Abstract
- Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in a tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
- American Institute of Physics. (2006). High school physics enrollment growth by level of course. Retrieved January 4, 2008, from http://www.aip.org/statistics/trends/reports/winter2006a.pdf.
- College Board. (1996). 1996 college bound seniors: a profile of SAT program test takers. Retrieved January 3, 2008, from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/data-reports-research/sat/archived/1996.
- College Board. (2005). 2005 college bound seniors: Total group profile report. Retrieved January 3, 2008, from http://www.collegeboard.com/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2005/reports.html.
- Dynarski, S. (2004). The new merit aid. In C. Hoxby (Ed.), College choices: The economics of where to go, when to go, and how to pay for it (pp. 63–97). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Fiorito, J., & Dauffenbach, R. C. (1982). Market and non-market influences on curriculum choice by college students. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 36, 103–114.
- Herzog, S. (2005). Measuring determinants of student return vs. dropouts/stopouts vs. transfer: A first-to-second year analysis of new freshman. Research in Higher Education, 46, 883–928.
- Leslie, L. L., & Oaxaca, R. L. (1991). Scientist and engineer supply and demand. Tucson: University of Arizona.
- Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2006). Study of mathematically precocious youth after 35 years. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 316–345.
- National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy. (2006). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- Office of Admission Research, University of Texas. (2001). Developing a concordance between ACT assessment and the SAT1. Austin: University of Texas.
- Reis, S. M., & Park, S. (2001). Gender differences in high-achieving students in math and science. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25, 52–73.
- Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
- Singell, L. D., Jr. (2003). Come stay awhile: Does financial aid effect retention conditioned on enrollment at a large public university? Economics of Education Review, 23, 459–471.
- Tai, R. H., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A.V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143–1144.
- Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. ( 2003). Women in science career processes and outcomes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Volume 31
- Issue 3
- Publication Date: Spring 2008
Can a Merit-Based Scholarship Program Increase Science and Engineering Baccalaureates?
Joe G. Baker and Michael G. Finn
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the following question: to what extent would a nationally competitive scholarship program increase science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) degree awards to our “best and brightest”? This inquiry is prompted by a 2006 report of a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) panel, “Rising Above the Gathering Storm,” which proposed a national STEM scholarship program to improve United States competitiveness. Using the Department of Education National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS-88), high school graduates from the class of 1992 who would potentially win such a scholarship were identified using ACT/SAT/AP test scores, grade point averages (GPA) and class standing, high school classes completed, and science fair participation. NELS-88 college transcript data indicated a lower bound estimate of between 60% to 80% of students likely to win the merit scholarships are already completing STEM degrees.
Cart Summary
Your cart is empty.