Merit Scholarships
The Georgia HOPE Scholarship, established in 1993, has served as a model for
many broad-based merit scholarship programs across the country. In addition to
being the first, the Georgia HOPE Scholarship is also the most studied (e.g.,
Dynarski, 2000; Cornwell & Mustard, 2001; Rubenstein & Scafidi, 2002). Broad-
based merit scholarship programs have also been the focus of two recent studies
from the Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. In addition to exploring the
effects of the HOPE Scholarship, researchers also examined the consequences of
broad-based merit scholarships in other states including Florida, Michigan, New
Mexico, Alaska, and Kentucky. The first report, Who Should We Help? The Negative
Consequences of Merit Scholarships, investigated theories behind the use of these
scholarships as well as how the different definitions of merit affect the
distribution of awards (Heller & Marin, 2002). The researchers focused on the
effects of merit structures on access to college for racial minorities and students
from low-income families. In addition, the study researched how the presence of
merit scholarships shaped tuition rates and financial aid packages from colleges
within states implementing such programs.
The general findings from the study were as follows: 1) Definitions of merit
and the structures of many existing merit scholarships overlook students with the
greatest financial need. This exacerbates existing disparities for minority and low-
income students. 2) Merit scholarships do not greatly expand access to college;
instead they tend to benefit those students who would attend college anyway. In
particular, scholarships seem to shape the school choice by students who qualify
for them; 3) Merit scholarships seem to influence tuition and financial aid
decisions at some institutions, which has the potential to increase the cost of
going to college for students who do not qualify for the scholarships (Heller &
Marin, 2002).
The follow up study by the Civil Rights Project, State Merit Scholarship Programs
and Racial Inequality, looked in greater detail at the effects of scholarships on low-
income and minority groups (Heller & Marin, 2004). This report confirmed the
earlier studies’ conclusion that although the effects of merit scholarships varied
by state and structure, they tended to contribute to existing inequalities in access
and awards. The study also included one of the few quantitative analyses of
KEES. In a comparative analysis of five states, Farrell (2004) found a substantive
gap between the size of KEES awards earned by Caucasian and African-American
high school students.
While merit scholarships have vocal critics, some of the programs earn praise
from scholars. For example, Ackerman, Young, & Young (2005) argue that
Nevada’s Millennium Scholarship Program has been successful in achieving
many of its goals. They find evidence that the Nevada Program improves access
to higher education and encourages students to attend in-state institutions. The
program also seems to promote persistence among award recipients. Ackerman
et al. note the importance of having the scholarship program tied to a stable
source of revenue.
The Structure of KEES
When compared with other merit programs, KEES has several distinctive
characteristics. Noteworthy differences include a substantially graduated award
schedule and the inclusion of two measures of merit. KEES awards are calculated
using two measurements: high school GPA determines a base award, and ACT
test score determines a supplemental amount. The annual base award is earned
National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators 31
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48