Numerous researchers (e.g., Academic Pathways to Access and Student Success, 2006, ACT, Inc., 2009; Bragg, Kim, & Barnett, , 2006; College Board, 2010; Hargrove, Godin, & Dodd, 2008; Keng & Dodd, 2008; Morgan & Klaric, 2007) have concluded that participating in challenging high school curriculums such as Advanced Placement (AP) courses and exams positively contribute to students' college readiness, college achievement, and career success. Specifically mentioned in the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2002) was the AP program as a college prep course (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). Moreover, Section 1702 (Access to High Standards Act) of the No Child Left Behind Act acknowledged federal confirmation of AP coursework as college prep curriculum and encouraged states and school districts to incorporate these programs as a means of elevating academic standards (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). In his 2006 State of the Union Address, President George W. Bush thrust the AP program into mainstream education; accordingly, the national perception on AP program involvement increased (Klopfenstein & Thomas, 2009).In a policy brief for the Education Commission of the States (ECS), Dounay (2006) recommended an all-inclusive state policy on advanced placement. First, each state and school district should require a minimum number of AP courses to be offered. As a result, state policy would provide consistency in AP content and leverage AP curriculum offerings in low-income and high minority schools. Second, a state-wide AP framework would establish standards and opportunities for all students to gain access to college preparatory courses. As the result, the federal government, along with most states, and the College Board subsidizes AP exam fees for low-income students. In addition, most states (including Texas, New York, and Florida) provide additional incentives for students and teachers of students who achieve AP exam scores of 3 or higher (Holstead et al., 2010). In September 2006, U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings announced that 33 grants in the amount of $17 million were awarded to increase the participation of low-income students in AP courses and exams. In 2006, an additional $5,867,284 was awarded to 26 states to fund AP exam subsidies programs (U.S. Department of Education, 2006).In 2012, Arne Duncan, the current Secretary of Education, announced that federal support of AP program incentives and exam subsidies were reinstated (U. S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2012). Over $21.5 million was budgeted to subsidize AP exam fees. As the result of these financial awards, the federal government continued to acknowledge AP course and exam participation as curriculum of college readiness and success. Although funding for AP programs and exams was approved, researchers (e.g., Davis, Joyner, & Slate, 2011; Moore & Slate, 2008) have documented the persistent AP achievement and participation gaps among Black students in the United States. Specific to this study, few researchers (Davis, Joyner, & Slate, 2011; Koch; 2012) have investigated AP program involvement and performance of ethnically diverse, primarily lower socioeconomic, student groups across states.PURPOSE OF THE STUDYThe purpose of this study was to determine the cost effectiveness of covering AP exam fees by comparing the success value provided by overall AP exam outcomes to test expenditures for Black students in three researcher-selected states (i.e., Texas, New York, and Florida). According to the Centers for Disease Control (n.d.), cost-effectiveness analysis is commonly used in the health care industries to confirm if the intervention and the results desired validate the cost or investment. As it pertains to this research, cost-effectiveness analysis compares the costs of AP exam to the results or level of success on these exams. In addition, the cost effectiveness analysis evaluates the extent to which AP achievement can be regarded as providing value for the dollars spent (Davis, 2013). …
Read full abstract