Admissions essays submitted by applicants to undergraduate institutions are typically evaluated by admissions professionals to gain a better understanding of an applicant’s likely fit for the institution. These essays are becoming increasingly important because many colleges are likely to strengthen the role that non-test-based application materials play in the admission decision-making process. The current study examines an index of academic writing skills exhibited in admissions essays and its implications for admissions decisions and post-enrollment academic outcomes across students from different demographic and socioeconomic backgrounds. We found that underrepresented minority (URM) and low-socioeconomic status applicants tended to submit essays that showed lower academic writing skills than their counterparts. URM and first-generation applicants who submitted essays with higher academic writing skills were more likely to get accepted, but they were not likely to receive higher first-semester grade point averages, on average, compared to non-URM and non-first-generation applicants who submitted essays that displayed high academic writing skills.
AlonS. (2009). The evolution of class inequality in higher education: Competition, exclusion, and adaptation. American Sociological Review, 74(5), 731–755. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400503
2.
AlveroA. J.GiebelS.Gebre-MedhinB.AntonioA. L.StevensM. L.DomingueB. W. (2021). Essay content and style are strongly related to household income and SAT scores: Evidence from 60,000 undergraduate applications. Science Advances, 7(42), Article eabi9031. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abi9031
3.
AlveroA. J.PalJ.MoussavianK. M. (2022). Linguistic, cultural, and narrative capital: Computational and human readings of transfer admissions essays. Journal of Computational Social Science, 5, 1709–1734.
AukermanM.BeachR. (2018). Student conceptualizations of task, audience, and self in writing college admissions essays. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.888
8.
BallA. F. (2006). Teaching writing in culturally diverse classrooms. In MacArthurC.GrahamS.FitzgeraldJ. (Eds.), The handbook of writing research (pp. 293–310). The Guilford Press.
9.
BastedoM. N.BowmanN. A.GlasenerK. M.KellyJ. L. (2018). What are we talking about when we talk about holistic review? Selective college admissions and its effects on low-SES students. The Journal of Higher Education, 89(5), 782–805. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2018.1442633
10.
BastedoM. N.HowardJ. E.FlasterA. (2016). Holistic admissions after affirmative action: Does “maximizing” the high school curriculum matter?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 38(2), 389–409. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373716642407
BrelandH. M.BridgemanB.FowlesM. E. (1999). Writing assessment in admission to higher education: Review and framework (Report No. RR-96-12R). Educational Testing Service. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1999.tb01801.x
13.
BreyerF. J.AttaliY.WilliamsonD. M.Ridolfi-McCullaL.RamineniC.DuchnowskiM.HarrisA. (2014). A study of the use of the e-rater® scoring engine for the analytical writing measure of the GRE® revised General Test (Report No. RR-14-24). Educational Testing Service. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12022
BridgemanB.RamineniC. (2017). Design and evaluation of automated writing evaluation models: Relationships with writing in naturalistic settings. Assessing Writing, 34, 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2017.10.001
16.
BursteinJ.TetreaultJ.MadnaniN. (2013). The E-rater® Automated Essay Scoring System. In ShermisM. D.BursteinJ. (Eds.), Handbook of automated essay evaluation current applications and new directions (pp. 55–67). Routledge.
EarlyJ. S.DeCosta-SmithM. (2011). Making a case for college: A genre-based college admission essay intervention for underserved high school students. Journal of Writing Research, 2(3), 299–329. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2011.02.03.2
20.
EarlyJ. S.DeCosta-SmithM.ValdespinoA. (2010). Write your ticket to college: A genre-based college admission essay workshop for ethnically diverse, underserved students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(3), 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.54.3.6
21.
EnrightM. K.QuinlanT. (2010). Complementing human judgment of essays written by English language learners with e-rater[r] scoring. Language Testing, 27(3), 291–440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210363144
GiebelS.AlveroA. J.Gebre-MedhinB.AntonioA. L. (2022). Signaled or suppressed? How gender informs women’s undergraduate applications in biology and engineering. Socius, 8. https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231221127537
HalberstamB.RedstoneF. (2005). The predictive value of admissions materials on objective and subjective measures of graduate school performance in speech-language pathology. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(2), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800500120183
JonesS.SteadV. (Eds.). (2015). Non-academic indicators and the higher education admissions process: A case study of the personal statement. In Handbook of higher education admission policy and practice. Peter Lang.
30.
KirklandA.HansenB. B. (2011). “How do I bring diversity?” Race and class in the college admissions essay. Law & Society Review, 45(1), 103–138. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00429.x
31.
KobrinJ. L.CamaraW. J.MilewskiG. B. (2002). The utility of the SAT I and SAT II for admissions decisions in California and the nation (Report No. 2002-6). The College Board. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED563069.pdf
32.
LeeJ.ThymesB.ZhouJ.JoachimsT.KizilcecR. F. (2023). Augmenting holistic review in university admission using natural language processing for essays and recommendation letters. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.17575
33.
LiraB.GardnerM.QuirkA.StoneC.RaoA.UngarL.HuttS.HickmanL.D’MelloS. K.DuckworthA. L. (2023). Using artificial intelligence to assess personal qualities in college admissions. Science Advances, 9(41), Article eadg9405. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adg9405
34.
MayhewM. J.RockenbachA. B.BowmanN. A.SeifertT. A.WolniakG. C. (2016). How college affects students: 21st Century evidence that higher education works. Jossey-Bass.
35.
McCaffreyD. F.ZhangM.BursteinJ. (2022). Across performance contexts: Using automated writing evaluation to explore student writing. The Journal of Writing Analytics, 6, 167–199. https://wac.colostate.edu/docs/jwa/vol6/mccaffrey-etal.pdf
MooreA. (2019). What are the doorways and barriers to enrollment in college preparatory courses for students who are Black, Hispanic, and American Indian? [Doctoral dissertation, Hamline University]. Digital Commons. https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_all/4470
38.
MurphyS. C.KliegerD. M.BornemanM. J.KuncelN. R. (2009). The predictive power of personal statements in admissions: A meta-analysis and cautionary tale. College and University, 84(4), 83–88.
PennebakerJ. W.ChungC. K.FrazeeJ.LavergneG. M.BeaverD. I. (2014). When small words foretell academic success: The case of college admissions essays. PLOS ONE, 9(12), Article e115844. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115844
42.
QuinlanT.HigginsD.WolffeS. (2009). Coverage of the e-rater® Scoring Engine (Report No. RR-09-01). Educational Testing Service. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2009.tb02158.x
43.
RamineniC.TrapaniC. S.WilliamsonD. M. (2015). Evaluation of e-rater® for the Praxis I® Writing Test (Report No. RR-15-03). Educational Testing Service. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1109680.pdf
44.
RamineniC.TrapaniC. S.WilliamsonD. M.DaveyT.BridgemanB. (2012a). Evaluation of the e-rater® Scoring Engine for the GRE® issue and argument prompts (Report No. RR-12-02). Educational Testing Service. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2012.tb02284.x
45.
RamineniC.TrapaniC. S.WilliamsonD. M.DaveyT.BridgemanB. (2012b). Evaluation of the e-rater® Scoring Engine for the TOEFL® independent and integrated prompts (Report No. RR-12-06). Educational Testing Service. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2012.tb02288.x
46.
RamineniC.WilliamsonD. M. (2018). Understanding mean score differences between the e-rater® automated scoring engine and humans for demographically based groups in the GRE® general test (Report No. RR-18-02). Educational Testing Service. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12192
ThomasM. K. (2004). The SAT II: Minority/majority test-score gaps and what they could mean for college admissions. Social Science Quarterly, 85(5), 1318–1334.
51.
TodorovaR. (2018). Institutional expectations and students’ responses to the college application essay. Social Sciences, 7(10), Article 205. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7100205
52.
WarrenJ. (2013). The rhetoric of college application essays: Removing obstacles for low income and minority students. American Secondary Education, 42(1), 43–56. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43694176
53.
WolniakG. C.WellsR. S.EngbergM. E.ManlyC. A. (2015). College enhancement strategies and socioeconomic inequality. Research in Higher Education, 57, 310–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9389-4
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.
