A growing body of educational research uses opportunity hoarding as a construct to understand advantaged families’ engagement in K–12 U.S. schooling. Our systematic review of the literature reveals that advantaged parents hoard educational resources and opportunities in three key areas: (1) the creation and maintenance of white space; (2) school choice/selection; and (3) organizational routines. While much can be learned from the extant research, we detail conceptual, empirical, and methodological gaps in the literature as well as outline a future research agenda that can inform equity-oriented educational policy, practice, and scholarship. We argue that the concept of opportunity hoarding serves as a useful analytic tool for understanding how actors advantaged by race and/or class create and maintain educational inequities and can guide efforts to ameliorate it; therefore, it is important to understand how educational researchers might extend its use.
AlexanderP. A. (2020). Methodological guidance paper: The art and science of quality systematic reviews. Review of Educational Research, 90(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319854352
2.
*AlvordD.RauscherE. (2021). Minority support: School district demographics and support for funding election measures. Urban Affairs Review, 57(3), 643–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087419877461
3.
AndersonE. (2010). The imperative of integration. Princeton University Press.
AndersonK.SadatB.SosaR. (2021). Teacher policy and racial/ethnic gaps in access to advanced coursework: Evidence from across the United States (EdWorkingPaper No. 21–421). Annenberg Institute at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/q31g-ba50
6.
AppleL.DebsM. (2021). “I am not a guinea pig”: Parental opportunity hoarding and tracking reform in Germany. Research in Comparative and International Education, 16(1), 64–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499921995786
BaderM. D. M.LareauA.EvansS. A. (2019). Talk on the playground: The neighborhood context of school choice. City & Community, 18(2), 483–508. https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12410
9.
*BeattieI. R. (2017). Tracking women’s transitions to adulthood: Race, curricular tracking, and young adult outcomes. Youth & Society, 49(1), 96–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X14527467
10.
BillinghamC. M.KimelbergS. M. (2013). Middle-class parents, urban schooling, and the shift from consumption to production of urban space. Sociological Forum, 28(1), 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12004
11.
BourdieuP. (1986). The forms of capital. In RichardsonJ. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood.
12.
BranchE. H.HanleyC. (2017). A racial-gender lens on precarious nonstandard employment. In KallebergA. L.VallasP. (Eds.), Precarious work (Vol. 31, pp. 183–213). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0277-283320170000031006
13.
CalarcoJ. M. (2018). Negotiating opportunities: How the middle class secures advantages in school. Oxford University Press.
14.
*CastroA. J.ParryM.Siegel-HawleyG. (2022). “All schools are not created equal:” An analysis of public comments on school rezoning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 30(13), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.30.6984
15.
ChuaV.SweeE. L.WellmanB. (2019). Getting ahead in Singapore: How neighborhoods, gender, and ethnicity affect enrollment into elite schools. Sociology of Education, 92(2), 176–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040719835489
16.
Cioè-PeñaM. (2020). Bilingualism for students with disabilities, deficit or advantage?: Perspectives of Latinx mothers. Bilingual Research Journal, 43(3), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2020.1799884
17.
Coleman-TempelL. E. (2020). Southeast high’s new building and reputation: A socio historical study of an urban high school [Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
18.
CollinsJ. (2009). Social reproduction in classrooms and schools. Review of Anthropology, 38, 33–48.
19.
CucchiaraM. B. (2013). Marketing schools, marketing cities: Who wins and who loses when schools become urban amenities. The University of Chicago Press.
20.
*DeniceP.DeArmondM.CarrM. (2021). When schools open: Student mobility and racial sorting across new charter schools in Kansas City, Missouri. Journal of Urban Affairs, 43(10), 1468–1491. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2020.1770605
21.
DiamondJ. B.LewisA. E. (2022). Opportunity hoarding and the maintenance of “white” educational space. American Behavioral Scientist, 66(11), 1470–1489. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642211066048
22.
DiamondJ. B.Posey-MaddoxL.VelázquezM. D. (2021). Reframing suburbs: Race, place, and opportunity in suburban educational spaces. Educational Researcher, 50(4), 249–255. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20972676
23.
DinovitzerR.HaganJ. (2014). Hierarchical structure and gender dissimilarity in American legal labor markets. Social Forces, 92(3), 929–955. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sot110
24.
DiTomasoN. (2013). The American non-dilemma: Racial inequality without racism. Russell Sage Foundation.
FaberJ. (2021). Contemporary echoes of segregationist policy: Spatial marking and the persistence of inequality. Urban Studies, 58(5), 1067–1086. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020947341
29.
FenigerY.Bar-HaimE.BlankC. (2021). From social origin to selective high school courses: Ability grouping as a mechanism of securing social advantage in Israeli secondary education. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 76, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2021.100627
30.
*FielJ. E. (2022). Opportunity seeking across segregated schools: Unintended effects of automatic admission policies on high school segregation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 44(3), 485–504. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737221078286
31.
*GanskiH. (2015). Inter-district school choice: Transfer policy and practice in a fragmented metropolitan region. Berkeley Review of Education, 5(2), 137–170. https://doi.org/10.5070/B85110009
32.
GoetzE. G.DamianoA.WilliamsR. A. (2019). Racially concentrated areas of affluence: A preliminary investigation. Cityscape, 21(1), 99–124.
33.
*GreenT. L.SánchezJ.GermainE. (2017). Communities and school ratings: Examining geography of opportunity in an urban school district located in a resource-rich city. The Urban Review, 49(5), 777–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-017-0421-1
34.
*GroomsA. (2019). Turbulence in St. Louis County: School transfers, opportunity hoarding, and the legacy of Brown. Peabody Journal of Education, 94(4), 403–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2019.1648952
HamiltonL.RoksaJ.NielsenK. (2018). Providing a “leg up”: Parental involvement and opportunity hoarding in college. Sociology of Education, 91(2), 111–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040718759557
37.
*HanselmanP. (2019). Access to effective teachers and economic and racial disparities in opportunities to learn. Sociological Quarterly, 60(3), 498–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2019.1625732
38.
*HanselmanP.DominaT.HwangN. (2022). Educational inequality regimes amid algebra for-all: The provision and allocation of expanding educational opportunities. Social Forces, 100(4), 1722–1751. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soab052
39.
*HanselmanP.FielJ. E. (2017). School opportunity hoarding? Racial segregation and access to high growth schools. Social Forces, 95(3), 1077–1104. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sow088
40.
HaoL.HuA.LoJ. (2014). Two aspects of the rural-urban divide and educational stratification in China: A trajectory analysis. Comparative Education Review, 58(3), 509–536. https://doi.org/10.1086/676828
41.
HidalgoL. A. (2017). Predatory landscapes: Pedagogical and social justice tools to uncover racist nativism in the spatial dimensions of economic exclusion. In MorrisonD.AnnammaS. A.JacksonD. D. (Eds.), Critical race spatial analysis: Mapping to understand and address educational inequity (pp. 67–87). Stylus.
42.
HolmeJ. J.DiemS.WeltonA. (2014). Suburban school districts and demographic change: The technical, normative, and political dimensions of response. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(1), 34–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X13484038
43.
HolmeJ. J.RichardsM. P. (2009). School choice and stratification in a regional context: Examining the role of inter-district choice. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(2), 150–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619560902810120
44.
HuguleyJ. P.Delale-O’ConnorL.WangM.-T.ParrA. K. (2021). African American parents’ educational involvement in urban schools: Contextualized strategies for student success in adolescence. Educational Researcher, 50(1), 6–16. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20943199
45.
HurieA. H.CallahanR. M. (2019). Integration as perpetuation: Learning from race evasive approaches to ESL program reform. Teachers College Record, 121(9), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811912100904
46.
KalevA.DobbinF.KellyE. (2006). Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. American Sociological Review, 71(4), 589–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240607100404
47.
*KebedeM.MaselliA.TaylorK.FrankenbergE. (2021). Ethnoracial diversity and segregation in U.S. rural school districts. Rural Sociology, 86(3), 494–522. https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12398
*KellyS.PriceH. (2011). The correlates of tracking policy: Opportunity hoarding, status competition, or a technical-functional explanation?American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 560–585. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210395927
50.
*KendallD. (2006). Class in the United States: Not only alive but reproducing. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 24(1), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2004.11.001
51.
*KnudsonP. (2021). How institutional context shapes the accounts of school choice and boundary-making among middle class parents in an urban school district. The Qualitative Report, 26(3), 808–831. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.4641
52.
LaParoK. (2021). White representation in neighborhood schools: School funding, nonprofit Investment, and academic outcomes [Doctoral dissertation, Temple University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
53.
LareauA. (2003). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life. University of California Press.
54.
LeeW.KnightD.CardellaM. (2021). Promoting equity by scaling up summer engineering experiences: A retrospective reflection on tensions and tradeoffs. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 11(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1288
55.
LenhoffS. W. (2020). Unregulated open enrollment and inequitable access to schools of choice. Peabody Journal of Education, 95(3), 248–271.
*LewisA. E.DiamondJ. (2015). Despite the best intentions: How racial inequality thrives in good schools. Oxford University Press.
58.
*Lewis-McCoyR. L. (2014). Inequality in the promised land: Race, resources, and suburban schooling. Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804792455
59.
Lyken-SegosebeD.HinzS. E. (2015). The politics of parental involvement: How opportunity hoarding and prying shape educational opportunity. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2015.988536
60.
MasseyD. S. (2007). Categorically unequal: The American stratification system. Russell Sage Foundation.
*MordechayK. (2022). A double edge sword: Tensions of integration amidst a diversifying public school. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 21(4), 901–921. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2021.1879165
63.
MorrisA. (2000). Building blocks of social inequality: A critique of durable inequality. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 42(2), 482–486. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500002553
64.
*MurrayB.DominaT.PettsA.RenzulliL.BoylanR. (2020). “We’re in this together”: Bridging and bonding social capital in elementary school PTOs. American Educational Research Journal, 57(5), 2210–2244. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831220908848
65.
*MurrayB.DominaT.RenzulliL.BoylanR. (2019). Civil society goes to school: Parent teacher associations and the equality of educational opportunity. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 5(3), 41–63. https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2019.5.3.03
66.
NandanA.SanthoshR. (2020). Associational structures and beyond: Evolution and contemporary articulations of Bhumihar caste associations in Bihar, India. Journal of Historical Sociology, 33(4), 665–680. https://doi.org/10.1111/johs.12304
67.
*NationsJ. M.MartinI. W. (2020). Racial context and political support for California school taxes. Social Science Quarterly, 101(6), 2220–2237. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12869
68.
*NicholsL. (2020). The journey before us: First-generation pathways from middle school to college. Rutgers University Press. https://doi.org/10.36019/9781978805668
69.
ParkhouseH.LuC. Y.MassaroV. R. (2019). Multicultural education professional development: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 89(3), 416–458. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319840359
70.
*PernaL. W.MayH.YeeA.RansomT.RodriguezA.FesterR. (2015). Unequal access to rigorous high school curricula: An exploration of the opportunity to benefit from the international baccalaureate diploma programme (IBDP). Educational Policy, 29(2), 402–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904813492383
71.
Posey-MaddoxL. (2014). When middle-class parents choose urban schools: Class, race, and the challenge of equity in public education. University of Chicago Press.
72.
*Posey-MaddoxL. (2016). Beyond the consumer: Parents, privatization, and fundraising in US urban public schooling. Journal of Education Policy, 31(2), 178–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2015.1065345
73.
*PowellS. N. (2020). The paradox of a credit-recovery program: Alleviating and exacerbating racial inequity. Race Ethnicity and Education, 23(6), 784–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2018.1511536
74.
*PriceH. E. (2021). The college preparatory pipeline: Disparate stages in academic opportunities. American Educational Research Journal, 58(4), 785–814. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831220969138
*ReeceR. L.O’ConnellH. A. (2016). How the legacy of slavery and racial composition shape public school enrollment in the American South. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 2(1), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649215582251
77.
ReevesR.V. (2017). Dream hoarders: How the American upper middle class is leaving everyone else in the dust, why that is a problem, and what to do about it. Brookings Institution Press.
78.
ReiselL.ØstbakkenK. M.AttewellP. (2019). Dynamics of claims making and gender wage gaps in the United States and Norway. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 26(1), 87–115. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxy019
79.
RichardsB. N.Ceron-AnayaH.DumaisS. A.MuellerJ. C.Sánchez-ConnallyP.WallaceD. (2023). What’s race got to do with it? Disrupting whiteness in cultural capital research. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 9(3), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/23326492231160535
80.
Riegle-CrumbC.KingB.IrizarryY. (2019). Does STEM stand out? Examining racial/ethnic gaps in persistence across postsecondary fields. Educational Researcher, 48(3), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19831006
81.
*RodaA. (2018). School choice and the politics of parenthood: Exploring parent mobilization as a catalyst for the common good. Peabody Journal of Education, 93(4), 430–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2018.1488400
82.
*RodaA. (2023). “Holding the line”: Investigating how urban school leaders’ respond to gentrification in New York City schools. Urban Education, 58(10), 2515–2542.https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920959137
83.
RodaA.MenkenK. (2024). The conflation of dual language bilingual education with gifted programs in New York City schools. Educational Policy, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/08959048241237724
84.
RodaA.WellsA. S. (2013). School choice policies and racial segregation: Where white parents’ good intentions, anxiety, and privilege collide. American Journal of Education, 119(2), 261–293. https://doi.org/10.1086/668753
85.
*RodriguezA.McGuireK. M. (2019). More classes, more access? Understanding the effects of course offerings on black-white gaps in advanced placement course-taking. The Review of Higher Education, 42(2), 641–679. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2019.0010
86.
*RuryJ. L. (2020). Creating the suburban school advantage: Race, localism, and inequality in an American metropolis. Cornell University Press.
87.
*RuryJ. L.RifeA. T. (2018). Race, schools and opportunity hoarding: Evidence from a post-war American metropolis. History of Education, 47(1), 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/0046760X.2017.1353142
88.
*RuryJ. L.SaatciogluA. (2011). Suburban advantage: Opportunity hoarding and secondary attainment in the postwar metropolitan North. American Journal of Education, 117(3), 307–342. https://doi.org/10.1086/659210
89.
SaldañaJ. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.
90.
*Sattin-BajajC.RodaA. (2020). Opportunity hoarding in school choice contexts: The role of policy design in promoting middle-class parents’ exclusionary behaviors. Educational Policy, 34(7), 992–1035. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904818802106
91.
SingerJ. (2020). Student stratification among a combination of school choice policies in Detroit. Journal of School Choice, 14(1), 122–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2019.1689467
92.
*SingerJ.LenhoffS. W. (2022). Race, geography, and school choice policy: A critical analysis of Detroit students’ suburban school choices. AERA Open, 8(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584211067202
93.
SmallM. L.AkhavanA.TorresM.WangQ. (2021). Banks, alternative institutions and the spatial–temporal ecology of racial inequality in US cities. Nature Human Behavior, 5, 1622–1628. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01153-1
94.
*SteffesT. L. (2020). Assessment matters: The rise and fall of the Illinois resource equalizer formula. History of Education Quarterly, 60(1), 24–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/heq.2020.7
95.
TillyC. (1998). Durable inequality. University of Chicago Press.
96.
TillyC. (2003). Changing forms of inequality. Sociological Theory, 21(1), 31–36.
97.
TillyC. (2005). Identities, boundaries, and social ties. Paradigm Publishers.
98.
Tomaskovic-DeveyD.Avent-HoltD. (2019). Relational inequalities: An organizational approach. Oxford University Press.
99.
Tomaskovic-DeveyD.Avent-HoltD.ZimmerC.HardingS. (2009). The categorical generation of organizational inequality: A comparative test of Tilly’s durable inequality. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 27(3), 128–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2009.04.004
ValdezV. E.FreireJ. A.DelavanM. G. (2016). The gentrification of dual language education. The Urban Review, 48(4), 601–627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-016-03700
102.
*VoulgaridesC. K. (2018). Does compliance matter in special education?: IDEA and the hidden inequities of practice. Teachers College Press.
WaltersP. B. (2007, January). Explaining the durable racial divide in American education: Policy development and opportunity hoarding from Brown to vouchers [Conference session]. Conference on the Social Dimensions of Inequality by the Russell Sage Foundation, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
WeathersE. S.SosinaV. E. (2022). Separate remains unequal: Contemporary segregation and racial disparities in school district revenue. American Educational Research Journal, 59(5), 905–938. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312221079297
107.
WilsonS. M.AnagnostopoulosD. (2021). Methodological guidance paper: The craft of conducting a qualitative review. Review of Educational Research, 91(5), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211012755
108.
WrightE.O. (2000). Metatheoretical foundations of Charles Tilly’s durable inequality. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 42(2), 458-474. doi:10.1017/S001041750000253X
109.
ZhangY.WangY. (2021). Inequality and access to elite universities in China: Reexamining the interacting multiple capitals model. Studies in Higher Education, 46(9), 1881–1893. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1711042
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.
