{"id":34,"date":"2022-01-25T14:08:42","date_gmt":"2022-01-25T14:08:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.soe.umich.edu\/mac\/?page_id=34"},"modified":"2025-12-17T21:32:07","modified_gmt":"2025-12-17T21:32:07","slug":"stratification-and-inequality-among-selective-colleges","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/research-initiatives\/stratification-and-inequality-among-selective-colleges\/","title":{"rendered":"Stratification and Inequality among Selective Colleges"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-theme-palette-2-color has-alpha-channel-opacity has-theme-palette-2-background-color has-background is-style-default\" \/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:3px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>Kim, Heeyun, Michael N. Bastedo, John Gonzalez, Allyson Flaster, &amp; Yiping Bai. 2025. &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2025\/12\/KimEtAl2026-GRE.pdf\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2025\/12\/KimEtAl2026-GRE.pdf\">GRE-Optional Policies in PhD Admissions: Impacts on Student Applications, Yield, and Structural Diversity<\/a>.&#8221; <em>Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Test-optional policies in graduate admissions have been increasingly common, yet their impact on structural diversity remains a topic of debate. To scrutinize the policies&#8217; effects on applications, yield, and structural diversity, we utilized 182,638 admissions records across 117 PhD programs at a flagship U.S. public university. Employing heterogeneity-robust difference-in-differences analyses, we found that the adoption of Graduate Record Examinations (GRE)-optional policies increased program selectivity, evidenced by a decrease in acceptance rates. Changes in applicant, admitted, and enrollee demographics were, for the most part, not significant. Our study provides the first empirical insights into the relationship between GRE-optional policies and enrollment outcomes, while also noting the policies&#8217; mostly negligible impact on structural diversity in PhD programs. <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-theme-palette-2-color has-alpha-channel-opacity has-theme-palette-2-background-color has-background is-style-default\" \/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:3px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>Kim, Sooji, &amp; Michael N. Bastedo. 2024. &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2025\/01\/KimBastedo2024-1.pdf\">Who Gets Their First Choice? Race and Class Differences in College Admissions Outcomes<\/a>.&#8221; <em>AERA Open, 10<\/em>(1), 1-16.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The debate over race-conscious admissions has gained prominence, notably in cases such as <em>Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.<\/em> In debates on race-conscious admissions, the question is often not whether a student will go to college, but which college the student will attend. Using data from the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009, we examined racial and socioeconomic disparities in the probability of acceptance to a student&#8217;s first-choice college based on institutional selectivity. Race was a significant predictor of acceptance to a first-choice college, with Black and Asian students facing odds of acceptance that were 46% to 59% lower than those of White peers. However, at highly competitive or the most selective colleges, race was no longer a significant predictor, and racial disparities in acceptance rates diminished. Socioeconomic status had no significant association with the probability of acceptance to a first-choice college.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-theme-palette-2-color has-alpha-channel-opacity has-theme-palette-2-background-color has-background is-style-default\" \/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:3px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>Baker, Dominique J., and Michael N. Bastedo. 2022. <a href=\"http:\/\/www-personal.umich.edu\/~bastedo\/papers\/BakerBastedo2021-lotteries.pdf\">&#8220;What If We Leave It Up to Chance? Admissions Lotteries and Equitable Access at Selective Colleges.&#8221;<\/a> <em>Educational Researcher.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Many prominent social scientists have advocated for random-draw lotteries as a solution to the \u201cproblem\u201d of elite college admissions. They argue that lotteries will be fair and equitable, eliminate corruption, reduce student anxiety, restore democratic ideals, and end debates over race-conscious admissions. In response, we simulate potential lottery effects on student enrollment by race, gender, and income, using robust simulation methods and multiple minimum thresholds for grades and standardized tests. In the overwhelming majority of lottery simulations, the proportions of low-income students and students of color drop precipitously. With a GPA minimum, we find the proportion of men could drop as low as one-third. Admissions lotteries with minimum bars for GPA and\/or standardized tests do not appear to produce more equitable outcomes.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\" \/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:3px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>Bielby, Robert, Julie R. Posselt, Ozan Jaquette, and Michael N. Bastedo. 2015 (in press). <a href=\"http:\/\/www-personal.umich.edu\/~bastedo\/papers\/BielbyPosseltJaquetteBastedo.pdf\">&#8220;Why Are Women Underrepresented in Elite College and Universities? A Non-Linear Decomposition Analysis.&#8221;<\/a> <em>Research in Higher Education<\/em> 55: 735-760.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The emerging female advantage in education has received considerable attention in the popular media and recent research. We examine a persistent exception to this trend: women\u2019s underrepresentation in America\u2019s most competitive colleges and universities. Using nationally generalizable data spanning four decades, we evaluate evidence for three possible explanations. First, we analyze whether men\u2019s academic profiles more closely match the admissions preferences of elite institutions. Next, we consider organizational preferences for male applicants. Finally, we test whether women self-select out of elite institutions through their application choices. Using Blinder\u2013Oaxaca non-linear decomposition techniques and multinomial logistic regression, we find that men\u2019s advantage in standardized test scores best explains the enrollment gap. Our analyses thus suggest that the gender enrollment gap in elite colleges and universities is a matter of access, not student choice. We discuss the implications of these results for educational equity and college admissions.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\" \/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:3px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>Bastedo, Michael N., and Allyson Flaster. 2014. <a href=\"http:\/\/www-personal.umich.edu\/~bastedo\/papers\/BastedoFlaster.ER2014.pdf\">&#8220;Conceptual and Methodological Problems in Research on College Undermatch.&#8221;<\/a> <em>Educational Researcher <\/em>43: 93-99<em>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Access to the nation\u2019s most selective colleges remains starkly unequal, with students in the lowest income quartile constituting less than 4% of enrollment. A popular explanation for this phenomenon is that low-income students&nbsp;<em>undermatch&nbsp;<\/em>by attending less selective colleges when their credentials predict admission to more highly selective colleges. We identify three problematic assumptions in research on undermatching: (a) that researchers can differentiate colleges at the \u201cmargin that matters\u201d for student outcomes; (b) that researchers can accurately predict who will be admitted at colleges that use holistic admission processes; and (c) that using achievement measures like SAT (Scholastic Assessment Test) scores to match students to colleges will reduce postsecondary inequality. We discuss the implications of these assumptions for future research on college choice and stratification.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\" \/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:3px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>Posselt, Julie R., Ozan Jaquette, Robert Bielby, and Micheal N. Bastedo. 2012. <a href=\"http:\/\/www-personal.umich.edu\/~bastedo\/papers\/PosseltJaquetteBielbyBastedo.pdf\">&#8220;Access without Equity: Racial and Ethnic Stratification in Higher Education.&#8221;<\/a> <em>American Educational Research Journal<\/em> 49: 1074-1111. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>This paper examines how the competitive dynamics that sustain institutional stratification have reinforced racial inequality in selective college enrollment between 1972 and 2004. Institutional stratification describes the hierarchy of postsecondary institutions in terms of mission, selectivity, and returns to degrees.&nbsp; Using a dataset constructed from four nationally representative surveys (NLS, HSB, NELS, and ELS), we model how escalating admissions standards\u2014including academic preparation, and the growing importance of SAT scores and extracurricular leadership\u2014effectively maintain racial inequality in selective college enrollment over time.&nbsp; Black and Latino students have made strides in their pre-collegiate academic preparation.&nbsp; Nevertheless, although access to postsecondary education has expanded since 1972 for all ethnic groups, Black and Latino students\u2019 odds of selective college enrollment have declined relative to White and Asian American students<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\" \/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:3px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>Bastedo, Michael N. and Ozan Jaquette. 2011. <a href=\"http:\/\/www-personal.umich.edu\/~bastedo\/papers\/BastedoJaquette2011.pdf\">&#8220;Running in Place: Low-Income Students and the Dynamics of Higher Education Stratification.&#8221;<\/a> <em>Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis <\/em>33: 318-339. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www-personal.umich.edu\/~bastedo\/papers\/EEPA-Appendix.pdf\">Online Appendix<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The increasing concentration of wealthy students at highly selective colleges is widely perceived, but few analyses examine the underlying dynamics of higher education stratification over time. To examine these dynamics, the authors build an analysis data set of four cohorts from 1972 to 2004. They find that low-income students have made substantial gains in their academic course achievements since the 1970s. Nonetheless, wealthier students have made even stronger gains in achievement over the same period, in both courses and test scores, ensuring a competitive advantage in the market for selective college admissions. Thus, even if low-income students were &#8220;perfectly matched&#8221; to institutions consistent with their academic achievements, the stratification order would remain largely unchanged. The authors consider organizational and policy interventions that may reverse these trends.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-theme-palette-2-color has-alpha-channel-opacity has-theme-palette-2-background-color has-background\" \/>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kim, Heeyun, Michael N. Bastedo, John Gonzalez, Allyson Flaster, &amp; Yiping Bai. 2025. &#8220;GRE-Optional Policies in PhD Admissions: Impacts on Student Applications, Yield, and Structural Diversity.&#8221; Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Kim, Sooji, &amp; Michael N. Bastedo. 2024. &#8220;Who Gets Their First Choice? Race and Class Differences in College Admissions Outcomes.&#8221; AERA Open, 10(1), 1-16&#8230;.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25,"featured_media":0,"parent":26,"menu_order":4,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_eb_attr":"","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_kadence_starter_templates_imported_post":false,"_kad_post_transparent":"","_kad_post_title":"","_kad_post_layout":"","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":"","footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-34","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/34","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/25"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=34"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/34\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":615,"href":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/34\/revisions\/615"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/26"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.marsal.umich.edu\/mac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}