Annotated Bibilography

This study conducted by Sandy Baum and Eban Goodstein examines if there exists bias towards men in the admissions process. By collecting data from 13 liberal arts colleges, the authors found that male applicants were favored over female applicants when the application pool had a high proportion of female students. Specifically, at historically female colleges, male students are more likely to be granted admission compared to their female counterparts. However, this similar preference for men is not observed in historically male-dominated institutions despite having more female applicants. Additionally, the authors discovered that male applicants had lower academic performance compared to female applicants. In conclusion, this paper shows the presence of gender bias in the admission process and raises questions about fairness and equity in higher education.

This paper answers our research question by examining gender factors in the admission process. Through quantitative analysis on college data, it provides critical information on gender bias in a subtle way. In the attempt to balance numbers of students in both genders, colleges inadvertently give more advantages to male students at the expense of more qualified female candidates. Combining this perspective with other articles on factors such as race and economic status, we can have a broader understanding of how these social stratifications can exacerbate inequalities in higher education.

This interactive article from the New York Times provides a data-driven look into the demographics of students at selective colleges, highlighting that a significant majority of these students come from families within the top 10% of income earners. The piece utilizes an interactive data set, allowing users to explore specific colleges and see the income distribution of their students. The narrative is built around the evidence that selective college enrollment is skewed towards wealthier students, supported by visual data representations and user-friendly interactive elements. While it is an invaluable source due to its comprehensive and user-friendly data, the article mainly presents information without in-depth analysis or discussion of causality, which may be a limitation for deeper analytical needs. Another limitation is the inability to compare statistics across years and a limited number of colleges represented by the dataset. Even so, this resource has significantly shaped our research on socioeconomic disparities in higher education by providing clear, visual documentation of income distributions, crucial for discussing the barriers lower-income students face and will serve as a compelling argument for more inclusive admission policies in this project.

This chapter by Mary Chamberlain from a Russell Sage Foundation publication explores the historical context of women's entry into higher education in the United States. Chamberlain highlights that women first gained access to higher education when Oberlin College admitted female students in 1837, over two centuries after the founding of Harvard College for men. This marked a significant shift in educational opportunities for women, which had been virtually nonexistent in colonial America and were restricted in European universities for centuries. This historical overview underscores the pivotal role of social movements and changing societal attitudes in shaping the educational landscape for women in America.

The article has many incredible reasons to provide a foundation for a change in such. It's a great resource for learning about current issues related to college admissions. The author talks about current data and includes professional opinions from education policy and admissions officers. Jin Chow talks about the decline of legacy admissions in colleges and universities. He mentions the historical context of legacy admissions, where he explains how they have favored applicants with family who went to this institution or more so known as alumni. This is social and economic inequality because they are likely to be accepted more because of the title of a family member. The article recently talks about the shifts in admissions policies which talks about Growing for more equal practices for fairness. He also provides advice for students on how to stand out for themselves in an increasingly competitive admissions process and have a higher chance to be accepted than alumni. 

It takes a closer look at educational equity and admissions policies. The article serves as an important resource which is one of the many reasons it stood out to this topic. It doesn't just show the efforts to take away the barriers within higher education but also to make a change and how it could combat this issue. By looking at both the historical context and changes in legacy admissions. Chow's work contributes to a broader understanding of educational studies.

This article presents a very interesting study. When the number of women in a university far exceeds that of men, the university will raise the threshold for admission of female students and lower the admission requirements for male students in order to achieve gender equality. While everyone is focusing on the pursuit of racial diversity, gender equality is also quietly changing. However, when girls apply to technical schools, the proportion of female applicants is much lower than that of boys. So, in order to ensure "equality," women are more likely to enter technical schools than men. The main argument of this article is to explore why, despite women's excellent performance in college (higher enrollment and graduation rates than men), they have not achieved the same level of gender equality in the workplace, such as the phenomenon that women's income is still less than 82% of men's(Cohen). After summarizing this source, I believe this may be helpful in evaluating our final project: How do socioeconomic factors affect college admission? The information is reliable based on objective data; we can see this happening to most women. This article would help shape my argument because it discusses not only the gender bias issue in education but also in the workplace. I hope using this source in your research project could lead to more social attention and policy adjustments.

This article states that the US Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in college admissions on June 29, 2023. This decision will have significant impacts on American college admissions and education, and it will also change some of the practices in college admissions that have been followed for the past few decades. The main point of contention is what measures will be taken to restore the diversity of college admissions after the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action. Research has shown that many people of color are less likely to attend colleges with greater resources if race is not considered a factor in admissions. Although there are some policies that can improve racial diversity, they have not achieved the expected results when compared with affirmative action, such as the percentage plan. This article can be very helpful for our project because it includes information on racial diversity in college admissions and interaction factors (for example, the admission ratio of low-income white groups and low-income people of color will also increase or decrease accordingly). It can also indirectly demonstrate that our current college admissions mechanisms are not perfect enough and do not adequately ensure the interests of communities of color and minorities in achieving equity and diversity in higher education.

This paper provides a thorough examination of the intersectionality of Critical Race Theory, or CRT, and Black Marxism and their implications for higher education. The paper describes two recent theoretical frameworks—economies of racism and critical race-class theory of education. It also touches on foundational concepts from CRT and Black Marxism such as whiteness as property and racial capitalism. In doing so, Cowley proposes new hypotheses about the role of race and class in educational contexts.

This article is valuable for its interdisciplinary approach, merging both sociological and educational theories to address systemic inequalities. Compared to other sources, Cowley’s integration of race and class theories provides a more holistic view of the factors influencing educational equity. The information is reliable and grounded in well-established theoretical traditions. It offers a critical lens for examining the intersections of race and class. Overall, it is useful for our research due to its focus on intersectionality of race and class within higher education, allowing us to frame arguments around the need for strategies that address both racial and economic disparities in education. It provides a strong theoretical foundation for understanding how systemic inequalities are perpetuated and offers a critical perspective that can inform both policy and practice.

Despite increased financial aid efforts by top-ranked U.S. colleges and universities over the past three years, there has been little progress in enrolling more low-income students. In fact, most of these institutions have seen a decrease in low-income students on their campuses even though they have implemented a more student-favorable scholarship system. Unfortunately, government data reveals that only four of the top 30 universities had a higher percentage of low-income students in 2007 compared to 2004. The main reasons in the article include the continued difficulty for low-income students to gain admission, increased financial aid for middle and upper-middle-class families, and cultural/systemic barriers that discourage students applying from low-income backgrounds. These findings are indicative of financial aid alone not being sufficient enough to increase low-income enrollments.

This article also provides quantitative evidence that socioeconomic factors do affect college admissions, thus aligning with our hypothesis. In this case, students who come from low-income families face difficulties in the college admission process as they do not have access to the same caliber of support systems (both educational and financial) that students from middle and upper-class families have. This article can also very well be integrated into our narrative through a Marxist perspective.

The New York Times College Mobility Project provides an in-depth analysis of the economic diversity and mobility outcomes of students from a wide range of American universities based on a comprehensive study using millions of anonymous tax records and tuition data by Opportunity Insights — a project backed by reputable economists and researchers from several top universities, including Harvard, MIT, and Brown. The interactive nature of the New York Times's platform introduces this personalized aspect in the exploration of the presented data, making it a unique and powerful resource. The platform also spotlights its key findings which further elucidate the economic segregation in colleges through summarized visualizations, while also identifying those associated with high levels of income mobility. 

This source is highly relevant to our topic of interest. The project supports the theory of Marxism by showing the role of education in class mobility and especially highlighting the need for greater access to elite institutions for low-income students. It also touches upon certain aspects of Critical Race Theory by showing the disproportionate challenges faced by low-income students, many of whom are from minority backgrounds. It would be helpful to include this source in a Further Reading section of our digital humanities project for visitors who are interested in exploring the role of intersectional identities in college admissions.

The article is a resource for this project such as the action, and educational equity that is shown. It provides a clear data-driven look at how private colleges aim to increase diversity. By comparing private and public colleges, the author offers a closer look at higher education diversity efforts. The use of solid data makes it a reliable source for understanding current trends and practices. The author Geiger from the Research Center explores how often private selective colleges consider race and ethnicity in their admissions into the institution. The findings show that these colleges are more likely to use such in their decisions compared to more public colleges. The article talks about how the impact of this practice on campus diversity can affect such things. The analysis includes data and trends from various colleges taking future opportunities to those who are interested in such schools, stripping them of their future. 

Students and policymakers will find this article particularly useful due to its detailed analysis and statistical focus. It not only adds to the affirmative action debate but also encourages further questions about the fairness and effectiveness of considering race and ethnicity in admissions. The article helps to understand how selective colleges try to balance academic merit and diversity among their students.

In Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell examines the factors that contribute to high levels of success. He argues that success is not merely about individual talent or effort but also significantly influenced by timing, cultural background, and unique opportunities. Through diverse examples, including the Beatles and Bill Gates, Gladwell illustrates how hidden advantages play a crucial role in achieving success. This book is essential for understanding the complexities behind personal achievements and challenges the notion of the "self-made" individual. It provides insightful perspectives valuable for discussions on the influence of external factors in shaping success.

In this scholarly article, Claudia Goldin and Lawrence F. Katz explore the pivotal developments in higher education in the United States from 1890 to 1940. They argue that the modern form of higher education was largely shaped during this period, well before the post-World War II expansion often cited in other discussions. The paper details the rise of the American research university and the transformation of public sector institutions into leaders in educational quality. It examines how shifts in industrial organization and political economy during these formative years led to profound changes in the scale and scope of higher education. This work is crucial for understanding the historical foundations that have influenced contemporary educational practices and policies. It also provides valuable insights into the interplay between economic forces and educational structures.

In this article, Dana Goldstein explores the growing trend of "microschools," small private educational settings which have gained popularity post-COVID-19. Microschools, often comprising fewer than ten students, operate in informal settings like homes and church basements and are seen as a blend of home-schooling and traditional one-room schoolhouses. Goldstein discusses how these institutions are increasingly funded by vouchers from state governments, particularly in states with Republican leadership, which advocate for school choice and reduced public schooling costs. The article highlights the benefits and challenges of microschools, including their appeal to parents of disabled children and those dissatisfied with public education, while also noting the lack of regulation and potential drawbacks such as insufficient support for students with special needs. The rise of microschools reflects broader educational and political shifts towards privatization and individualized education.

This article explores how private college consultants, known as IECs, guide students through the college admissions process by helping them present their authentic selves. Through 50 in-depth interviews with IECs, the study reveals that demonstrating authenticity is a complex task that requires a consideration of how one’s authentic self might be perceived by admissions officers. This process is influenced by class and race, and the article places focus on Asian American students specifically, who are often stereotyped as inauthentic. The study argues that despite efforts to increase diversity, the college admissions process continues to reflect and perpetuate social stratification. It describes the role of cultural capital, the influence of class and race on authenticity, and broader implications for equity in higher education.

The article is valuable to our research on bias and intersectionality as it highlights nuanced ways in which social stratification influences college admissions. Through qualitative data and analysis, the study examines both interpersonal dynamics and subjective evaluations involved in the admissions process. It offers insights into how class and racial dynamics shape students’ experiences and outcomes in the admissions process, which can help in developing a more comprehensive understanding of the barriers to equity in higher education. Overall, this source is useful in addressing the specific challenges faced by marginalized groups.

This article explores the role that public universities play in advancing social mobility for students from low-income backgrounds. Leonhardt highlights the success of several institutions—City College of New York, University of Texas at El Paso, and California State University in Bakersfield—in helping students from the bottom fifth of the income distribution rise to the top three-fifths. Despite facing challenges like budget cuts and high dropout rates, these colleges continue to outperform elite institutions in terms of social mobility. The article also referenced a comprehensive study by economist Raj Chetty which tracks the earnings of college graduates, emphasizing the roles these institutions have in affecting economic advancement. Leonhardt calls for greater support and investment in public higher education to sustain and enhance their impact. 

The main theory that we would be concerned about in this article is Marxism: the article highlights the role of education in class mobility and the need for greater investment in public institutions to support working-class students. There’s also this intersectional aspect to it, wherein it discusses the challenges faced by low-income students, many of whom are from minority backgrounds. This article is well-researched, supplemented with datasets, helpful visualizations, as well as citations from reputable sources. However, although it came from a well-known publisher, we might want to note the biases this article may have, due to the opinionated nature of the topic.

This editorial from the Los Angeles Times discusses the inherent biases of the early decision admissions process at colleges, arguing that it disproportionately benefits wealthy students. The main argument is that early decision applicants are more likely to come from affluent backgrounds where there is access to better preparatory resources and the financial security to commit to a college without comparing financial aid offers. The article covers various aspects, including statistical data on admissions rates and personal anecdotes from students who feel they were at a disadvantage.This source is highly useful for research on inequities in college admissions processes. It is a credible source, coming from a reputable editorial board of a major newspaper, which supports its arguments with both qualitative and quantitative evidence. However, as an editorial, it inherently contains a bias towards critiquing the status quo of admissions practices. The source does well to compare its stance with general admissions data and opinions from educational experts, which helps in providing a balanced view.The editorial is beneficial for my research into educational disparities. It provides a contemporary example of how systemic biases favor certain groups, supporting my thesis on the need for reform in educational institutions. This article has influenced my thinking by highlighting the specific advantages that early decision programs offer to the wealthy, which is an angle I had not fully considered before. I can use this source to argue for a more equitable admissions process in my project.

This article discusses the implications of Supreme’s Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admission v. President and Fellow of Harvard College, which discontinues the use of race-based criteria in college admissions. Since colleges still use sex-based factors to fight gender stereotypes in fields like STEM and HEAL, the absence of race criteria in evaluating college applications can favor white men over their peers in marginalized groups. Compared to female students, males are favored since girls perform better. On the other hand, white men’s overall academic standing is higher compared to boys of other races. The author argues this ruling can exacerbate inequalities and pose challenges to future legal change to sex-based affirmative action. 

The article is useful for answering our research question on how socioeconomic status affects American college admissions. By examining existing gender-based policies in admissions process and integrating them with recent legal decisions, the article provides an insightful perspective on how intersectionality perpetuates racial disparities in college. As a result, it highlights the multifaceted nature of admissions policies and their broader implications on diversity and equality in higher education. This nuanced view helps to understand the complex interplay between different social categories and how they collectively shape opportunities for students from various backgrounds.

This article examines the transformative impact of higher education on global society, highlighting its role in rationalizing professions, facilitating globalization through shared cultural frames, supporting global socio political movements, and reorganizing societal structures. The authors discuss how higher education contributes to the development of modern professions, global integration, and major social movements around issues such as human rights or environmental protection. 

The overall focus is on higher education’s broad societal impacts. The article provides meaningful insights that draw on historical and global data, while offering a focus on the integrative effects of higher education, making it a highly valuable resource for understanding the intersection of education and social stratification. This article is particularly useful for our research on the historical role of higher education in perpetuating social stratification. Through an examination of how educational institutions shape societal structures and influence global movements, the article sheds light on the dual role of higher education in promoting both social mobility and inequality. Our research aims to understand this relationship between education and societal change. By further examining the role of bias and intersectionality in affecting higher education systems and college admissions, as well as the perpetuation of social stratification, this article helps deepen our understanding of the complex dynamics within educational institutions.

This article examines the transformative impact of higher education on global society, highlighting its role in rationalizing professions, facilitating globalization through shared cultural frames, supporting global socio political movements, and reorganizing societal structures. The authors discuss how higher education contributes to the development of modern professions, global integration, and major social movements around issues such as human rights or environmental protection. 

The overall focus is on higher education’s broad societal impacts. The article provides meaningful insights that draw on historical and global data, while offering a focus on the integrative effects of higher education, making it a highly valuable resource for understanding the intersection of education and social stratification. This article is particularly useful for our research on the historical role of higher education in perpetuating social stratification. Through an examination of how educational institutions shape societal structures and influence global movements, the article sheds light on the dual role of higher education in promoting both social mobility and inequality. Our research aims to understand this relationship between education and societal change. By further examining the role of bias and intersectionality in affecting higher education systems and college admissions, as well as the perpetuation of social stratification, this article helps deepen our understanding of the complex dynamics within educational institutions.

“The Effect of Race and Sex on College Admission” is a study testing the hypothesis that both race and sex will affect a candidate’s likelihood to get into college. The experiment involved 240 American colleges and universities, where each school was sent an application of a student with a random race and sex. The analysis found that white applicants were accepted only slightly more frequently than black applicants. Male applicants were also favored over female applicants. However, the data did not show statistical significance between race/sex and college admission chances. 

This study is crucial to our project as it touches upon social factors that may affect college admissions decisions. Though the data did not reach a 0.05 level of significance under the original null hypothesis, there was statistically significant evidence that at the “low ability level” men were favored more than women of the same ability. This shows that overall, women were discriminated against in college admissions. We can use this study for our project narrative as it provides evidence for our research question—how and if socioeconomic factors affect college admissions. More specifically, this article agrees with our project hypothesis that these factors do affect college admissions results, typically negatively impacting those of a certain race, gender, and class.