James Benson Sara Goldrick-Rab Wisconsin Scholars Longitudinal Study July 8, 2011

1. Putting College First: How Social and Financial Capital Impact Labor Market Participation Among Low-Income Undergraduates James Benson Sara Goldrick-Rab Wisconsin Scholars Longitudinal Study July 8, 2011

2. Twenty-first Century College Students and Work Participation • A majority of undergraduates work despite evidence that working while in college is associated with lower rates of degree completion. • Non-experimental studies indicate that work participation itself may have positive benefits, but extensive work (>20 hours/week) associated with stopping out and dropping out. • Over the last 40 years, the proportion of students who work extensively has increased.

3. Why might extensive work affect college success? • Work may divert attention from college-related activities, thus impeding the student’s social and academic integration into the college environment (Tinto 1993). • Work may take students away from specific activities: academic work; interaction with faculty; academic interaction with peers (study groups) and mentors; social interaction with on-campus peers (formal organizations and informal relations); (Astin 1993). • Moderate work may enhance self-esteem and social skills, and positively affect cognitive development through application of these skills to academic endeavors (Pascarella et al.)

4. Social Background and Work Decisions • Higher parental education and income associated with lower rates of extensive work during college, thus facilitating “educationally conducive” conditions for their success (Roksa and Velez 2010). • Students in low-wealth families respond to financial strain through a coping strategy (extensive work) that solves short-term problems while creating long-term ones (Bozick 2007). • Students may not simply be “hedging their bets” by straddling college and the labor market: even among students with high test scores, lower income is associated with more work hours (Belley and Lochner 2007).

5. Research Questions and Analytical Strategy • Does social capital (parental education) shield children of low-income families from potentially harmful work during college? • Parental education is a crucial part of the propensity to persist (impact presentation). • Can the introduction of additional financial resources (the WSG) reduce the incidence of potentially harmful work activities? • Analytical Strategy: • Survey measures for 2218 participants. • Control group sample allows us to compare means for all work outcomes across parental education groups (high school, some college, and college degree). • Participant Sample allows us to assess differences across treatment (WSG) and control groups.

6. Parental Education and Work Participation during Year 1 and Year 2 (Control Group; n=1300)

7. Impacts of Treatment Assignment on Work Participation (Year 1 and Year 2) for Students from High School, Some College, and Degree Backgrounds (Participants; n=2218)

8. Impacts of Treatment Assignment on Work Participation (Year 2) for 2-year and 4-year Students from High School, Some College, and Degree Backgrounds (n=606; n=1193)

9. Summary of Results • Parental Education: consistent differences across students from HS and BA backgrounds in total work hours, working off-campus, off-campus hours, and working extensively, despite similar percentages of labor market participation. • Financial Resources (the WSG): The grant reduced work hours by an average of 1.9 hours/week for students from HS and SC backgrounds. • For students from a HS background, the grant offset 60 percent of the social disadvantage (1.9/3.2 * 100) in total work hours. • We are more confident of the impacts of the WSG in the UW than WTCS sector. Among university students the WSG plays a clear compensatory role in reducing work hours, off-campus hours, and extensive work for students from families where the highest degree is a high school diploma.