No Time for College? An Investigation of Time Poverty and Parenthood
Abstract
Postsecondary outcomes are significantly worse for student parents even though they earn higher GPA’s on average. This study used institutional records and survey data from a large urban U.S. university to explore whether time poverty explains this trend. The results of regression and KHB decomposition analysis reveal that students with preschool-aged children have a significantly lower quantity and quality of time for college than comparable peers with older or no children, and that time spent on childcare is the primary reason for this difference. Both quantity and quality of time for education had a significant direct effect on college persistence and credit accumulation, even when controlling for other factors. Thus, greater availability of convenient and affordable childcare (e.g. increased on-campus childcare, revised financial aid formulas that include more accurate estimates of childcare costs) would likely lead to better college outcomes for students with young children.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
For students with disabilities/health issues, long commutes, and/or extensive work/family commitments, taking courses in person instead of online may have negative costs.
“for students with disabilities/health issues, long commutes, and/or extensive work/family commitments, taking courses in person instead of online may have negative costs (Daymont et al., 2011;Jaggars et al., 2013;Wladis et al., 2018Wladis et al., , 2022)).”
From Competing hypotheses about online versus face-to-face course outcomes: Analysis leveraging the unique circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic (2025) · cites this paper as Wladis et al., 2018
Institutions may enact restrictions (who can register, how many online courses) that might reduce access to college for students who need online courses (women, parents, or time-poor students).
“Institutions may also enact other restrictions (i.e., who can register, how many online courses) that might reduce access to college for students who need online courses (women, parents, or students who are time-poor [Daymont et al., 2011;Jaggars et al., 2013;Wladis et al., 2018Wladis et al., , 2022]]) to progress.”
From Competing hypotheses about online versus face-to-face course outcomes: Analysis leveraging the unique circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic (2025) · cites this paper as Wladis et al., 2018
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 37 · Cited by 92
- Authors
- Wladis, C., Hachey, A. C., & Conway, K.
- Affiliations
- The Graduate Center, CUNY (US)
- The University of Texas at El Paso (US)
- Borough of Manhattan Community College (US)
- Corresponding author
- Wladis, Claire
- Venue
- The Journal of Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-05-30
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 807-831
- ISSN
- 0022-1546 (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4640
- OpenAlex
- W2806179716
- Cited by
- 92
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 19.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- CUNY Academic Works (City University of New York) (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1431649)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
- Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
- Keywords
- student parents, time poverty, parenthood, child care, college persistence, credit accumulation, postsecondary outcomes, preschool children
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
