SUU Festival of Excellence 2018

One of the barriers that prevent potential students of applying and enrolling in college are the perceived costs of attendance. For many students, there is a difference in the perceived cost of college and the cost that they will actually pay to attend. This study analyzes a randomized controlled experiment designed to nudge students toward college by providing salient information on the net cost of college.
Participants in the study consist of over 9,000 seniors from high schools that are in the same state as the university, which is a regional public university. All participants received a letter which offered automatic admission to the university, conditional that they fill out a free application. The letter also included references to where the students could go to learn more about the costs of the university and how to fill out a FAFSA and apply for a Pell Grant. A subset of participants were randomly assigned to a treatment group. This group received a letter with the same wording but contained an additional content that summarized the costs of the university, the potential award amount provided by a Pell Grant, and an estimated net cost. This information was presented clearly, conspicuously, and at the center of the letter.
Those that received this letter detailing the expected costs of college were 2.2 percentage points more likely to apply than those that just received a letter (of which 14 percent applied to the university). Using proxies for family income, individuals from lower income families were 4.4 percentage points more likely to apply, indicating that the nudge was most effective among individuals who were most likely to receive a Pell Grant. One reason why the nudge may have been effective was that it provided salient information and simplified the application process.
However, examining other outcomes like enrollment, filling out the FAFSA and applying for a Pell Grant show that there was no significant effect of the intervention. There was no statistical difference in enrollment between the treatment and control group. There also was no statistical difference in the likelihood of individuals filling out a FAFSA or applying for a Pell Grant between the two groups. While the information was directed at providing information on potential award amounts from a Pell Grant, the intervention only simplified the application process and not the enrollment or financial aid process. This suggests that information may not be enough, instead interventions should be designed to remove obstacles that prevent individuals from taking advantage of programs that make college more affordable.