Services Offered by the Largest Precollegiate Programs

Services offered by the largest precollegiate programs were examined in three ways: in terms of the approaches used to provide the services, the services that were the most important, and the financial benefits that were offered to participants.

Approaches for Providing Services

When given a list of six methods that programs might use to provide services, 78 percent of the institutions ranked classroom sessions among the top three for their largest precollegiate program, 60 percent indicated tutoring, and 60 percent indicated workshops and small groups (figure 8). Among the remaining methods, 34 percent said mentoring was in the top three, 30 percent picked testing/assessment, and 24 percent indicated field trips.

There often were differences in the approaches that were used, depending on the characteristics of the institutions offering the programs (table 15). Four-year institutions more often said tutoring was the single most used approach than did 2-year institutions (24 percent versus 11 percent), and small institutions more often said workshops and small groups were the top approach than did large institutions (25 percent versus 13 percent). Upward Bound programs differed from other programs by having a greater emphasis on tutoring (32 percent versus 14 percent) and less emphasis on workshops and small groups (13 percent versus 23 percent).

Most Important Services

At the time the survey questionnaire was developed, it was not known whether precollegiate programs were structured around just a few services or reflected a more multifaceted approach. For this reason, the questionnaire was designed to ask about a list of 12 program services in two different ways: first by asking whether each service was very important, somewhat important, or not at all important, and second by ranking the top 3 services in order.

The rankings that institutions provided supply considerable y more detail about programs' priorities. The services most often ranked among the top three were social skills development (43 percent), information about college admissions and/or financial aid (35 percent), supplemental courses (33 percent), career counseling (32 percent), preparatory courses (29 percent), and remediation (29 percent; figure 10). However, it would be incorrect to infer from the high ranking given to social skills development that this service was emphasized more than academic skills. In fact, institutions were more likely to rank as the single most important priority either remediation ( 19 percent) or supplemental courses (18 percent) than social skills development (12 percent); further, if the five academically related services are grouped together (remediation, academically accelerated courses below the college level, college-level courses, special preparatory courses, and other supplemental courses), then programs were far more likely to rate among the top three one of these academic services (81 percent not in tables) than social skills development (43 percent).

In some cases there were differences in program priorities based on institutional characteristics (table 16). Supplemental courses were reported among the top three more often by 4-year institutions than 2-year institutions (37 percent versus 24 percent), and information about admissions and/or financial aid was more often among the top three for programs at public institutions than at private institutions (45 percent versus 19 percent) and programs at large institutions than at small institutions (50 percent versus 27 percent). Perhaps reflecting a greater vocational focus, career counseling was more often among the top three at 2-year institutions than at 4-year institutions (48 percent versus 25 percent).

There also were some significant differences between Upward Bound and other programs. Upward Bound programs were more likely than other programs to rank accelerated courses below the college level among the top three (35 percent versus 10 percent), as well as other supplemental courses (44 percent versus 28 percent) and information about admissions and/or financial aid (56 percent versus 27 percent); they were less likely to put social skills development among the top three (26 percent versus 51 percent).

Financial Awards to Participants

An estimated 63 percent of the largest precollegiate programs provided some type of financial award, including 50 percent that paid a stipend for participation and 33 percent that offered financial incentives for successful performance (table 17).³⁰Financial awards were especially common among Upward Bound programs, both overall (99 percent versus 47 percent) as well as for each type of aid (98 percent versus 28 percent for stipends for participation, and 49 percent versus 26 percent for benefits for successful performance).

The incentives that programs provided for successful performance included a variety of types of aid (table 18). In fact, 63 percent of the institutions providing such benefits indicated that they provided some other benefit in addition to or in place of any of the five types listed on the questionnaire. Often, however, these "other" incentives were quite similar to those listed on the questionnaire, except that they provided for only partial payments or they applied to only a small number of precollegiate students. Most commonly, these responses indicated that a scholarship or stipend was paid to at least some students (32 percent) or that some costs (e.g., tuition, room and board, books) were at least partially met (25 percent). Among the five benefits listed on the questionnaire, the most often reported benefit was college-level courses offered for credit free of charge or at reduced prices (39 percent).

Upward Bound programs differed from other precollegiate programs in their use of several of these benefits, with a greater use of college courses at reduced prices (61 percent versus 22 percent) and pay for precollege grades (21 percent versus 5 percent); Upward Bound programs less often reported use of a full tuition guarantee at the institution (6 percent versus 23 percent) and the last dollars needed for tuition (7 percent versus 21 percent). Other differences between programs were a greater use of reduced cost college-level courses at 2-year institutions than at 4-year institutions (56 percent versus 33 percent) and a greater offering of pay for grades at public institutions than at private institutions (17 percent versus 5 percent).

³⁰ Some programs provided both benefits.

Top