where are the low-income students at highly selective ... · upward mobility, research shows that...
TRANSCRIPT
Brittany K. Carlson Senior Fellow
S. Caroline Kerr Chief Executive Officer
Where Are The Low-Income Students At Highly Selective Colleges?
Opportunities and Levers For Change
Copyright 2016, All Rights Reserved
This paper was prepared by Brittany K. Carlson, 2015-2016 Senior Fellow at The Joyce Ivy Foundation, a 501(c)(3) non-profit, tax-exempt organization dedicated to the advancement of post-secondary opportunities for young women, including nonpartisan analysis, study, and research of issues related to college access. This paper draws on research by Carrie Alexander, 2014-2015 Senior Fellow at The Joyce Ivy Foundation.
The Joyce Ivy Foundation PO Box 2396
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Phone/Fax 734-661-0229
[email protected] www.joyceivyfoundation.org
Table of Contents Section 1 Executive Summary.………………………….…………… 3
Section 2 Current Application And Enrollment Trends………….... 4
Section 3 Colleges Making Progress…………………..…………… 6
Section 4 An Opportunity For Elite Institutions………………..…… 10
Section 5 Levers For Change…………………………...…………… 11
Section 6 Conclusion………..…………………………...…………… 17
Section 7 Sources …………………………………….....…………… 18
1
ResearchbyCarolineHoxbyandChristopherAveryfindsthatupto
35,000
low-incomestudentsarecapableoftheacademicrigoratthenation’sbestcollegesanduniversities,yettheydonotapply.
2
Source:CarolineM.HoxbyandChristopherAvery,TheMissing“One-Offs”:TheHiddenSupplyofHigh-Achieving,Low-IncomeStudents,NationalBureauofEconomicResearchWorkingPaper18586(2012),p.11.
Where Are The Low-Income, High-Achieving Students At Highly Selective Colleges?
SECTION 1:
Executive Summary
Thelong-standingbeliefthatmanylow-income
studentsdonotapply–orarenotadmitted–to
highlyselectivecollegesduetolackof
academicpreparationandcompetitive
standardizedtestscoreshasbeeneffectively
challengedbyrecentresearch.Itisestimated
thatupto35,000low-incomestudentsare
capableofworkatthenation’sbestcolleges
anduniversities,yetdonotapply.1Inrecent
years,collegesanduniversitiesacrossthe
UnitedStateshaveimplementedprogramsto
recruitandadmitamoresocioeconomically
diversestudentbody.Onemethodoftracking
thischangeovertimeisexaminingthenumber
ofstudentsreceivingPellGrantsenrolledat
particularcolleges.Whilesomecollegeshave
madeprogress,manyofthemostselective
institutions–thosethathavethelargest
universityendowmentsandgenerousfinancial
aidprograms–arenotablyabsent.
3
Thispaperexaminesthisrecentprogressand
highlightsfiveleverstoenactfurtherchange:
1. Counseling and recruitment;
2. Pre-college programming;
3. Financial aid literacy;
4. Colleges’ institutional priorities;
5. Undergraduate class size.
Toutilizetheselevers,theJoyceIvyFoundationrecommendssixactions:
1. Enroll more low-income students in pre-college summer academic programs;
2. Expand undergraduate enrollments;
3. Reallocate some spaces historically used to fulfill other institutional priorities;
4. Further diversifying other “institutional priority” segments of the student body;
5. Increase transparency and comparability of financial costs of attending selective institutions;
6. Focus admissions recruitment on lower income areas.
Note:Forthepurposesofthiswhitepaper,‘low-income’referstofamilieswithinthebottomincomequartile.Variousresearchcitedhereindefineslow-incomeusingacompositemeasureoffamilyincome,parentshighestlevelofeducationalattainment,andparents’occupationalstatus.‘High-achieving’referstostudentsscoringinthetop10%onstandardizedtesting.
48%
23%
Higher-income Lower-Income
ApplicationRatestoHighlySelectiveCollegesbyHigh-
AchievingStudents
Exhibit1
Source:JackKentCookeFoundation,(2016).
SECTION 2:
Current Application and Enrollment Trends
AstheUnitedStatescontinuestoexperience
demographicchanges,thedefinitionofdiversity
oncollegeanduniversitycampusesisexpanding.
Nolongerdothemostselectivecollegesand
universitiessolelyenrollthesonsanddaughters
ofAmerica’smostwealthyandwell-connected
families,butrathertheyseektobuildastudent
bodythatreflectsgreaterdiversityingender,
race,ethnicity,religion,nationality,and
socioeconomicstatus,amongotherdimensions.
Whilethediversityofthestudentbodyatthe
mostselectiveinstitutionsintheUnitedStates
haschangedinsomewaysinthepasttwenty-five
years,inotherways,particularly
socioeconomically,ithasremainedalarmingly
stagnant.
Along-standingbeliefinthefieldof
collegeadmissionsisthatmanylow-income
studentsdonothavetheacademicpreparation
orcredentialstomakethemsuccessful
applicantsinhighlyselectiveadmissions
processes.ResearchbyCarolineHoxbyand
ChristopherAveryhasshownthistobean
incorrectassumption;infact,theirresearch
suggeststhattherearebetween25,000-35,000
low-incomestudentswiththeacademic
credentialstobeverysuccessfulinhighly
selectiveapplicantpools.2However,these
studentsarenotapplyingtohighlyselective
institutionsatthesamerateastheirhigher
incomepeers.
Only23%ofhigh-achieving*,low-income
studentsevenapplytoaselectiveschool,instark
contrastto48%oftheirhigh-achieving,higher
incomepeers.3Forthosestudentswhoare
admittedtohighlyselectiveinstitutions,thehigh-
4
5
achievingstudentsfromthewealthiestfamilies
arethreetimesaslikelytoenrollasthehigh-
achievingstudentsfromthelowestincome
families.Infact,themajorityofstudentsin
America’smostselectiveinstitutions–72%–
comefromthewealthiest25%ofthe
population,whereasonly3%comefromthe
lowestincomequartile.4Despitethedisparityof
enrollmentratesofhigh-incomeandlow-income
studentsathighlyselectiveinstitutions,when
low-incomestudentsdomakeittohighly
selectiveinstitutions,theyoftendoverywell:
studentsinthebottomtwoincomequartilesearn
similargradesandgraduateatthesamerateas
thosestudentsfromfamiliesinthetoptwo
incomequartiles.5
Exhibit2
6
Somecollegesanduniversitieshavemade
progressinattractingandmatriculatingthis
populationoftalentedstudents.Anexamination
ofPellGrantallotment,federalgrantsgivento
low-incomestudentstohelpdefraysome,butnot
all,ofthecostsofattendingcollege,isperhapsthe
bestavailablemeasureofacollegeoruniversity’s
commitmenttoaccessandsocioeconomic
diversity.Generally,thenumberofPellgrant
recipientsisincreasinginAmericanhigher
education.Exhibit3:Figure1andFigure2show
visualizationsofPellGrantallotmentfrom2008
and2012byThirdCoastAnalytics.Warmer
colors,suchasred,orange,andyellow,
correspondtoagreaternumberofPellrecipients
oncampus.Withinthisfour-yeartimespan,
collegesanduniversitiesincreasedthenumberof
low-incomestudentsoncampus.
Infact,PellGrantallotment,asperthe
IntegratedPostsecondaryEducationalData
System,from2007through2012,indicatesthat
someinstitutionsaredoinganespecially
noteworthyjobofincreasingtheirnumberofPell
Grantrecipientsoncampus.PerExhibit4:Figure
1,Vassar,Franklin&Marshall,andDenisonare
compellingexamplesofcollegesthathavegreatly
increasedtheirPellallotmentwithinthissix-year
timespan;Figure2indicatesNewYork
University,UniversityofSouthernCalifornia,and
BostonUniversityleadingPellallotmentprogress
amongprivateuniversities.
Asforpublicuniversities,Universityof
Missouri–Columbia,UniversityofCalifornia–
LosAngeles,andUniversityofFloridahavethe
greatestincreaseinPelldistributionwithintheir
studentbodies(Exhibit4:Figure3).
Missingfromtheselistsofschoolsare
someofthemosthighlyselective,well-resourced
collegesanduniversitiesinthecountry.Acloser
lookattheblue“tail”onthefarleftofExhibit3:
Figure2showscollegesanduniversitieswithlow
numbersofPellrecipientsoncampus,lowadmit
rates,andhighgraduationrates–manyofwhom
areIvyLeagueinstitutionsorhighlyselective,
privateliberalartscolleges.
Exhibit3:Figure3showsacompelling
exampleofthis:HarvardUniversityisoneofthe
SECTION 3:
Colleges Making Progress
7
darkestbluecircles,withonly18%of
studentsoncampusreceivingaPell
Grant,but97%graduating.Harvard’s
highgraduationraterevealsthe
extensiveresourcesandsupporton
campus,resourcesandsupportthat
wouldbeparticularlytransformational
forlow-incomestudents.
Exhibit3
Figure1–PellAllotment,2008
Figure2–PellAllotment,2012
Figure3–HarvardPellAllotment,2012
Source:ThirdCoastAnalytics,NACAC,2014.
8
Exhibit46
Figure2–PellChange:PrivateUniversities,2007to2012
Figure1–PellChange:SmallInstitutions,2007to2012
Figure3–PellChange:LargeInstitutions,2007to2012
9
10
Highlyselectivecollegesanduniversities,which
oftenhavesignificantendowmentsandwell-
fundedfinancialaidprograms,havean
opportunitytosupportgreaternumbersofhigh-
achieving,low-incomestudentsbyproviding
themwithatop-notcheducationwithoutthe
burdenofdebt.Beyondjustthesefinancial
considerations,increasedaccessforlow-income
populationsrepresentshighlyselective
institutions’participationintheexpansionof
opportunityforabroaderanddeepersectorof
thepopulationandoftenresonateswith
institutionalmissionsandstrategicplans.Asthe
mostselectiveinstitutionsinthecountryconsider
theirroleinincreasingaccessandassistingin
upwardmobility,researchshowsthatadmission
toahighlyselectiveinstitutionpaysoff
considerablyforallindividuals,butparticularly
thosefromlow-incomebackgrounds.
Additionally,thehumancapitalthat
studentsacquirebyattendingahighquality
institutionoftenleadstosignificanteconomic
returnsareevenmoresignificantforstudents
comingfromlow-incomebackgrounds.7Ifthe
talent,resources,alignmentwithinstitutional
mission,andopportunityforgreatreturnis
there,whyaretherenotmorehigh-achieving,
low-incomestudentsatthecountry’smost
selectivecollegesanduniversities?Enrollmentof
low-incomestudentsathighlyselectivecolleges
anduniversitieshaschangedverylittleoverthe
pasttwentyyears.
Researchindicatesthathigh-achieving,
low-incomestudentstypicallydonotapplyto
highlyselectiveinstitutionstowhichtheyare
qualifiedfortwomainreasons:theydonot
believetheycanafforditandtheydonotreceive
thorough,accurate,andindividualizedguidance
throughthecollegeapplicationprocess.8
However,aftermorethanadecadeofworking
successfullywithlow-incomestudents,theJoyce
IvyFoundationhasidentifiedactionsthatcan
helpovercomethebarriershigh-achieving,low-
incomestudentsfacewhenapplyingtocollege.
SECTION 4:
An Opportunity For Elite Institutions
11
Thefollowingsixleversofferwaystorecruitand
enrollgreaternumbersofhigh-achieving,low-
incomestudentstohighlyselectiveinstitutions,
oftenthroughcollaborationwithother
organizations.
1.CounselingandRecruitment
Manylow-incomestudentsdonotreceive
accurate,individualizedcounselingthroughoutthe
collegeapplicationprocess,andthelackofsuch
guidanceimpedestheirchancesofapplyingtoa
highlyselectiveinstitution,evenwhentheyare
qualified.Shiftingrecruitmentpracticesaswellas
investingmoreincollegecounselingresourcesare
twoleverstoovercomethisbarrier.
Recruitmenttravelforallcolleges,including
themostselective,oftencentersaround
metropolitanareasandhighschoolsthatprovide
collegeswiththegreatestnumberofapplicants.
Withanestablishedpresence,continuedtravelto
theseplacesoftenreproducesadvantagesforlocal
students.Thehighschoolsandstudentswhoare
mostfrequentlyvisitedbysomeofthemost
selectiveinstitutionsareoftentheoneswhocould
benefittheleast–manyofthesestudentsalready
havethemeanstomakeindividualtripsto
campusesthemselvesorarealreadyfamiliarwith
highlyselectioninstitutionsandthepreparation
necessarytoapply.Instead,collegesshould
continuetoexpandtheirpresencethroughvisitsto
under-resourced,public,urbanorruralhigh
schoolswherestudentsarenotfamiliarwith
highlyselectivecollegesandarelesslikelytobe
receivingindividualizedcollegeadvising.The
formatofacollege’spresentationshould
emphasizeaffordability,particularlyincomparison
tootherlocal,seeminglylessexpensiveoptions,
andprovidebroadinformationaboutthereturns
onahigh-qualityeducation.
TheJoyceIvyFoundationsendslow-income
studentstopre-collegeprogramsathighly
selectivecollegeseachsummer.Alumnaeofthe
JoyceIvyFoundationSummerScholarsprogram
frequentlycounselyoungerpeersintheirlocal
communitiesthefollowingyear.Theyare
frequentlycitedasrelatable,authenticsourcesof
information.
SECTION 5:
Levers For Change
Distanceprogrammingcanalsobe
effective.Virtualsessionsonline,andtargeted
printcommunicationscanalsoexpanda
college’sreachwhenthelimitsofin-person
travelarereached.
Statesandschooldistrictsalsohavearole
toplay.Inschoolcounselorsurveysconducted
bytheJoyceIvyFoundationinMidwestern
states,counselorsconsistentlyreportthattheir
caseloadsaretoohigh,theyareregularly
burdenedwithotheradministrativeduties–
oftenunrelatedtocounselingorcollegeguidance
–andofferedverylittleprofessional
developmenttolearnmoreabouthighly
selectiveadmissionsandfinancialaidpractices.
Stateandlocalleadersmustdomoretoinvestin
makingqualitycollegecounselingavailableto
theirstudents.
TheJoyceIvyCollegeAdmissions
Symposium,heldannuallyinMichigan,isan
exampleofcollaborationbetweenthe
Foundation,localcounselors,andadmissions
andfinancialaidprofessionalsfromhighly
selectivecolleges.Theseindividualswork
togethertoofferworkshopsonhighlyselective
admissionsandfinancialaidatnocostto
participants,whoincludeeducatorsandfamilies.
12
2.Pre-collegeProgramming
Manycollegesholdsummeracademic
programsontheircampusesthatofferachance
toexperiencelifeonacollegecampus.These
pre-collegeprogramscouldbebetterleveraged
tobreakdownbarriersthatlow-income
populationsface.Rarelyarethesesummer
programsdesignedtobe“feederprograms”for
theundergraduateadmissionsprocess;infact,
manyoperateasarevenueandprofitsourcefor
thehostinstitution.Theseprogramscanbe
someofthemostvaluableleversforbroadening
alow-incomestudentandfamily’sawarenessof
thefullrangeofcollegeoptions.Todoso,the
programmustofferneed-basedfinancialaidto
abroadrangeofstudents–notjustthosein
closeproximitytocampuswhocanbeoffereda
discountedrateorparticipateascommuters.
Theprogramsshouldalsoconsiderpartnering
withsecondaryschoolsandcommunity-based
organizationsthatservelow-incomestudents.
Overall,selectivecollegesand
universitiesneedtoembracethefactthattheir
campusesduringthesummermonthsrepresent
oneofthemostpowerfulleversattheirdisposal
forattractingandexposinglow-income
individualstotheirinstitution.Toooften,
summerdormitoryandacademiccapacityat
selectivecollegesareviewedmoreasan
incrementalrevenuesource,fromsummersports
campsorwealthyinternationalanddomestic
familieswhowanttoexposetheirchildrentolife
onaselectivecollege,andfromotherprograms
thatdonotdirectlyaddresstheneedtohelplow-
incomestudentsintheU.S.withthatcriticalstep
ofexperiencinglifeonaselectivecollegecampus.
TheJoyceIvyFoundationSummer
Scholarsprogramservesasamodelforhow
campusesandacademicprogramscanbe
leveragedduringthesummermonthstoserve
low-incomestudents.Eachyear,theFoundation
recruitshigh-achieving,low-incomestudentsvia
itsnetworkofcounselorsandviadirect
recruitmentusingstudents’standardizedtest
scores.Thesestudentsarethensupported
financiallyintheirquesttospendpartoftheir
summer,typicallyaftersophomoreorjunioryear
ofhighschool,onthecampusofahighlyselective
collegeoruniversity.TheJoyceIvyFoundation
currentlypartnerswithprogramsatBarnard,
Brown,Cornell,Emory,Harvard,JohnsHopkins,
MIT,Smith,Stanford,WashingtonUniversityinSt.
Louis,andYale.Theseelevencollegesand
universitieshavedonewhatmanyother
13
institutionshavenot:openedtheircoffersand
summerprogramstosupporthigh-achieving,
low-incomestudentsthroughouttheU.S.in
spendingimportanttimeexperiencinglifeonthe
campusofahighlyselectivecollege.These
summerprogrampartnerssharethescholarship
Exhibit5
Source:JoyceIvyFoundationScholarSurvey(2015).
ImpactofPre-collegeSummerProgramParticipation
programshavebeenintroducedathighly
selectiveinstitutionssuchasHarvard,Stanford,
andAmherstforstudentscomingfromfamilies
whoseincomesfallbelowacertainlevel.
Beyondinstitutionalaid,thenumberofstudents
receivingPellGrantshasalsoincreased.
KnowledgeoftheavailabilityofPell
Grantsandinstitutionalfinancialaidpackages
goalongwayininforminghigh-achieving,low-
incomestudentsthatattendingahighly
selectiveinstitutioniswithintheirreach.Infact,
costsareoftenlowesttoattendaselective
institutionforalow-incomestudent–on
average,yearlytuitionforalow-incomestudent
atthemostcompetitiveinstitutionsroundsout
to$6,754,whileyearlytuitionforalow-income
studentatalesscompetitiveinstitutionis
$26,335.9Byhavinganin-depthunderstanding
ofthefinancialaidpracticesatindividualhighly
selectiveinstitutions,high-achieving,low-
incomestudentsaremorelikelytoviewtheir
attendanceatahighlyselective,competitive
schoolasbeingfinanciallyfeasible.
PromisingresearchbyCarolineHoxby
showsthatpersonalizedmailingshelptogive
high-achieving,low-incomestudentsthe
financialaidliteracytheyneedinorderto
costswiththeJoyceIvyFoundation,thus
extendingthereachofboththeFoundationand
summerprogram’sbudgets.
AccordingtotheFoundation’s2015surveys
ofSummerScholars,96%reportedthatthe
experiencechangedtheircollegeplans,making
themmoreambitiousandgeographicallydiverse.
88%reportedanincreaseinacademicconfidence
and89%ultimatelyappliedtothecollegeor
universitythathostedtheirsummerprogram.
Theinfrastructurefortheseprograms
alreadyexists,andwithfurtherinvestmentin
financialaidbudgets,advisorsupportfor
participants,andsecondaryschooland
community-basedorganizationpartnerships,these
programscanserveagreaternumberoflow-
incomestudents–whilestillservingother
institutionalpriorities.
3.FinancialAidLiteracy
Whilemanyofthemostselectivecolleges
anduniversitiesinthecountryhavestickerprices
thatareunmanageableforthemajorityof
applicants,generousneed-based–andoftenneed-
blind–financialaidpracticesmakeattendancea
realityforstudentscomingfromthelowest
incomelevels.Overthelastdecade,“freetuition”
14
15
considerapplyingtohighlyselectiveinstitutions.
Bymailingpersonalizedlettersinvitingstudents
toapplytoagroupofcollegesbasedupontheir
gradesandtestscores,alongwithgraphsand
chartscomparingthecosttogototheseschools
versuslocalcommunitycollegesandstate
universitiesnearby,andeightvouchersfor
studentstoapplytoschoolsfreeofcharge,the
numberofhigh-achieving,low-incomestudents
whoappliedandwereadmittedtohighly
selectiveinstitutionsincreasedby31%.10
Hoxby’sresearchalsosuggeststhatthere
isanimportantrolefora“matchmaker”inthe
process;thisincludesthirdpartyorganizations
thatencourageastudenttoconsiderahighly
selectivecollege.TheJoyceIvyFoundationhas
foundvalueintheroleof“matchmaker”when
recruitingstudentstotheSummerScholars
program.Manystudentsareskepticalwhenthey
receivedirectrecruitmentmessagesfroma
collegeoruniversity,buttrustathirdparty
sourcethatservesstudentslikethem.
4.InstitutionalPriorities
Astheenrollmentofhigh-achieving,low-
incomestudentsincreasesathighlyselective
institutionswiththeinterventionsdescribed
above,institutionshavetobecognizantofthe
financialsustainabilityofsuchefforts.With
limitedspotsinfirst-yearclassesatthecountry’s
mosthighlyselectiveinstitutions,asone
populationofstudentsincreases–inthiscase,
high-achieving,low-incomestudents–another
populationmustinvariablydecrease,ifclasssize
istoremainconstant.Assuch,institutionsshould
considershiftinginstitutionalpreferencesinthe
admissionprocessawayfromathletesandlegacy
students,whotraditionallyreceiveconsiderable
benefit,tolow-incomestudents.Thepreference
thatathletesandlegacystudentsreceiveis
significant:morethan80%ofthenation’smost
selectiveinstitutionsgivepreferencetostudents
ofalumni,andathletesareoftenfourtimesas
likelytobeadmittedasothersimilarlyqualified
applicants,butonceadmitted,underperformin
comparisontootherstudentswithsimilar
academicprofiles.11Shiftingprioritiesand
preferencesawayfromthesetraditionally
favoredstudentpopulationstohigh-achieving,
low-incomeU.S.citizensiscontroversialwithin
highereducation.Themostselectivecollegesand
universitiescanaffordtodoso.Itremainsfor
themtoengageinamoreseriousdebatewith
theirconstituencies–alumni,donors,
government,faculty,andsocietyatlarge–about
therelativeprioritiesintheadmissionsprocess.
Areweasasocietycommittedtoasocioeconomic
diversity,orarewenot?And,inthose
circumstanceswhensuchacommitmentisalso
consistentwithacademicmeritocracy,what
debateisengagedtochallengetheassumptions
thatwouldsimultaneouslyrejectinvestments
thatsimultaneouslyimprovediversityand
academicmeritocracy.
5.ClassSize
Another,perhapsmoreviable,option
wouldbetoincreaseoverallclasssize,atactic
thatmanyoftheinstitutionswiththegreatest
increasesinPellallotmenthaveemployedover
thepastsixyears.
Infact,ofthecollegesandprivateand
publicuniversitieswiththegreatestincreasein
Pellallotmentsbetween2007and2012,only
three–Vassar,BostonUniversity,andUniversity
ofFlorida–increasedtheirPellallotments
withoutincreasingtheirfreshmenclasssize.
Ontheflipside,threeinstitutions–Bates,
ClaremontMcKenna,andMountHolyoke–stand
outfortheirincreasesinfreshmenclasssize,but
theirdecreaseinPellallotment,evidencing
perhapsanespeciallyopportunemomentto
increasethenumberofhigh-achieving,low-
incomestudentsoncampus.Ofcourse,increasing
classsizeisanimportantstrategicdecision,but
onethatshouldbeinextricablylinkedto
increasingsocioeconomicdiversityaboveallelse.
16
Whileweliketovieweducationasanequalizer
amongracesandclasses,therealityisstudents
fromthepoorestfamiliesinthecountryhavea
significantlyreducedchance,comparedtotheir
wealthypeers,ofattendinghighlyselective
institutions.Researchshowsthatthereare
thousandsoflow-incomestudentswiththe
capabilityofbeingsuccessfulathighlyselective
institutionswhosimplydonotapply,eliminating
theiraccesstogenerousfinancialaidand
powerfulnetworksthatwouldbenefitthem
tremendouslylaterinlife.
Asinstitutionsconsidertheirmissions
androleinincreasingaccess,somethingneedsto
change.Thereisnoone-size-fits-allsolution,but
collegesshouldcarefullyconsiderthesetof
leverspreviouslyoutlinedanddeterminethe
combinationthatbestmatchestheirresources
andaspirationstobetterservelow-income
students.
Additionally,greaterpartnershipswith
community-basedorganizations,andleveraging
existingprograms,suchaspre-collegesummer
programs,willhelprealizegainsmorerapidly.
SECTION 6:
Conclusion
Finally,statesandschooldistrictsalso
havearoleininvestinginqualitycollege
counselingandpartneringwithcollegesand
community-basedorganizationstoservetheir
students.
Whilecollegesanduniversitiesmayview
theirincreasedcommitmenttotheenrollmentof
low-income,high-achievingstudentsfroma
socialjusticeperspective,inthispresentmoment
inhighereducation,itmayalsostemfroma
purelypracticalone.Affirmativeactionincollege
admissions,althoughstilllegal,willundoubtedly
remainacontroversialtopicinyearstocome.
Whilenotaperfectproxy,aconsiderationof
socioeconomicdiversitycouldbecomemore
important,againmakingtherecommendations
listedaboveallthatmorerelevant.Regardless,it
isclearthatwithallthepiecesinplace-the
talent,resources,alignmentwithinstitutional
mission,andopportunityforgreatreturn-highly
selectiveinstitutionscanandshoulddomoreto
enrollthelargenumberoflow-income,high-
achievingstudentsinthiscountry.
17
18
1.CarolineM.HoxbyandChristopherAvery,TheMissing“One-Offs”:TheHiddenSupplyofHigh-Achieving,Low-IncomeStudents,NationalBureauofEconomicResearchWorkingPaper18586(2012),p.11.
2.Hoxby&Avery(2012),p.11.
3.JenniferGiancolaandRichardD.Kahlenberg,TrueMerit:EnsuringOurBrightestStudentsHaveAccesstoOurBestCollegesandUniversities,JackKentCookeFoundationReport(January2016),p.13.
4.Giancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.5.
5.Giancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.33.
6.CarrieAlexander,PellGrants&FreshmanClassSizesAtSelectiveAmericanSchools(March27,2015)
7.WilliamG.BowenadDerekBok,TheShapeoftheRiver:LongTermConsequencesofConsideringRaceinCollegeandUniversityAdmissions(Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,1998),p.118,276.
8.Giancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.14-16.
9.CarolineM.HoxyandChristopherAvery,TheMissing“One-Offs”:TheHiddenSupplyofHigh-Achieving,Low-IncomeStudents,NationalBureauofEconomicResearchWorkingPaper18586(2012),p.37,Table1,ascitedinGiancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.15.
10.CarolineM.HoxbyandSarahTurner,“ExpandingCollegeOpportunitiesforHigh-Achieving,Low-IncomeStudents,”DiscussionPaperNo.12-014(Stanford,CA:StanfordInstituteforEconomicPolicyResearch,2013)ascitedinGiancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.15.
11.Giancola&Kahlenburg(2016),p.23,25.
SECTION 7:
Sources
Source:JoyceIvyFoundation2008&2014CounselorSurveys
P.O. BOX 2396 | ANN ARBOR, MI 48106 | 734-661-0229 | [email protected]