The College Scorecard, President Obama’s proposed way to provide students with better data about their college options, leaves many of those students baffled and lacking desired information, according to a report released on Monday.
The Center for American Progress, a research organization, recently conducted focus groups with dozens of college-bound high-school students to gauge their views of the College Scorecard’s proposed design, as well as the center’s own version.
In the report, “Improving the College Scorecard: Using Student Feedback to Create an Effective Disclosure,” the center discusses the focus groups’ opinions and recommends ways to improve the scorecard.
The scorecard, which was proposed by President Obama last February, is an online tool designed to make it easier for students to compare colleges one to one, by providing at-a-glance information about universities, including their costs, completion rates, and average student-loan debt.
“It’s a big step to giving students better information” about factors “that historically have not been that transparent,” said Julie M. Morgan, the center’s associate director for postsecondary education and co-author of the report. “But oftentimes, in cases of many government disclosures, they don’t have the opportunity to test things out with students.”
One of the focus groups’ biggest findings was that students were unsure of the scorecard’s purpose and usefulness. The design of the government’s version did not easily convey the information and why it is important. The center’s version did little better, with students criticizing its lack of introductory content that would explain what the scorecard is.
More Testing Needed
In its report, the center recommends a redesign that would include a single focal point (such as a college’s logo) and a visual hierarchy, to clearly lead the reader from one part of the scorecard to another.
Students also said they wanted to be able to customize the scorecard, according to their interests. They said they wanted more information on the student-loan debt they might expect to take on, such as average monthly payments. And they said they would prefer a focus on four-year graduation rates, six-year rates.
The report notes that since the focus groups excluded nontraditional students and parents, the views are not conclusive.
“Most of the findings we have come with the caveat that it needs to be tested more,” said Ms. Morgan. “The Department of Education needs to invest time and money to do this work.”
The report’s recommendations drew praise from the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators.
“It does an excellent job of solving problems of disclosures,” said Justin Draeger, the association’s president. “The fact that students couldn’t even determine what the scorecard was or what they’re supposed to do with it should give a lot of insight for how we’re developing disclosures.”
Mr. Draeger said that his group would be conducting its own consumer testing on the Education Department’s proposed Financial Aid Shopping Sheet, which is intended to make it easier for students to compare aid offers from different colleges. The report will be released in 2013.
The two groups “are doing something that really should be a no-brainer to the government, which is doing rigorous consumer testing prior to a release,” he said. “Everybody wants to put something together that works for students, but to date, I don’t think we’ve done a good job in trying to find out what works for them.”