.

A National Comparison: CaliforniansMore Concerned about Access

To put the attitudes of Californians in per-spective, this study included a parallel studyof 500 Americans nationwide (see AppendixOne: National attitudes toward higher educa-tion). On general questions about highereducation, the attitudes of Californians areindistinguishable from Americans nation-

wide, but there were significant differenceson specific questions about educationalopportunity.

The survey asked respondents from bothgroups to evaluate existing educationalopportunities in the states where they live.Fifty-two percent of Californians believe thatthere are many qualified people in Californiawho do not have the opportunity to attend

17

9

college. This is a high number, but thenational figures are even higher. Nationwide,six out of ten (60 percent) say that manyqualified people in their state do not have anopportunity to attend college. By this mea-sure, Californians are somewhat more likelyto feel that their present system provideseducational opportunities.

When the survey moved from concernsabout the current situation to concernsabout the future, we see that Californians aremore likely to think that opportunity hasdecreased and are considerably more pes-simistic about the future than otherAmericans. Sixty-seven percent of Califor-nians say that it is harder to get a collegedegree now than it was ten years ago. com-pared to 55 percent nationwide. Seventy-three percent of Californians think it will beeven more difficult ten years from now, com-pared to 66 percent nationwide.

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Chart 11Support for Overhaul of Higher Education:

California Verses the Nation

CaliforniaPercentages saying "Oyerhaur

Nation

Q: "Some people think that California's (respondents' state(public college and university system needs to be funda-mentally overhauled. Other people think that CaliforniaS(respondents' state( college system should be basically leftalone. Ithich of those views comes closer to your own?"

the important things they need to know,compared to a smaller number (46 percent)who feel this way in California.

Not surprisingly, then, Californians aremore concernedabout higher educa-tion than are resi-dents of other states.Nationwide, 41 per-cent reported a highlevel of concernabout higher educa-tion. This is a highfigure by any mea-sure (since the com-parison was withhealth care and theeconomy) but it issignificantly lowerthan the figure inCalifornia, where 53percent expressed a

Chart 10Opportunity: California Verses the Nation

Co.lege Eduoston Harder To Get ICYear, trOrn Now

Cosege Educaton Hatder To GetThan 10 Yews Ago

Many Oualthed Students Carrot Go toColleiss Now

66%

73% i ciettomis MI I

Nation 0

67%

55%

52%

60%Percent

0 10 20 30 40 SO 60 70 80 90 100

Q: "Do you believe that currently in California (respondents stale( the vast majority of t eoplewho are qualified to go to college have the opportuniN to do so. or do you think there aremany people who are qualified to go hut don't have the opportunity to do so?"

0: "In your view. has getting a college education become more difficult than it was 10 years ago,less difficult than was 70 years ago, or is it about as difficult as it was 10 years ago?"

Q: "And do you think getting a college education will be more difficult or less difficult, or aboutthe same. 10 years from now?"

Californians are also less satisfied with thequality of education they are receiving now.Nationwide, 54 percent think that state col-leges and universities are teaching students

10

high level of concern.Californians are alsomore likely to wantfundamental reformsin higher education,with 64 percent call-ing for a basic over-

haul as compared to 54 percent nationwide.

These differences may be partiallyexplained by looking at California's history in

! 8

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

higher education. Traditionally, Californianshave had much greater opportunity for high-er education than those in many other states.Indeed, Californians are still more likely thanother Americans to give their own state satis-factory marks on opportunity. The majorityof Americansin California and everywhereelseare sold on the importance of a college

degree, but Californians are more likely tosee access as something they are losing,rather than as something they never had. Asone computer programmer in Los Angelessaid, "The university system was the jewel ofCalifornia. It is no longer and it's sad. We sawthe tail end of a good thing, and it is gonenow."

SECTION THREE

What Has Gone Wrong?

Targeting State Government

Californians share a widely held percep-tion about who bears the primary responsi-bility for problems in higher education. Inthe eyes of most Californians, state govern-ment deserves the lion's share of the blame.

When asked why they think college feesand expenses are going up, Californiansexpress some concern about overpaid profes-sors and lavish expenses on buildings andgrounds, but most of their attention isfocused on problems at the state level. Bylarge majorities, people name state cutbacks(63 percent) and state mismanagement (61percent) as very important reasons forincreases in college costs. By contrast, lessthan half (46 percent) feel overpaid adminis-trators are an important part of the problem.

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Thirty-eight percent cite general inflation; 24percent target buildings, grounds and unnec-essary equipment. Only 22 percent nameoverpaid professors as a major reason.

Focus groups suggest that two factors areat work here. First, higher education inCalifornia is closely associated with state gov-ernment, and there seems to be a great dealof anger and frustration about what is goingon in state government in California. Focusgroup respondents tended to move quicklyfrom concerns about higher education toconsiderable hostility toward state govern-ment. Many comments were very pointed:

Cut.Backs in Stale Aid toColleges & Universities

Mismanagement by StateGovernment

Overpaid Administrators

Other Prices Rising Also

Too Much Spent on Grounds.Buildings, etc.

Overpaid Professors

Chart 12Reasons for Rising College Prices

24%

22%

1 46%1

38%

We always have only two choices abouteducationraise our taxes or have the

kids pay for itthemselves. Whyisn7 there another

63%choice? Pay foreducation out of

61% the taxes you arealready takingfrom me. ny is it[that theyI alwayswant to take itfrom me? I amalready at povertylevel. Do you wantme to get a Polger:s

70 80 90 100 can and stand onthe corner?

in San Diego

Percent

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percentages saying "Very impOrtant reason'

Q: "I dal (Piing to read you 5001k' reaSOaS that some people have giv:2n for why college prices aregoing up. h'itr each reason. please tell me if you think it is a very importatit. a somewhatimportant, a not very important. or not an important reason at all." Illems in this batterywere rotated with each new respontkot.1

Q: "Mismanagement by the stale government."

Q: -Prices are going up for everything else. so college prices go up as a result."

Q: -Too touch outney is spent on the grounds, built/huts and unnecessary eguipownt.'

Q: "Cutbacks in stale aid to public colkwes and universities."

Q: "Overpaid professors.-

12

29

I look at it at thestate level. It ismismanagement ofstate funds, and ithas been happen-iw for a long time.Like the lottery

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

at first, school employees got the moneythe first year; then we don't see it any-more.

in Hayward

They know that education is important,so they keep bringing up education as areason for raising our taxes. It is anexcuse to raise our taxes. The money thatwas there to spend on education is there,

but they are using it for other things.in San Diego

Compared to the nation as a whole,Californians were slightly more likely to faultoverpaid administrators (46 percent to 41percent) and slightly less likely to mentionoverpaid professors (22 percent versus 26percent) as major factors in increasing col-lege expenses.

2113

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

SECTION FOUR

Principles for Evaluating Solutions

Most Californiansdo not have specificsolutions in mindabout how to solvethe problems in high-er education, butthey do have certaindeeply held valuesthat guide theirthinking about highereducation. Using abroad range of specificproposals to promptdiscussion in focusgroups, combined withanalysis of the surveyresults, researchersidentified three mainvalues that drive agreat deal of publicthinking about educa-tion:

Opportunity. Asdiscussed in earliersections, an over-whelming majority ofCalifornians think cost should not preventany qualified and motivated person fromreceiving a college education.

Opportunity: Don't ExcludeQua lrtied Students

Motivation: EducationDepends on Motivation

Reciprocity; Students MustContridute to Education Costs

Chart 13Higher Education Values

70%

68%

84%

Percent

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 90 90 100

Opportunity Q: "Do you believe that currently in California the vast majority of people who arequalified to go to college have the opportunity to do so or do you think there are many peo-ple who are qualified to go hut don't hare the opportunity to do so?"

ilotWation Q: "Which of the following two statements comes closer to your own view? The bene-fit a student gets from attmding college mostly depends upon the quality of the college he orshe is attending. The benefit a student gets from attending college mostly depends upon howmuch of an effort he or she puts in.-

Reciprocity Q: "To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Studentsdon't appreciate the value of a college education when they hare no personal respwsibilityfor paying for what it costs

Motivation. People also put great stresson the importance of individual motivation.If a student in primary or secondary schoolhas a bad experience, many people tend toblame the school, parents, or administrators.By contrast, people tend to place the primaryresponsibility for success in college on theindividual student. Seventy percent ofCalifornians believe that the benefit a studentgets from college depends mostly on theeffort he or she puts into it. Only 18 percentattribute the benefit to the quality of the col-lege.

14

Reciprocity. People believe that studentsshould demonstrate that they are deservingof higher education, and, in some senses,earn the right to attend college. Opinion ana-lyst Daniel Yankelovich, for example. hasobserved a shift in public conceptions of"deserving" and changing attitudes aboutrights and responsibilities: Americans aremoving away from the notion of entitle-ments, toward a concept of rights based onreciprocitygiving something back to soci-ety in exchange for what we receive. Thisattitude is important in Californians' think-ing about higher education as well. Sixty-eight percent of Californians believe that"students don't appreciate the value of a col-lege education when they have no personal

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Focus on Older PeopleCalifornians who are over 65 yeai s of agehave a somewhat different slant on a num-ber of issues related to higher education.Probably the most dramatic difference con-cerns the necessity of college educationitself. By more than a two-to-one majority(65 percent compared to 31 percent), olderCalifornians believe that a college educationis not necessary for many people.Californians under 65 take nearly the oppo-site view: 59 percent believe that a collegeeducation is necessary for everyone, andonly 36 percent question this.

Older Californians are also more likely tothink that too many people are going to col-leges. Forty-two percent of oider peoplethink that it is a very serious problem thattoo many people are going to colleges ratherpopulation feel this way.

Chart 16Is College Necessary for Everyone:

Views of Older and Younger Respondents

Percent

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

dr I I Over 65

0 Linder 6566%

59%

0

/1IR o/n

31V.

Mg47o

a 4W MrNot Ntocosswry N000ssory Dont Know

Q: "Some people think that these days a college edwation isnecessary for almost everyone. Other people think that acollege education is not necessary for many people.Which of those views comes closer to your own?"

than trade schools. Only 22 percent of the under-65

Older people also place a much greater emphasis on individual responsibility. They are more like-ly to feel strongly that students who don't pay for a college education won't appreciate it (59 per-cent of older people strongly agree with this statement, compared to 43 percent of Californiansunder 65), and they are much more likely to think that individuals who can't afford collegeshould make sacrifices rather than look to the state for help. A healthy majority (54 percent) ofolder people would rather see needy young people make sacrifices themselves (such as workingpart-time and living at home) rather than get state aid that comes from other sources. Onceagain, the percentages are reversed for the under-65 population, where the majority (52 percent)supports state aid for these students, even at the cost of cutbacks elsewhere.

responsibility for paying for what it costs." Asone San Diego woman said, "A giveaway is athrowaway. Someone coming out of highschool should learn something about life interms of investing in their own future."

These primary values underlie people's reac-tions to various proposed solutions to theproblems of increasing costs and decreasingopportunity.

Restructuring Higher Education

This study presented Californians with aseries of solutions that colleges and universi-ties could use to respond to the prob!em ofhigher costs and diminishing resourceseach accompanied by a possible tradeoff.

While none of the suggested ideas is popular,Californians offer varying degrees of resis-tance depending on the extent to which thesolution matches or violates these core val-ues.

Least popular of all of the solutions cov-ered by the study is the suggestion that uni-versities decrease enrollments Fifty-eightpercent of Californians rate this as a pooridea. Californians are almost as hostile to theidea of raising expenses and fees, with 52 per-cent labeling this as a poor idea. Admittingfewer students and raising fees are unaccept-able because these ideas violate the primaryvalue of opportunity. As we have seen.Californians believe that either of these stepswill restrict opportunity for many motivated

15

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Matrix 2: Reaction to ideas for dealing with cutbacksin state aid to colleges and universities.

Proposal Trade-off(even though some

people argue that ...)

Resistance Percent(those saying "poor idea")

Admit fewer students there wouldn't be room in thesystem for some who want togo to college.

58 percent

Raise college prices the financial burdens onfamilies and students wouldbe too high.

52 percent

Reduce the amount of .

researchpotential scientific discoverieswould be delayed or lost.

38 percent

Reduce spending on theupkeep and maintenanceof campus buildings andgrounds

college campuses wouldphysically deteriorate.

36 percent

Increase the number ofstudents that professorsteach

the time professors couldspend doing research wouldgo down.

34 percent

and qualified students.

There is much less resistance to otherproposals that do not directly limit access tohigher education, such as limiting research(38 percent label this as a poor idea), cuttingback on the upkeep of buildings (36 percentcall this a poor idea), or asking professors toteach more students (only 34 percentthought this was a poor idea).

What Californians seem to be saying isthat they are least receptive to proposals thatreduce or limit access to higher education.Such changes cut sharply against the basicvalues. But Californians do indicate a willing-ness to think about changes in the way edu-cation is delivered. Here again the basic val-ues come into play. Many people feel that ahighly motivated student can still get a goodeducation, even if classes are larger, or build-ings are less well kept up.

16

Even though there is support for research,

people are evenly divided on whether a lot ofresearch can be cut, with 45 percent oppos-ing cuts in research and 43 percent support-ing them. Generally, Califcrnians supportresearch in concept (in focus groups, peopletended to emphasize the value of medicalresearch), but this support is weakened bynews coverage of seemingly laughable pro-jects such as studies on insect breeding(spending scarce research dollars to study"how a fly gets horny" seemed to evoke par-ticular contempt).

Many people seem to believe that thebasic values of opportunity andmotivation can still be supported by asystem that delivers education in amore efficient and cost-effective way.

Californians may think that state govern-ment has caused the higher education crisis,but their demand for a fundamental overhaul

2 4.1

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

of the system is not restricted to state gov-ernment. Many are quite willing to considerchanges in colleges and universities as well.Many people seem to believe that the basicvalues of opportunity and motivation can stillbe supported by a system that delivers educa-tion in a more efficient and cost-effectiveway. Sixty-three percent, for example, agreethat colleges "could save money by usingnew ways of teaching that rely on technologi-cal innovations, for example with greater useof computers and tele-conferences so thatone professor could teach more students."

Paying for Higher Education

These core values also come into playwhen people explore different ways to helpstudents pay for hiter education. The studypresented four different options as a way toexplore Californians' values: more opportuni-ties to work for financial aid, more loans,more direct aid to colleges, and more grants.

Significantly, the most popular idea, sup-ported by 82 percent of Californians, is togive students opportunities to work for theirown financial aid. This approach appeals toall three primary values: It provides opportu-nity for education, especially to those whoare motivated enough to be willing to workfor it. It involves reciprocity and personalresponsibility since working one's waythrough college requires students to put in akind of "sweat equity" for their education.Several focus group respondents commentedfavorably on President Clinton's ideas aboutnational service programs, and national sur-veys show that this idea is very popular withthe public.

Loans are a more complex matter in themind of many Californians. On the one hand,loans are reasonably popular since they doprovide an element of reciprocity: studentsare, in effect, paying for their own education.Fifty-nine percent think that the state shoulduse loans more often than it does now as away of helping students to pay for college

education. Loans are problematic in otherways. There is a widespread and very trou-bling perception that many students aredefaulting on college loans. In the public'smind, defaults have turned education loansfrom a reciprocity-based program into onemore example of people robbing the publictill. At the same time, there is also concernabout the debt that students can accumulatein paying for higher education costs.

Chart 14Too Many Students Don't Pay Loans Back

Percent100

90

40

70

so

50

30

20

10

90%

0

d Aa 1 I rd rad

6% 4°

VorSomawhat Not satious(Not a Not SaraSerious Problom Problem at NI

"I am going to read you several concerns aboutCalifornia's public college system which some peoplehave talked about. For each one, please tell mewhether you think it is a very serious problem, asomewhat serious problem or not a serious problemat all."

Q: "Too many students take out college loans and neverpay them back."

Students Borrow Too Much

Q: "Students are having to borrow too much money topay for their college education."

9 5

17

Direct aid to colleges and universities issupported by most Californians (55 percentthink this method should be used moreoften). However, this idea is also somewhatcontroversial. On the one hand, most Cali-fornians see cutbacks in state aid as a majorcause of escalating college costs. On theother hand, many focus group respondentswere worried that if the state gives moremoney to education, the extra funds will justend up in the pockets of administrators.

Finally, Californians have mixed feelingsabout the idea of giving money directly tostudents. This approach does get some sup-port; 42 percent say it should be used moreoften, as opposed to 29 percent who want touse it less often. The weaker support for thismethod may be due to the perception thatdirect grants are a giveaway, and they thusviolate the principle of reciprocity.

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Mixed feelings about lcans and grants alsoemerge when people are asked to makechoices among different approaches. Forexample, respondents were asked to choosebetween giving more loans and grants toqualified students (even if it meant cutbacksin other services and programs), versus ask-ing students themselves to ay for college bymaking sacriiices such as living at home,working and going to scholl part-time (evenif it meant some students would drop out).Grants and loans were favored by 50 percentof Californians, but a substantial minority(40 percent), would rather see studentsthemselves make sacrifices such as working,living with their parents, going to schoolpart-time.

Chart 15

Respondents were also asked to choosebetween giving money directly to collegesversus giving it to students to spend on the

public or private col-lege of their choice.

Preferred Ways for Students to Pay for College

Students Woes tor Student Aid

Student Loans

GOVOTTI1111( Aid to Golfers

Govornment Mak.. Grants toStudents

42%

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percentages saying "use more often"

59%

55%

82%

PercentI -1--I

60 70 80 90 100

"1 am going to read you several ways for government to make a college educationaffirrdable foracademically qualified students. For each one. please tell me if you think government shoulduse this more often than it does now. less often than it does now, or use it about us often as itdoes it now."Illems in this battery were rotated with each new respondent./

Q: -Government grants money directly to students."

Q: -Government makes money available for student loans."

Q: -Government provides students with opportunities to work for the financial aid they get."

Q: "Government gives money to the public coPeges and universities so they can keep the prices

they charge students down."

18

Here, Californiansare almost evenlydivided. A plurality(47 percent to 42 per-cent) favor givingmoney directly tocolleges rather thangiving it to studentsto spend on the publicor private school oftheir choice.

What Califor-nians are strugglingfor, in other words,are ways to help stu-dents pay for theirown educations. Peo-ple do not want to seestudents locked outof higher education,but they resist givingsupport to studentswith no strings at-tached.

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

APPENDIX ONE

National Attitudes Toward Higher Education

This study included a survey of 502 peoplenationwide, using a shorter survey instru-ment which included only a subset of theCalifornia questions. The study also includeda review of existing public opinion surveydata on higher education.

Our main reason for collecting this datawas to put the California findings in perspec-tive (see page 9: A National Comparison.) Butthe national findings tell an important andinteresting story in their own right Most ofthe concerns expressed by Californians areexpressed by other Americans as well. Theconcerns differ in degree, rather than inkind.

Nationally, there is nearly universal agree-ment that a college education is an impor-tant gateway to a good job. Nearly eight outof ten Americans (79 percent) are convincedthat high school graduates should go to col-lege "because in the long run they will havebetter job prospects." An even larger percent(89 percent) feel that society should notallow lack of money to prevent a qualifiedand motivated student from getting a collegeeducation.

As in California, this support for theimportance of a college degree, however,does not mean that people are sold on theintrinsic value and importance of a collegeeducation. Seventy-seven percent of Amer-icans think it is a problem that many youngpeople are "wasting their time and money incollege because they don't know what to dowith their lives," and 54 percent think that itis a problem that "too many people are goingto college instead of alternatives to college

where they can learn trades like plumbing orcomputer repair." The same dilemma trou-bling Californians seems to exist nationwide:A college degree may just be a piece of paper,but without that piece of paper, a young per-son will find his or her financial prospectsvery limited.

Both this study and other national studiesshow consiLrable concern about the escalat-ing cost of higher education. A 1991 ABCNewslWashington Post survey found that 65percent of Americans say that they worry agreat deal about the perception that a "goodcollege education is becoming too expen-sive." This study found that 60 percent ofAmericans believe that currently, many qual-ified students do not have the opportimity togo to college.

There is also a strong sense that opportu-nity to attend college is decreasing and thatthe situation will continue to worsen. Fifty-five percent say that it is more difficult to geta college education than it was ten years ago,and an even greater number (66 percent)think that it will be even more difficult tenyears from now.

Clearly, Americans are starting to worryabout this problem and want something tobe done about it. Forty-one percent report ahigh level of concern about higher educationin their state (even compared with otherissues such as the economy and health care),and an even higher percentage (54 percent)think that higher education in their stateneeds a fundamental overhaul.

The quality of higher education is obvi-

19

ously not the preeminent concern. A majori-ty (54 percent) say that public higher educa-tion institutions in their state are "teachingstudents the important things they need toknow." What seems to be driving the con-cerns for a basic overhaul is a sense that anincreasingly important good (higher educa-tion) is becoming less and less accessible.

When it comes to solutions, national atti-tudes are virtually identical to those inCalifornia. Specifically, the public's thinkingseems to be driven by three main values:opportunity, motivation, and reciprocity.Eighty-nine percent think that qualified andmotivated students should not be denied anopportunity to attend a college or universitymerely because of the cost. A large majority(71 percent) also believe that the benefit ofattending college depends much more onindividual effort (motivation) than on thequality of the college. Finally, 76 percentbelieve that students don't really appreciatethe value of a college education unless theyare involved in paying for it themselves (reci-procity).

National public attitudes toward changesin college education are also guided by thesame primary values: opportunity, motiva-tion, and reciprocity. Respondents in thenational sample were asked to consider threedifferent scenarios that state colleges anduniversities might use to compensate for cut-backs in state funding. Resistance was high-est to ideas which reduced access to highereducation: 53 percent thought that raisingcollege prices was a poor idea and 51 percentsaid that admitting fewer students was a pooridea. By contrast, the public is much moreopen to the idea of increasing the number ofstudents that professors teach. Only 32 per-cent rated this as a poor idea.

20

The primary values of opportunity, reci-

THE C..DSING GATEWAY

procity, and motivation also guide the pub-lic's thinking about the best means to helpstudents pay for their college education. Themost appealing approach is providing stu-dents with opportunities to work for financialaid to pay for their own education. Eightypercent think that we should use thisapproach more often. Surveys taken duringthe 1992 presidential election showedextremely high support for candidateClinton's ideas for using national service as away to pay for college education. A 1992 CBSNews/New York Times survey found that 82percent support the idea that governmentshould provide "loans to college studentsthat they could pay back either by deductionsfrom paychecks or by two years of nationalservice."

Student loans are popular even when theyare not linked to national service since theyprovide opportunity while requiring studentsto pay for their own education. Sixty-two per-cent think student loans should be usedmore often as a way to support college educa-tion. At the same time, there are deep con-cerns about loans. Ninety-one percent ofAmericans are concerned that too many stu-dents take out college loans and never paythem back and 81 percent think that it is aproblem that students borrow two muchmoney.

The idea of giving money directly to col-leges has somewhat less support. Fifty-twopercent think this method should be usedmore frequently. Giving money directly tostudents is the least popular idea. Forty-threepercent think this idea should be used moreoften: 31 percent say that it should be usedless often and 22 percent say it should beused the same amount. Obviously, Americanssupport the idea of helping students go tocollege, but direct grants contradict thevalue of reciprocity.

2 8

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

APPENDIX TWO

Research Methodology

To study attitudes toward higher educa-tion, the Public Agenda Foundation conduct-ed eight focus groups in California, a randomsample telephone survey of California resi-dents, and a random sample telephone sur-vey of resi,lents of the continental UnitedStates.

Eight focus groups were conducted inCalifornia in the spring of 1993. Groups wereheld in Bakersfield, Hayward, Los Angeles,San Diego, and San Jose. These group ses-sions included in-depth questioning of crosssections of Californians. Participants for thefocus groups were recruited by independentconsumer research organizations in Califor-nia. This qualitative research stage generatedhypotheses later tested with the two tele-phone surveys.

Public Agenda developed the instruments(questionnaires) for the surveys and con-tracted Research International, Inc. to con-

duct sampling, interviewing and tabulation.The California survey was conducted with832 California residents 18 years of age orolder. The sampling error for the Californiasurvey is plus or minus three percent. Thenational survey was conducted with 502 resi-dents of the continental United States 18years of age or older and has a samplingerror of plus or minus four percent. Samplesfor both the California and national surveyswere drawn and interviewed using randomdigit dialing techniques, where every house-holdincluding those with unlisted num-bersin California and the continentalUnited States had an equal probability ofbeing dialed. In the California survey, respon-dents were given the option of being inter-viewed in English or Spanish (49 interviewswere conducted in Spanish). The surveyswere conducted at Research International'scomputer-assisted telephone interviewingfacility in New York, between the first andninth of August 1993.

9 927

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Acknowledgements

A number of people have been instrumental in bringing this report to fruition. We are, first of

all, grateful to Pat Callan and Joni Finney of the California Higher Education Policy Center forcommissioning this study and for the advice and encouragement they have provided along the

way.

We are also indebted to the American Council of Education for the opportunity to draw on astudy of existing survey research on higher education. These findings were compiled in theData Book on Public Perceptions of Higher Education (January 1993), prepared by James

Harvey and Associates.

As always, we relied heavily on the support of our colleagues at the Public Agenda Foundation,including Deborah Wadsworth and Jean Johnson for overall direction, Jill Boese for editorial

support, and Isa Simon for administrative support and production.

We are particularly grateful to the members of the Public Agenda's research staff. EthanGutmann and Greg Shaw helped both with the design of the survey instruments and with theanalysis of the data; Greg Shaw also did a great deal of the work in developing the charts.

3023

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

About the Public Agenda Foundation

Founded a decade ago by public opinion analyst Daniel Yankelovich and former Secretary ofState Cyrus Vance, the Public Agenda Foundation works to help average citizens better under-stand critical policy issues and to help the nation's leaders better understand the public's pointof view. Public Agenda's in-depth research on how average citizens think about policy formsthe basis for its extensive citizen education work. Its citizen education materialsused by theNational Issues Forums and media outlets across the countryhave won praise for their credi-bility and fairness from elected officials from both political parties and from experts and deci-sion-makers across the political spectrum.

Cyrus VanceChairman

6 East 39th StreetNew York, NY 10016

Tel: (212) 686-6610

FAX: (212) 889-3461

OfficersDaniel Vankelovich Maurice Lazarusl'resident

Executive Committee

Ted Ashley Frederick B. HenryWarner Communications. Inc. The Bohen Foundation

John Diebold Bobby R. InmanThe JD Consulting Group. Inc. Admiral, U.S. Navy. Retired

Sidney HarmanI larman International Industries,Inc.

Member EmeritusFrank StantonFormer President, CBS

24

David MathewsThe Kettering Foundation

Executive MrectorDeborah Wadsworth

Executive Committee Chairman

Ann Md,aughlinFormer U.S. Secretary of Labor

Joe B. WyattVanderbilt University

Vice PresidentsJean JohnsonKeith MelvilleScott Swensen

31.

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

The F lonorahle John BrademasNew York University

Robert A. BurnettMeredith Corporation

!milk W. CabotCabot Corporation. Inc.

Patricia CarbineMs. Foundation for Education &Communication

Edward W. CarterCarter, Hawley. Hale. Stores, Inc.

Lisle C. Carter. Jr.. Esq.Washington, D.C.

The Honorable Dick ClarkThe Aspen Institute

William K. CoorsAdolph Coors Co.

John C. CulverArent. Fox, Kintner. Plotkin.and Kahn

The I lonorable Douglas DillonNew York

John T. DunlopHarvard University

William D. EberleEhco. Inc.

Marian Wright EdelmanChildren's Defense Fund

William EllinghausFormer President. AT&T

Policy Review Board

Murray II. FinleyAmalgamated Clothing & Text i leWorkers Union

John W. GardnerStanford University

Walter E. Iloadleyloover Institution

Shirley Hufstedlerlufstedier, Miller. Carlson

& Beardsley

Vernon E. Jordan. Jr.Akin, Gamp. Strauss, I lauer& Feld

Clark KerrUniversity of California

Franklin A. LindsayCambridge. Massachusetts

The I lonorable Sol M. LinowitzCoudert Brothers

Gilbeil C. MaurerThe I learst Corporation

James P. McFarlandMinneapolis, Minnesota

Ruben F. MettlerTRW. Inc.

J. Irwin MillerCummins Engine Company

Newton N. Minow. Esq.Sidley and Austin

Eleanor Holmes NortonCongresswoman.Washington, D.C.

Jane C. PfeifferGreenwich. Connecticut

The I lonorable Elliot RichardsonMillbank. Tweed, Hadley & McCloy

David E. RogersThe New York Hospital-CornellMedical Center

The lionorable George RornneyBloomfield Hills. MI

William M. RothSan Francisco. CA

Jerome S. RubinTimes Mirror Co.

William RuderWilliam Ruder. Inc.

Sophie SaPanasonic Foundation, Inc.

Hershel B. SarbinHershel B. Sarbin Assoc.. Inc.

John SawhillNature Conservancy

Adele SimmonsThe John D. ez Catherine T.MacArthur Foundation

Elmer 13. StaatsFormer Comptroller General

Lester ThurowMassachusetts Institute ofTechnology

Members of the executive committee also serve on the policy review hoard.

3'4 25

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Related Reports Published by the Public Agenda Foundation

DIVIDED WITHIN, BESIEGED WITHOUT: THE POLITICS OF EDUCATION IN FOUR

AMERICAN SCHOOL DISTRICTS. Steve Farkas. Prepared by the Public Agenda Foundation for

the Charles F. Kettering Foundation. The result of two years of education reform research, this

report details severe gaps in communication among educators, between parents and educators,

and between business leaders and educators and discusses how they contribute to gridlock on

school reform. 1993. 32pp. $10.00

EDUCATIONAL REFORM: THE PLAYERS AND THE POLITICS. Steve Farkas. This report is

based on a national survey conducted by Public Agenda in collaboration with the Kettering

Foundation in 1992. Diverse groups with a stake in education were surveyed using systematic

random sampling: teachers, principals, superintendents, and, in the public sector, business

executives from major corporations. 1992. 21pp. $8.50.

CROSSTALK: THE PUBLIC, THE EXPERTS, AND COMPETITIVENESS. John Immerwahr, Jean

Johnson, and Adam Kernan-Schloss. A Research Report from the Business-Higher Education

Forum and the Public Agenda Foundation. This report describes fundamental differences

between the way leaders and the public view the issue of U.S. economic competitiveness and

related problems in education and work force training. 1991. 24pp. $17.50.

To order:Please write or call: the Public Agenda Foundation, 6 East 39th Street, Dept. CA. New York, NY

10016. Tel: 212-686-6610 FAX: 212-889-3461. Orders may be charged to American Express.

26

THE CLOSING GATEWAY

Single copies of this report are available from the California Higher Education Policy Center,

160 West Santa Clara Street, Suite 704, San Jose, California 95113. For an immediate

response please fax all requests to (408) 287-6709. Ask for No. 93-6.

Copyright 1993. The Public Agenda Foundation and the California Higher Education Policy

Center. Copies may not be sold. The Center grants permission to copy and distribute this pub-

lication, with acknowledgment of the California Higher Education Policy Center.

The California Higher Education Policy Center is a nonprofit, independent, non-partisan orga-

nization created to stimulate public discussion and debate about the purposes, goals and orga-

nization of California higher education.

REPORTS PUBLISHED BY THE CALIFORNIA HIGHEREDUCATION POLICY CENTER

93-1 PUBLIC POLICY BY ANECDOTE

The Case of Community College FeesBy William Trombley

93-2 THE CALIFORNIA HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY VACUUM

The Example of Student Feesby Patrick M. Callan

93-3 THE PRESS AND CALIFORNIA HIGHER EDUCATION

By William ChanceMay 1993

93-4 BY DESIGN OR DEFAULTBy Patrick M. Callan and Joni E. Finney

June 1993

93-5 ON THE BRINKThe Impact of Budget Cuts on California's Public Universities

by Jack McCurdy and William Trombley

August 1993

93-6 THE CLOSING GATEWAYCalifornians Consider Their Higher Education System

By John Immerwahr and Steve Farkas

September 1993

:4127