Panel: For-Profit College Sector: Evidence on Student Employability and Competition
(Education)

Saturday, November 8, 2014: 10:15 AM-11:45 AM
Dona Ana (Convention Center)

*Names in bold indicate Presenter

Panel Organizers:  Rajeev Darolia, University of Missouri
Panel Chairs:  Peter Hinrichs, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
Discussants:  Brian Jacob, University of Michigan


Do Employers Prefer Workers Who Attended for-Profit Colleges? Evidence from a Field Experiment
Rajeev Darolia1, Cory Koedel1, Paco Martorell2 and Katie Wilson2, (1)University of Missouri, (2)RAND Corporation



An Experimental Study of the Value of Postsecondary Credentials in the Labor Market
David Deming1,2, Claudia Goldin1,2, Lawrence Katz1,2 and Noam Yuchtman2,3, (1)Harvard University, (2)The National Bureau of Economic Research, (3)University of California, Berkeley



Competition and Crowd-out: Evidence from Local Higher Education Markets
Lesley Turner, University of Maryland, Stephanie Cellini, George Washington University and Rajeev Darolia, University of Missouri


Some of the most important current policy debates in higher education concern for-profit colleges. Over the last decade, enrollment growth in the proprietary sector has well-exceeded that of the non-profit sector, leading to for-profit colleges comprising a sizable portion of the higher education market. Public and regulatory attention on for-profits has become increasingly acute following the sectorís disproportionate share of publicly funded federal financial aid and relatively high student loan default rates among students. The three papers in this panel contribute to the emerging evidence on for-profit colleges using experimental and quasi-experimental analyses. Two papers provide the first experimental evidence on the labor market value of for-profit college attendance, using separately implemented, random assignment, large-scale national resume audit studies to test for employer attitudes towards for-profit college students as compared to students who attend other types of colleges. The third paper provides quasi-experimental evidence on the competition between for-profit and public colleges for low-income students by exploiting plausibly exogenous variation in financial aid availability and institution composition in local higher education markets. The authors represent a diversity of institutional affiliations, including academic and private sector researchers.
See more of: Education
See more of: Panel