Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Many prominent social scientists have advocated for random-draw lotteries as a solution to the “problem” of elite college admissions. They argue that lotteries will be fair, 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.

Keywords

college admissions colleges diversity equity gender lottery low-income students race secondary data analysis structural diversity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alon

(2009). The evolution of class inequality in higher education: Competition, exclusion, and adaptation. American Sociological Review, 74(5), 731–755.

Arcidiacono

Kinsler

Ransom

(2019). Divergent: The time path of legacy and athlete admissions at Harvard (NBER Working Paper No.26315). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w26315

Astin

A. W.

(1970). A researcher’s proposal for changes in higher education. Educational Record, 51(3), 225–231.

Avery

Levin

(2010). Early admissions at selective colleges. American Economic Review, 100(5), 2125–2156. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.5.2125

Baker

D. J.

(2019). Pathways to racial equity in higher education: Modeling the antecedents of state affirmative action bans. American Educational Research Journal, 56(5), 1861–1895. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219833918

Bastedo

M. N.

Bowman

N. A.

Glasener

K. M.

Kelly

J. L.

(2018). What are we talking about when we talk about holistic review? Selective college admissions and its effects on low-SES students. Journal of Higher Education, 89(5), 782–805. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2018.1442633

Bastedo

M. N.

Jaquette

(2011). Running in place: Low-income students and the dynamics of higher education stratification. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 318–339. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373711406718

Bellafante

(2020, December 18). Should Ivy League school randomly select students (at least for a little while)? The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/18/nyregion/ivy-league-admissions-lottery.html

Buchmann

Condron

D. J.

Roscigno

V. J.

(2010). Shadow education, American style: Test preparation, the SAT and college enrollment. Social Forces, 89(2), 435–461. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2010.0105

10.

Carnevale

A. P.

Rose

S. J.

(2003). Socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and selective college admissions. In Kahlenberg

R. D.

(Ed.), America’s untapped resource: Low-income students in higher education. The Century Foundation. https://www.immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/TCF_US/C030320C.pdf

11.

Chetty

Friedman

J. N.

Saez

Turner

Yagan

(2020). Income segregation and intergenerational mobility across colleges in the United States. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(3), 1567–1633. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjaa005

12.

Clinedinst

(2020). State of college admission 2019. National Association for College Admission Counseling. https://www.nacacnet.org/globalassets/documents/publications/research/2018_soca/soca2019_all.pdf

13.

Conley

(2018, August 13). Enough fretting over college admissions: It’s time for a lottery. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/enough-fretting-over-college-admissions-its-time-for-a-lottery/2018/08/13/f65a072c-9a74-11e8-8d5e-c6c594024954_story.html

14.

Garces

L. M.

Poon

(2018). Brief for Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. https://harvardlawreview.org/2021/05/students-for-fair-admissions-inc-v-president-and-fellows-of-harvard-college/

15.

Goodman

Gurantz

Smith

(2020). Take two! SAT retaking and college enrollment gaps. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 12(2), 115–158. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20170503

16.

Grofman

Merrill

(2004). Anticipating likely consequences of lottery-based affirmative action. Social Science Quarterly, 85(5), 1447–1468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2004.00285.x

17.

Grutter

v. Bollinger

. (2003). U.S. Supreme Court, 539 U.S. 306. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/539/306/case.pdf

18.

Guinier

(2003). Admissions rituals as political acts: Guardians at the gates of our democratic ideals. Harvard Law Review, 117, 113–224.

19.

Guinier

(2015). The tyranny of the meritocracy: Democratizing higher education in America. Beacon Press.

20.

Gumport

P. J.

Bastedo

M. N.

(2001). Academic stratification and endemic conflict: Remedial education policy at CUNY. Review of Higher Education, 24(4), 333–349. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2001.0009

21.

Hess

(2020, April 7). Why pandemic problems should get colleges like Harvard to admit students by lottery next year. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/frederickhess/2020/04/07/spotty-transcripts-no-test-scores-how-should-colleges-select-students-next-year/#2b9f882e3270

22.

Horn

C. L.

Marin

Garces

L. M.

Miksch

Yun

J. T.

(2018). Shaping educational policy through the courts: The use of social science research in amicus briefs in Fisher I. Educational Policy, 34(3), 449–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904818773902

23.

Hurwitz

(2011). The impact of legacy status on undergraduate admissions at elite colleges and universities. Economics of Education Review, 30(3), 480–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.12.002

24.

Karabel

(2005). The chosen: The hidden history of admission and exclusion at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

25.

Laitinen

McCann

Fishman

(2019). Supporting students of color in higher education: New America’s recommendations. New America Foundation. https://s3.amazonaws.com/newamericadotorg/documents/Supporting_Students_of_Color_in_Higher_Education_New_America.pdf

26.

Park

J. J.

Becks

A. H.

(2015). Who benefits from SAT prep? An examination of high school context and race/ethnicity. Review of Higher Education, 39(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2015.0038

27.

Posselt

J. R.

Jaquette

Bielby

Bastedo

M. N.

(2012). Access without equity: Longitudinal analyses of institutional stratification by race and ethnicity, 1972–2004. American Educational Research Journal, 49(6), 1074–1111. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831212439456

28.

Reardon

S. F.

Baker

Kasman

Klasik

Townsend

J. B.

(2018). What levels of racial diversity can be achieved with socioeconomic-based affirmative action? Evidence from a simulation model. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 37(3), 630–657. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22056

29.

Reeves

R. V.

Halikias

(2017, February 1). Race gaps in SAT scores highlight inequality and hinder upward mobility. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/research/race-gaps-in-sat-scores-highlight-inequality-and-hinder-upward-mobility/

30.

Rojas

(2020, September 2). Should Harvard randomize admissions? Orgtheory.net. https://orgtheory.wordpress.com/2020/09/02/should-harvard-randomize-admissions/

31.

Rosinger

K. O.

Ford

K. S.

Choi

(2021). The role of selective college admissions criteria in interrupting or reproducing racial and economic inequities. Journal of Higher Education, 92(1), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2020.1795504

32.

Schwartz

(2005, February 25). Top colleges should select randomly from a pool of “good enough.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/top-colleges-should-select-randomly-from-a-pool-of-good-enough/

33.

Schwartz

(2019, June 4). Do college admissions by lottery. Behavioral Scientist. https://behavioralscientist.org/do-college-admissions-by-lottery/

34.

Stone

D. A.

(2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (3rd ed.). W.W. Norton.

35.

Stone

(2009). The logic of random selection. Political Theory, 37(3), 375–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591709332329

36.

Stone

(2013). Access to higher education by the luck of the draw. Comparative Education Review, 57(3), 577–599. https://doi.org/10.1086/670663

37.

Sturm

Guinier

(1996). The future of affirmative action: Reclaiming the innovative ideal. California Law Review, 84(4), 953–1036. https://doi.org/10.2307/3480987

38.

U.S. Department of Education. (2020). Status dropout rates. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_coj.asp

39.

Viano

Baker

D. J.

(2020). How administrative data collection and analysis can better reflect racial and ethnic identities. Review of Research in Education, 44(1), 301–331. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X20903321

40.

Warikoo

N. K.

(2016). The diversity bargain: And other dilemmas of race, admissions, and meritocracy at elite universities. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226400280.001.0001

41.

Weis

Cipollone

Jenkins

(2014). Class warfare: Class, race, and college admissions in top-tier secondary schools. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226135083.001.0001

42.

Wolff

R. P.

(1964). The college as rat-race: Admissions and anxieties. Dissent, 11(1), 13–20. https://www.dissentmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/Pdf-16.pdf

43.

Wong

(2018, August 1). Lotteries may be the fairest way to fix elite-college admissions. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/08/lottery-college-admissions/566492/

44.

Wooldridge

J. M.

(2009). Introductory economics: A modern approach. Cengage Learning.

45.

Zwick

(2017). Who gets in? Harvard University Press.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.65 MB

What If We Leave It Up to Chance? Admissions Lotteries and Equitable Access at Selective Colleges

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material