Document Category: Research Study

Food insecurity among Division I student-athletes at a California State University: A mixed methods study (2023)

According to the 2020 Hope Survey, 38% of two-year college students and 29% of four-year college students experienced food insecurity. The distinct lifestyle of student-athletes may place them at an even greater risk for experiencing food insecurity and its consequences as compared to non-student-athletes. Therefore, this study assessed the prevalence of food insecurity among 98 student-athletes at California State University, Northridge (CSUN), and explored its impact on their athletic and academic performances and emotional well-being. The current study utilized a mixed-methods, cross-sectional design. An online survey was used to assess food security status, fruit and vegetable intake, reliance on athletic department fueling stations, and other sociodemographic variables. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore the impact of food insecurity on athletic performance, academic performance, and emotional well-being. Of the 98 student-athletes, 34.7% were food insecure. Reliance on the fueling station as a primary source of food for the day and reduced fruit and vegetable intake were identified as significant predictors of food insecurity. Results from eight semi-structured interviews revealed that food intake impacts energy levels during class and athletic events, and in the overall quality of athletic performance. Additionally, unequal access to resources within the fueling station was seen as a barrier to their success. Future research should investigate the prevalence of food insecurity among student-athletes and assess the use of the athletic department fueling station as an intervention to mitigate food insecurity among this population.

Empirical Benchmarks for Planning and Interpreting Causal Effects of Community College Interventions (2023)

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are an increasingly common research design for evaluating the effectiveness of community college (CC) interventions. However, when planning an RCT evaluation of a CC intervention, there is limited empirical information about what sized effects an intervention might reasonably achieve, which can lead to under- or over-powered studies. Relatedly, when interpreting results from an evaluation of a CC intervention, there is limited empirical information to contextualize the magnitude of an effect estimate relative to what sized effects have been observed in past evaluations. We provide empirical benchmarks to help with the planning and interpretation of community college evaluations. To do so, we present findings across well-executed RCTs of 39 CC interventions that are part of a unique dataset known as The Higher Education Randomized Controlled Trials (THE-RCT). The analyses include 21,163–65,604 students (depending on outcome and semester) enrolled in 44 institutions. Outcomes include enrollment, credits earned, and credential attainment. Effect size distributions are presented by outcome and semester. For example, across the interventions examined, the mean effect on cumulative credits earned after three semesters is 1.14 credits. Effects around 0.16 credits are at the 25th percentile of the distribution. Effects around 1.69 credits are at the 75th percentile of the distribution. This work begins to provide empirical benchmarks for planning and interpreting effects of CC evaluations.

Racial and Economic Stratification on Campus: The Relationship Between Luxury Residence Halls, Race, and Academic Outcomes (2023)

Residence hall design has remained an important topic for higher education professionals, but recently it has garnered attention from audiences beyond the postsecondary sector, including policymakers, donors, and media. In the competitive realm of enrollment management, luxury residence hall designs that emphasize high-end amenities and private rooms are vital in attracting certain prospective students (McClure, 2019). The design of luxury residence halls has created tension between the ideals of equitable educational experiences and increased competition to attract enrollment, as such facilities are often priced beyond the financial reach of students whose presence is essential to creating a diverse educational experience for all students.

Rather than creating a more diverse environment, residence hall design has been shown to promote racial and economic stratification in living spaces (Foste, 2021). One form of racialized pattern in student housing is homophily, which is the grouping of students by race or class that permits (or limits) opportunities to interact with persons “like me” (McPherson et al., 2001). Yet, interacting with others of a similar race and economic background has been shown to result in better academic outcomes (Brown et al., 2019). Some researchers found residence hall design played no role in college experiences (Bronkema & Bowman, 2017), while others found isolating designs to be less conducive to flourishing and associated with poorer academic outcomes for Black students when examining Black/White differences (Brown et al., 2019).

As university leaders face pressures to increase enrollment, some have allocated millions of dollars to attracting students using a new type of luxury residence hall design—hybrid luxury—that combines high-end amenities and high socialization design (Cramer, 2021; Eligon, 2013). While hybrid luxury halls emphasize added amenities such as coffee lounges, co-working spaces, and exclusive resident-only fitness studios, they also incorporate certain design elements to strategically increase patterns of student socialization. What remains unknown is (a) how emerging hybrid luxury designs may be associated with academic outcomes and (b) whether student academic outcomes differed in other forms of residence hall designs conditioned on race and homophily [End Page 108] opportunity. The focus of this work takes up these two questions.

Basic needs insecurities among Rutgers students: A university wide survey (2023)

This report describes the first study to invite all matriculated students from every Rutgers Chancellor-led Unit (Unit) to participate in a survey on basic needs insecurities. It is also the first study to measure Rutgers students’ basic needs insecurities beyond food and housing.

Methods:
· The survey was conducted online from November 15 to December 14, 2022.
· A total of 7,094 students responded, for a 10.7% response rate. Response rate by Unit ranged from 8.6% to 13.5%.
· The respondents were generally representative of the Rutgers student body.

Top line Results:
· University wide, almost 1 in 3 undergraduates (31.2%) and 1 in 4 graduate students (26.5%) reported experiencing food insecurity in the past 30 days.
· Graduate students were more likely than undergraduates to report having been housing insecure over the past 12 months, 46.7% vs. 31.0%, respectively.
· Homelessness was the least frequent basic need insecurity, as 7.6% of undergraduates and 8.2% of graduate students reported experiencing homelessness in the past 12 months.
· Many students reported having difficulty affording other needs that can affect their well-being and education. Some of the most pervasive needs were difficulty affording technology (42.8% of undergraduates and 47.2% of graduate students), books (43.8% of undergraduates and 40.1% of graduate students), and mental healthcare (35.8% of undergraduates and 41.6% of graduate students).
· As expected, given the different student populations of each Unit and degree level, there were disparities in the rates of basic needs insecurities across Units and degree level.

Recommendations:
· Continue to support innovative efforts to meet students’ basic needs and share best practices across Units.
· Tailor programming and policies to Unit-level student profiles and needs rather than adopt a one-size fits all, universitywide approach.
· Streamline service delivery whenever possible. Benefit hubs such as basic needs centers help connect students with Unit-based and community-based services and programs across multiple types of needs. Units should consider adopting a benefit hub model that is tailored to the needs of their students.

California Student Aid Commission: Food and Housing Survey (2023)

In May 2023, the California Student Aid Commission (Commission) administered our inaugural Food and Housing Survey, as a supplement to the triannual Student Expenses and Resources Survey (SEARS). This survey asked students about their experiences paying for food and housing during the 2022-23 academic year.

Survey Recruitment Bias and Estimates of College Student Food Insecurity (2023)

Having valid measures of college student FI is essential for justifying basic-needs services for students. But college student food insecurity (FI) rates vary significantly across institutions, perhaps partially due to differences in non-response bias resulting from participant recruitment strategies. We tested for effects of recruitment method on measured levels of college student FI at three time points (2020, 2021, 2022). Survey response rates varied dramatically across recruitment modalities. Higher FI rates were estimated in low-response-rate survey deliveries. Emailed surveys appear to inflate estimates of student FI. Efforts to increase response rates likely produce more valid estimates of college student FI.

Who Received Federal Emergency Aid Funding in Texas? A Closer Look at the Pandemic Funding Awarded to Postsecondary Students (2023)

Executive Summary

More than 1 million Texas students received federal emergency aid through HEERF, nearly half (47%) of all students statewide based on enrollment figures reported by institutions.
Despite having similar average amounts of unmet financial need, Texas students enrolled at public two-year colleges were less likely to receive emergency aid — and received smaller average award amounts — than students enrolled at public four-year universities.
Across all institutions, Black students receiving aid were awarded higher average amounts of emergency aid than other racial/ethnic student groups.
More than 450,000 Pell recipients — nearly 80% of all Pell recipients statewide — received emergency aid and were awarded significantly higher average amounts than non-Pell recipients. Nearly one-third of all non-Pell recipients — over 404,000 students — also received emergency aid.
Across sectors, improved retention rates at the institution level were correlated with larger percentages of students receiving emergency aid. This correlation was consistently stronger for institutions with higher percentages of Pell recipients.

College Students and Class Attendance: How Poverty and Illbeing Affect Student Success through Punitive Attendance Policies (2023)

This study examines the prevalence of poverty and illbeing among students attending a large urban university and investigates how these challenges affect attendance, including how failure to meet attendance requirements may negatively influence course outcomes for these students. Through an anonymous survey, 520 students responded to questions asking about professor inflexibility, food insecurity, housing insecurity, depression, anxiety, and chronic illness. Over half of survey respondents reported having some degree of food and housing insecurity, and over half reported having anxiety, depression, or chronic illness. A multiple regression analysis demonstrated that punitive attendance policies disproportionally impact students living in poverty and those who experience anxiety, depression, or other forms of chronic illness. Several students reported that inflexible attendance policies have led them to a lowered grade, course failure, or course withdrawal to avoid failure, even when they otherwise had a passing grade. Examining professorial power through French and Raven’s six power bases, I invite faculty to think about the ways in which their power intersects with students and the opportunities that course policies provide to actively contribute to social mobility for students facing opportunity gaps.

Effects of Universal and Unconditional Cash Transfers on Child Abuse and Neglect (2023)

We estimate the effects of cash transfers on a severe measure of child welfare: maltreatment. To do so, we leverage year-to-year household variation from a universal and unconditional cash transfer, the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD). Using linked individual-level administrative data on PFD payments and child maltreatment referrals, we show that an additional $1,000 to families in the first few months of a child’s life reduces the likelihood that a child is referred to Child Protective Services by age three by 2.0 percentage points, or 10 percent, on average. Estimates indicate that additional cash transfers also reduce child mortality.