| | | | |

The Plight of Economic Disadvantaged Students in the 8th Grade Cohort

ByBlake Decker

We continue our summer blog series reviewing the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board’s (THECB) 8th grade cohort study, now known as the “Texas Talent Trajectory (T3)” project. This blog post builds on previous entries (here and here) by exploring educational outcome data for members of the three-year 8th-grade cohort (FY2011-FY2013) based on students’ economically disadvantaged status, as determined by a student being “eligible to participate in the national free or reduced price lunch program, as defined by the Texas Education Agency” (T3 Appendix). 

Texas Talent Trajectory (T3) Data Comparison by Economic Status

In the visualization below, there are three different timepoints in determining success for students in the 8th-grade cohort.

  • Economic Status: Out of the more than 1.08 million in the 3-year cohort, over 57% (619K) of the students were considered to be economically disadvantaged during their 8th grade year.
  • High School Diploma: Just over 81% of 8th graders earned a high school diploma from a Texas public high school in the T3 data. As shown in the visualization below, there is an almost 10 percentage point difference between the groups based on economic status: 77% of economically disadvantaged students completed a high school diploma, while over 86% of students who were not economically disadvantaged earned a high school diploma.
  • Higher Education Enrollment: The metrics at the higher education level in Texas show increasing gaps based on economic status. For students in the 8th-grade cohort, almost 65% of not economically disadvantaged students enrolled in Texas higher education (2- or 4-year institutions) within six years of high school graduation, while under 43% of economically disadvantaged students enrolled. For the not economically disadvantaged group, enrollment is fairly evenly split between 2-year and 4-year institutions. However, the economically disadvantaged students enrolled in 2-year institutions at twice the rate of those enrolled in 4-year institutions (28.7% versus 14.1%, respectively).
  • Higher Education Credential: Previous data showed that only 24% of the 8th-grade cohort completed a higher education credential (certificate or degree) within 11 years of entering the 8th grade. For those in the economically disadvantaged group, less than 16% earned a higher education credential, while 36% of the not economically disadvantaged group earned a higher education credential in Texas. The largest gap is for students who earned a bachelor’s degree, as only 9.5% of the economically disadvantaged students earned a bachelor’s degree compared to 29.3% of students in the not economically disadvantaged group.
NOTES: Current T3 data do not include enrollment and earning of credentials at out-of-state higher education institutions. These data, plus employment outcomes, will be added by THECB in the future. Hovering over the nodes and links in the Sankey diagram show additional information.
There is a significant gap in educational outcomes based on economic status of students in the 8th-grade cohort.
Abbreviations: "HE" = Higher Education | "EconDis" = "Economically Disadvantaged" | "Not EconDis" = "Not Economically Disadvantaged"

So What?

As the “HE Credential” visualization above showed, only 16 out of every 100 students (15.8%) in the 8th-grade cohort who were eligible for free/reduced lunch (economically disadvantaged) completed either a certificate, associate’s degree, or bachelor’s degree from a Texas public or independent college or university. This means that only 97,668 of the 618,994 8th-grade students who were economically disadvantaged in the multi-year cohort earned a higher education credential within 11 years of starting 8th grade. With the fairly recent proliferation of “Early College High School (ECHS)” and “Pathways in Technology Early College High School (P-TECH)” programs designed to support educational attainment for historically underserved students, it will be interesting to see how these and other efforts (e.g., “Promise” programs at colleges and universities) ultimately improve educational outcomes for economically disadvantaged students over the long-term.