Rhodes: Geography and Student Debt
While recent evidence supports some closing or narrowing of the rural-nonrural college attainment gap, Alec P. Rhodes (Sociology, Ohio State) argues that there have been few studies that explore how rural youth financed this increased attainment. Student Debt and Geographic Disadvantage: Disparities by Rural, Suburban, and Urban Background (published in Rural Sociology) seeks to remedy this oversight by examining the disparities in young adults’ student debt by geographic background and investigating the factors contributing to these differences in debt load.
Relying on data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997, Rhodes finds that, adjusting for socio-demographic characteristics, college-goers from rural backgrounds accumulate 60 percent more student debt than their counterparts from suburban and urban backgrounds. Additionally, Rhodes finds that having student debt is more common for rural college-goers, with 48 percent of rural collegegoers at age 25 indebted compared to 38 percent of suburban and 37 percent of urban college attendees.
Student Debt and Geographic Disadvantage also analyzes possible explanations for higher debt among rural college-goers. Rhodes asserts higher rural student debt can be partially attributed to differences in parental socioeconomic status between rural and suburban or urban families. Those with rural backgrounds are more likely to come from lower income and wealth families or to be first-generation college students and unfamiliar with the financial aid system. Rural college-goers are also more likely to delay first enrollment and less likely to attain a 4-year or higher degree by age 25 when compared to suburban counterparts, and this too can contribute to higher debt among rural college attendees.
Rhodes also points to the distance rural college attendees may have to travel to attend college. College-goers from rural backgrounds are more likely to migrate to other counties for college, and this is associated with higher student debt in young adulthood.
Rhodes also evaluates the role gender plays on student debt within different geographies. Student Debt and Geographic Disadvantage illustrates that while both men and women from rural backgrounds tend to accumulate higher student debt than their nonrural counterparts, gender and geography combine in a way that is particularly impactful for rural women.
Ultimately, this article contributes new evidence of the social processes underlying debt accumulation while connecting to the broader discussion of disparities impacting rural communities. Student Debt and Geographic Disadvantage suggests future studies are needed to assess other spatial factors that may account for debt disparities by geographic background as well as further investigation of the role of geographic variation in college costs and state policies.
