Researchers have paid scant attention to the opportunities and the barriers associated with across-state study of college-transition policies, although the American states comprise a social system especially well suited for comparative analysis. What sorts of questions should researchers ask about college-transition policies and programs? How might these questions be framed conceptually? What data are and are not generally available to researchers? This article examines these questions. Because relatively little comparative-state research on college-transition policies exists, the emphasis is on describing the contemporary policy landscape, identifying broad questions with which to anchor future study, and discussing potential data sources and analytic approaches. The authors argue that researchers should begin asking more empirically oriented questions about both the determinants and the effects of college-transition policies in the states. They contend that both avenues of inquiry pose distinct data and analytic challenges.
Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns and bachelor's degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
2.
Baird, K. (2006a). Do prepaid tuition plans affect state support for higher education? Journal of Education Finance, 31(3), 255-275.
3.
Baird, K. (2006b). The political economy of college prepaid tuition plans. The Review of Higher Education, 29(2), 141-166.
4.
Berry, F.S., & Berry, W.D. (1990). State lottery adoptions as policy innovations: An event history analysis. American Political Science Review84(2), 395-416.
5.
Berry, F.S., & Berry, W.D. (1999). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research . In P. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
6.
Berry, W.D., Ringquist, E.J., Fording, R.C., & Hanson, R.L. (1998). Measuring citizen and government ideology in the American states, 1960-93. American Journal of Political Science , 42, 327-348.
7.
Beyle, T. (1999). The governors. In V. Gray, R. L. Hanson, & H. Jacob (Eds.), Politics in the American states (7th ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
8.
Bibby, J.F., & Holbrook, T.M. (1999). Parties and elections. In V. Gray, R. L. Hanson, & H. Jacob (Eds.), Politics in the American states (7th ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press .
9.
Bowler, M. (2001). Maryland's K-16 partnership. In G. I. Maeroff, P. M. Callan, & M. D. Usdan (Eds.), The learning connection: New partnerships between schools and colleges (pp. 63-70). New York: Teachers College Press.
10.
Burke, J.C. (2002). Funding public colleges and universities for performance . Albany, NY: Nelson Rockefeller Institute Press.
11.
Dawson, R.E., & Robinson, J.A. (1963). Inter-party competition, economic variables, and welfare policies in theAmerican states. Journal of Politics, 25(2), 265-289.
12.
Education Commission of the States. (2001). What is P-16 education? A primer for legislators. Denver, CO: Author.
13.
Education Commission of the States. (2003). StateNotes: Models of postsecondary education coordination and governance in the states. Denver, CO: Author .
14.
Education Commission of the States. (2006). StateNotes: P-16 collaboration in the states. Denver, CO : Author.
15.
Ehrenberg, R. (2006). The perfect storm and the privatization of public higher education. Change, 38(1), 46-50.
16.
Erikson, R.S., Wright, G.C., & McIver, J.P. (1993). Statehouse democracy: Public opinion and policy in the American states. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17.
Farrell, P. (2004). Who are the students receiving merit scholarships? In D. E. Heller & P. Marin (Eds.), State merit scholarship programs and racial inequality (pp. 49-75). Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
18.
Grapevine. (2007). State rankings on annual changes in state appropriations. Retrieved from http://www.coe.ilstu.edu/grapevine/table3.html
19.
Gray, V. (1994). Competition, emulation, and policy innovation . In L. Dodd & C. Jillson (Eds.), New perspectives on American politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press .
20.
Hays, S.P. (1996). Influences on re-invention during the diffusion of innovations. Political Research Quarterly, 49(3), 631-650.
21.
Heller, D.E. (1999). The effects of tuition and student financial aid on public college enrollment. The Review of Higher Education , 23(1), 65-89.
22.
Heller, D.E. (2001). The states and public higher education policy: Affordability, access, and accountability. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
23.
Heller, D.E. (2002). State merit scholarship programs. In D. E. Heller & P. Marin (Eds.), Whom should we help? The negative social consequences of merit scholarships (pp. 15-23). Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
24.
Heller, D.E. (2004). State merit scholarship programs: An overview . In D. E. Heller & P. Marin (Eds.), State merit scholarship programs and racial inequality (pp. 13-22). Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
25.
Heller, D.E. (2006, March). Merit aid and college access. Paper prepared for the Symposium on the Consequences of Merit-Based Student Aid, Wisconsin Center for the Advancement of Postsecondary Education, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
26.
Heller, D.E., & Rasmussen, C. (2001, November). Do merit scholarships promote college access? Evidence from two states. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education , Richmond, VA.
27.
Herbert, A.W. (2001). Statewide education governance reform: The Florida experiment. ECS Governance Notes. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
28.
Holbrook, T.M., & Van Dunk, E. (1993). Electoral competition in theAmerican states. American Political Science Review, 87, 955-962.
29.
Ikenberry, S., & Hartle, T. (1998). Too little knowledge is a dangerous thing: What the public thinks and knows about paying for college. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
30.
Immerwahr, J. (2002). The affordability of higher education: A review of recent survey research. San Jose, CA: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.
31.
Kane, T.J. (1994). Lessons from the largest school voucher program ever: Two decades of experience with Pell Grants. Monograph, Kennedy School of Government.
32.
Kettlewell, J.S., Kaste, J.A., & Jones, S.A. (2000). The Georgia story of P-16 partnerships. Educational Policy, 14(1), 77-92.
33.
Kirst, M.W. (1997). Exam confusion: Admissions and placement tests lack standardization. National Crosstalk, 5(4).
34.
Kirst, M.W. (1999). A Babel of standards: Students face a confusing array of tests and assessments. National Crosstalk, 7(4).
35.
Kirst, M.W. (2000). The senior slump: Making the most of high school preparation. National Crosstalk, 8(4).
36.
Kirst, M.W., & Bracco, K.R. (2004). Bridging the great divide: How the K-12 and postsecondary split hurts students, and what can be done about it. In M. W. Kirst & A. Venezia (Eds.), From high school to college: Improving opportunities for success in postsecondary education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37.
Kirst, M.W., & Venezia, A. (2001, September). Bridging the great divide between secondary schools and postsecondary education. Phi Delta Kappan, 92-97.
38.
Kirst, M. W., Venezia, A., & Antonio, A. L. (Eds.). (2004). From high school to college: Improving opportunities for success in postsecondary education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
39.
Kleinbaum, D.G., Kupper, L.L., & Muller, K.E. (1988). Applied regression analysis and other multivariate methods (2nd ed.). Boston: PWS-KENT.
40.
Krueger, C. (2001). ECS state notes: Financial aid: Merit scholarships . Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
41.
Mazamanian, D., & Sabatier, P. (1983). Implementation and public policy. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
42.
McGuinness, A.C. (1997). State postsecondary education structures handbook . Denver, CO: National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.
43.
McLendon, M.K. (2003). State governance reform of higher education: Patterns, trends, and theories of the public policy process. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 18, pp. 57-144). London: Kluwer.
44.
McLendon, M.K., & Hearn, J.C. (2007). Incorporating political indicators into comparative-state research on postsecondary policy: Opportunities and limitations of space and time. In K. Shaw & D. E. Heller (Eds.), The challenges of comparative state-level higher education policy research. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
45.
McLendon, M.K., Hearn, J.C., & Deaton, R. (2006). Called to account: Analyzing the origins and spread of state performance-accountability policies for higher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(1), 1-24.
46.
McLendon, M.K., Heller, D., & Young, S. (2005). State postsecondary policy innovation: Politics, competition, and interstate migration of policy ideas. Journal of Higher Education, 76(4), 363-400.
47.
Mintrom, M. (1997). Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation . American Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 738-770.
48.
Mintrom, M., & Vergari, S. (1998). Policy networks and innovation diffusion: The case of state education reforms. The Journal of Politics, 60(1), 126-148.
49.
Mooney, C.Z., & Lee, M.H. (1995). Legislating morality in theAmerican states. American Journal of Political Science, 39(3), 599-627.
50.
Mumper, M. (2003). Does policy design matter? Comparing universal and targeted approaches to encouraging college student participation. Educational Policy, 17(1), 38-59.
51.
National Association of Systems Heads. (2001 ). State K-16 councils. Retrieved from http://www.nashonline.org/
52.
National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. (2000). Measuring up, 2000. San Jose, CA: Author.
53.
Olivas, M.A. (2003). State college savings and prepaid tuition plans: A reappraisal and review. Journal of Law & Education, 32(4), 475-515.
54.
Oregon University System. (2000, April). An introduction to the Proficiency-Based Admissions Standards System (PASS). Author.
55.
Palumbo, D.J. (1988). Public policy in America: Government in action . San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
56.
Plotnick, R.D., & Winters, R.F. (1985). A politicoeconomic theory of income redistribution . American Political Science Review, 79(2), 458-473.
57.
Rainwater, T. (2000, August). ECS state notes: P-16 collaboration in the states. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
58.
Sabatier, P.A. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up models of policy implementation . Journal of Public Policy, 6, 21-48.
59.
Selingo, J. (2003, May 2). What Americans think about higher education . Chronicle of Higher Education.
60.
Sigelman, L., & Smith, R.E. (1980). Consumer legislation in the American states: An attempt at explanation. Social Science Quarterly, 61(1), 58-69.
61.
Squire, P. (1993). Professionalization and public opinion of state legislatures. Journal of Politics, 55(2), 479-491.
62.
Squire, P. (2000). Uncontested seats in state legislative elections . Legislative Studies Quarterly, 25(1), 131-146.
63.
Swail, W.S., & Perna, L.W. (2002). Pre-college outreach programs: A national perspective . In W. G. Tierney & L. S. Hagedorn (Eds.), Increasing access to college: Extending possibilities for all students. Albany : State University of New York Press.
64.
Trombly, W. (2001). Florida's new "K-20" model. Crosstalk , 9(2), 14-16.
65.
Usdan, M.D., & Podmostko, M. (2001). The legislative status of K-12 and higher education relationships. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership.
66.
Walker, J.L. (1969). The diffusion of innovations among theAmerican states. American Political Science Review, 63(3), 880-899.
67.
Wong, K.K., & Shen, F.X. (2002). Politics of state-led reform in education: Market competition and electoral dynamics. Educational Policy, 16(1), 161-192.
