skip to main content
Washington State Institute for Public Policy
Back Button

College in the high school (for high school students)

Higher Education
Benefit-cost methods last updated December 2017.  Literature review updated February 2018.
Open PDF
College in the high school allows high school sophomores, juniors, and seniors to simultaneously earn transferrable college and high school credits while still enrolled in high school. Unlike dual enrollment, students participating in college in the high school complete courses on their high school campus. The high school and partner college work closely to ensure that college in the high school coursework is comparable to a similar course taught on the college campus. We report on dual enrollment and early college high school programs separately.
BENEFIT-COST
META-ANALYSIS
CITATIONS
The estimates shown are present value, life cycle benefits and costs. All dollars are expressed in the base year chosen for this analysis (2016). The chance the benefits exceed the costs are derived from a Monte Carlo risk analysis. The details on this, as well as the economic discount rates and other relevant parameters are described in our Technical Documentation.
Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant
Benefits to:
Taxpayers $10,984 Benefits minus costs $37,276
Participants $19,085 Benefit to cost ratio $139.00
Others $6,965 Chance the program will produce
Indirect $512 benefits greater than the costs 100 %
Total benefits $37,546
Net program cost ($270)
Benefits minus cost $37,276
1In addition to the outcomes measured in the meta-analysis table, WSIPP measures benefits and costs estimated from other outcomes associated with those reported in the evaluation literature. For example, empirical research demonstrates that high school graduation leads to reduced crime. These associated measures provide a more complete picture of the detailed costs and benefits of the program.

2“Others” includes benefits to people other than taxpayers and participants. Depending on the program, it could include reductions in crime victimization, the economic benefits from a more educated workforce, and the benefits from employer-paid health insurance.

3“Indirect benefits” includes estimates of the net changes in the value of a statistical life and net changes in the deadweight costs of taxation.
Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant
Benefits from changes to:1 Benefits to:
Taxpayers Participants Others2 Indirect3 Total
Crime $67 $0 $165 $34 $266
Labor market earnings associated with high school graduation $9,689 $21,336 $9,808 $0 $40,833
Health care associated with educational attainment $2,303 ($631) ($2,522) $1,150 $299
Costs of higher education ($1,076) ($1,620) ($485) ($537) ($3,717)
Adjustment for deadweight cost of program $0 $0 $0 ($135) ($135)
Totals $10,984 $19,085 $6,965 $512 $37,546
Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant
Annual cost Year dollars Summary
Program costs $8,962 2015 Present value of net program costs (in 2016 dollars) ($270)
Comparison costs $8,695 2015 Cost range (+ or -) 25 %
We determined the cost of college in the high school by multiplying the per credit cost of college In the high school for Washington students by the number of annual credits earned by the students in the studies. The average per-credit fee for Washington colleges is approximately $45. Students took an average of 1.22 courses per year in our sample (Rodriguez et al., 2012). This equates to approximately 6.08 annual credits or 0.13 of a student FTE (based on a full-time load of 45 credits).
The figures shown are estimates of the costs to implement programs in Washington. The comparison group costs reflect either no treatment or treatment as usual, depending on how effect sizes were calculated in the meta-analysis. The cost range reported above reflects potential variation or uncertainty in the cost estimate; more detail can be found in our Technical Documentation.
Estimated Cumulative Net Benefits Over Time (Non-Discounted Dollars)
The graph above illustrates the estimated cumulative net benefits per-participant for the first fifty years beyond the initial investment in the program. We present these cash flows in non-discounted dollars to simplify the “break-even” point from a budgeting perspective. If the dollars are negative (bars below $0 line), the cumulative benefits do not outweigh the cost of the program up to that point in time. The program breaks even when the dollars reach $0. At this point, the total benefits to participants, taxpayers, and others, are equal to the cost of the program. If the dollars are above $0, the benefits of the program exceed the initial investment.

^WSIPP’s benefit-cost model does not monetize this outcome.

Meta-analysis is a statistical method to combine the results from separate studies on a program, policy, or topic in order to estimate its effect on an outcome. WSIPP systematically evaluates all credible evaluations we can locate on each topic. The outcomes measured are the types of program impacts that were measured in the research literature (for example, crime or educational attainment). Treatment N represents the total number of individuals or units in the treatment group across the included studies.

An effect size (ES) is a standard metric that summarizes the degree to which a program or policy affects a measured outcome. If the effect size is positive, the outcome increases. If the effect size is negative, the outcome decreases.

Adjusted effect sizes are used to calculate the benefits from our benefit cost model. WSIPP may adjust effect sizes based on methodological characteristics of the study. For example, we may adjust effect sizes when a study has a weak research design or when the program developer is involved in the research. The magnitude of these adjustments varies depending on the topic area.

WSIPP may also adjust the second ES measurement. Research shows the magnitude of some effect sizes decrease over time. For those effect sizes, we estimate outcome-based adjustments which we apply between the first time ES is estimated and the second time ES is estimated. We also report the unadjusted effect size to show the effect sizes before any adjustments have been made. More details about these adjustments can be found in our Technical Documentation.

Meta-Analysis of Program Effects
Outcomes measured Treatment Age No. of effect sizes Treatment N Adjusted effect sizes (ES) and standard errors (SE) used in the benefit-cost analysis Unadjusted effect size (random effects model)
First time ES is estimated Second time ES is estimated
ES SE Age ES SE Age ES p-value
Grade point average^ 17 4 1402 0.041 0.028 18 0.041 0.028 18 0.115 0.028
High school graduation 17 3 819 0.276 0.082 18 0.276 0.082 18 0.517 0.001

Citations Used in the Meta-Analysis

Rodriguez, O., Hughes, K.L., & Belfield, C. (2012). Bridging college and careers: Using dual enrollment to enhance career and technical education pathways. (NCPR Brief). New York: Community College Research Center.