Search

Admission to selective colleges has grown more competitive, yielding student bodies that are unrepresentative of the U.S. population. Admission officers report using sorting (e.g., GPA, standardized tests) and concertedly cultivated (e.g., extracurricular activities) and ascriptive status (e.g., whether an applicant identifies as a member of a racially minoritized group) criteria to make decisions. Using latent class analysis, we identified three groupings of institutions based on the admission criteria they claim to value. Public institutions largely practiced a "coarse sieve" approach that relied on sorting criteria. Some private institutions practiced "fine sieve" admissions by emphasizing concertedly cultivated and ascriptive status criteria. A few privates employed the "double sieve" that combined sorting and concertedly cultivated criteria. Results illuminate the shape of the admissions sieve, identifying institutional contexts that inform the admissions practices selective colleges claim to use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We compiled the first longitudinal data set with detailed state funding information to examine whether different funding strategies for public higher education correlate with college access and completion, with a focus on outcomes among racially minoritized students. We found no relationships between funding mechanisms and student outcomes at public universities. However, at community colleges, we found that funding strategies that combine base adjustments and enrollment or performance components may increase enrollment, but not completions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing number of states use performance-based funding (PBF) systems to tie appropriations to student outcomes. Yet while many studies have examined the effects of PBF on enrollment and completion outcomes, no research has considered whether PBF affects post-college outcomes. This is of particular importance as more states directly incentivize colleges to improve student earnings and have students major in high-demand fields. We used the first detailed longitudinal dataset of state PBF policies to examine the effects of PBF on student earnings and found some modest positive effects concentrated among students who were already enrolled in college when PBF was first implemented. However, these small increases could also reflect other trends occurring prior to the implementation of PBF and analyses show this increase was not sustained among later cohorts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]