Brittany K. Carlson Senior Fellow

S. Caroline Kerr Chief Executive Officer

Where Are The Low-Income Students At Highly Selective Colleges?

Opportunities and Levers For Change

Copyright 2016, All Rights Reserved

This paper was prepared by Brittany K. Carlson, 2015-2016 Senior Fellow at The Joyce Ivy Foundation, a 501(c)(3) non-profit, tax-exempt organization dedicated to the advancement of post-secondary opportunities for young women, including nonpartisan analysis, study, and research of issues related to college access. This paper draws on research by Carrie Alexander, 2014-2015 Senior Fellow at The Joyce Ivy Foundation.

The Joyce Ivy Foundation PO Box 2396

Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Phone/Fax 734-661-0229

info@joyceivyfoundation.org www.joyceivyfoundation.org

Table of Contents Section 1 Executive Summary.………………………….…………… 3

Section 2 Current Application And Enrollment Trends………….... 4

Section 3 Colleges Making Progress…………………..…………… 6

Section 4 An Opportunity For Elite Institutions………………..…… 10

Section 5 Levers For Change…………………………...…………… 11

Section 6 Conclusion………..…………………………...…………… 17

Section 7 Sources …………………………………….....…………… 18

1

ResearchbyCarolineHoxbyandChristopherAveryfindsthatupto

35,000

low-incomestudentsarecapableoftheacademicrigoratthenation’sbestcollegesanduniversities,yettheydonotapply.

2

Source:CarolineM.HoxbyandChristopherAvery,TheMissing“One-Offs”:TheHiddenSupplyofHigh-Achieving,Low-IncomeStudents,NationalBureauofEconomicResearchWorkingPaper18586(2012),p.11.

Where Are The Low-Income, High-Achieving Students At Highly Selective Colleges?

SECTION 1:

Executive Summary

Thelong-standingbeliefthatmanylow-income

studentsdonotapply–orarenotadmitted–to

highlyselectivecollegesduetolackof

academicpreparationandcompetitive

standardizedtestscoreshasbeeneffectively

challengedbyrecentresearch.Itisestimated

thatupto35,000low-incomestudentsare

capableofworkatthenation’sbestcolleges

anduniversities,yetdonotapply.1Inrecent

years,collegesanduniversitiesacrossthe

UnitedStateshaveimplementedprogramsto

recruitandadmitamoresocioeconomically

diversestudentbody.Onemethodoftracking

thischangeovertimeisexaminingthenumber

ofstudentsreceivingPellGrantsenrolledat

particularcolleges.Whilesomecollegeshave

madeprogress,manyofthemostselective

institutions–thosethathavethelargest

universityendowmentsandgenerousfinancial

aidprograms–arenotablyabsent.

3

Thispaperexaminesthisrecentprogressand

highlightsfiveleverstoenactfurtherchange:

1. Counseling and recruitment;

2. Pre-college programming;

3. Financial aid literacy;

4. Colleges’ institutional priorities;

5. Undergraduate class size.

Toutilizetheselevers,theJoyceIvyFoundationrecommendssixactions:

1. Enroll more low-income students in pre-college summer academic programs;

2. Expand undergraduate enrollments;

3. Reallocate some spaces historically used to fulfill other institutional priorities;

4. Further diversifying other “institutional priority” segments of the student body;

5. Increase transparency and comparability of financial costs of attending selective institutions;

6. Focus admissions recruitment on lower income areas.

Note:Forthepurposesofthiswhitepaper,‘low-income’referstofamilieswithinthebottomincomequartile.Variousresearchcitedhereindefineslow-incomeusingacompositemeasureoffamilyincome,parentshighestlevelofeducationalattainment,andparents’occupationalstatus.‘High-achieving’referstostudentsscoringinthetop10%onstandardizedtesting.

48%

23%

Higher-income Lower-Income

ApplicationRatestoHighlySelectiveCollegesbyHigh-

AchievingStudents

Exhibit1

Source:JackKentCookeFoundation,(2016).

SECTION 2:

Current Application and Enrollment Trends

AstheUnitedStatescontinuestoexperience

demographicchanges,thedefinitionofdiversity

oncollegeanduniversitycampusesisexpanding.

Nolongerdothemostselectivecollegesand

universitiessolelyenrollthesonsanddaughters

ofAmerica’smostwealthyandwell-connected

families,butrathertheyseektobuildastudent

bodythatreflectsgreaterdiversityingender,

race,ethnicity,religion,nationality,and

socioeconomicstatus,amongotherdimensions.

Whilethediversityofthestudentbodyatthe

mostselectiveinstitutionsintheUnitedStates

haschangedinsomewaysinthepasttwenty-five

years,inotherways,particularly

socioeconomically,ithasremainedalarmingly

stagnant.

Along-standingbeliefinthefieldof

collegeadmissionsisthatmanylow-income

studentsdonothavetheacademicpreparation

orcredentialstomakethemsuccessful

applicantsinhighlyselectiveadmissions

processes.ResearchbyCarolineHoxbyand

ChristopherAveryhasshownthistobean

incorrectassumption;infact,theirresearch

suggeststhattherearebetween25,000-35,000

low-incomestudentswiththeacademic

credentialstobeverysuccessfulinhighly

selectiveapplicantpools.2However,these

studentsarenotapplyingtohighlyselective

institutionsatthesamerateastheirhigher

incomepeers.

Only23%ofhigh-achieving*,low-income

studentsevenapplytoaselectiveschool,instark

contrastto48%oftheirhigh-achieving,higher

incomepeers.3Forthosestudentswhoare

admittedtohighlyselectiveinstitutions,thehigh-

4

5

achievingstudentsfromthewealthiestfamilies

arethreetimesaslikelytoenrollasthehigh-

achievingstudentsfromthelowestincome

families.Infact,themajorityofstudentsin

America’smostselectiveinstitutions–72%–

comefromthewealthiest25%ofthe

population,whereasonly3%comefromthe

lowestincomequartile.4Despitethedisparityof

enrollmentratesofhigh-incomeandlow-income

studentsathighlyselectiveinstitutions,when

low-incomestudentsdomakeittohighly

selectiveinstitutions,theyoftendoverywell:

studentsinthebottomtwoincomequartilesearn

similargradesandgraduateatthesamerateas

thosestudentsfromfamiliesinthetoptwo

incomequartiles.5

Exhibit2

6

Somecollegesanduniversitieshavemade

progressinattractingandmatriculatingthis

populationoftalentedstudents.Anexamination

ofPellGrantallotment,federalgrantsgivento

low-incomestudentstohelpdefraysome,butnot

all,ofthecostsofattendingcollege,isperhapsthe

bestavailablemeasureofacollegeoruniversity’s

commitmenttoaccessandsocioeconomic

diversity.Generally,thenumberofPellgrant

recipientsisincreasinginAmericanhigher

education.Exhibit3:Figure1andFigure2show

visualizationsofPellGrantallotmentfrom2008

and2012byThirdCoastAnalytics.Warmer

colors,suchasred,orange,andyellow,

correspondtoagreaternumberofPellrecipients

oncampus.Withinthisfour-yeartimespan,

collegesanduniversitiesincreasedthenumberof

low-incomestudentsoncampus.

Infact,PellGrantallotment,asperthe

IntegratedPostsecondaryEducationalData

System,from2007through2012,indicatesthat

someinstitutionsaredoinganespecially

noteworthyjobofincreasingtheirnumberofPell

Grantrecipientsoncampus.PerExhibit4:Figure

1,Vassar,Franklin&Marshall,andDenisonare

compellingexamplesofcollegesthathavegreatly

increasedtheirPellallotmentwithinthissix-year

timespan;Figure2indicatesNewYork

University,UniversityofSouthernCalifornia,and

BostonUniversityleadingPellallotmentprogress

amongprivateuniversities.

Asforpublicuniversities,Universityof

Missouri–Columbia,UniversityofCalifornia–

LosAngeles,andUniversityofFloridahavethe

greatestincreaseinPelldistributionwithintheir

studentbodies(Exhibit4:Figure3).

Missingfromtheselistsofschoolsare

someofthemosthighlyselective,well-resourced

collegesanduniversitiesinthecountry.Acloser

lookattheblue“tail”onthefarleftofExhibit3:

Figure2showscollegesanduniversitieswithlow

numbersofPellrecipientsoncampus,lowadmit

rates,andhighgraduationrates–manyofwhom

areIvyLeagueinstitutionsorhighlyselective,

privateliberalartscolleges.

Exhibit3:Figure3showsacompelling

exampleofthis:HarvardUniversityisoneofthe

SECTION 3:

Colleges Making Progress

7

darkestbluecircles,withonly18%of

studentsoncampusreceivingaPell

Grant,but97%graduating.Harvard’s

highgraduationraterevealsthe

extensiveresourcesandsupporton

campus,resourcesandsupportthat

wouldbeparticularlytransformational

forlow-incomestudents.

Exhibit3

Figure1–PellAllotment,2008

Figure2–PellAllotment,2012

Figure3–HarvardPellAllotment,2012

Source:ThirdCoastAnalytics,NACAC,2014.

8

Exhibit46

Figure2–PellChange:PrivateUniversities,2007to2012

Figure1–PellChange:SmallInstitutions,2007to2012

Figure3–PellChange:LargeInstitutions,2007to2012

9

10

Highlyselectivecollegesanduniversities,which

oftenhavesignificantendowmentsandwell-

fundedfinancialaidprograms,havean

opportunitytosupportgreaternumbersofhigh-

achieving,low-incomestudentsbyproviding

themwithatop-notcheducationwithoutthe

burdenofdebt.Beyondjustthesefinancial

considerations,increasedaccessforlow-income

populationsrepresentshighlyselective

institutions’participationintheexpansionof

opportunityforabroaderanddeepersectorof

thepopulationandoftenresonateswith

institutionalmissionsandstrategicplans.Asthe

mostselectiveinstitutionsinthecountryconsider

theirroleinincreasingaccessandassistingin

upwardmobility,researchshowsthatadmission

toahighlyselectiveinstitutionpaysoff

considerablyforallindividuals,butparticularly

thosefromlow-incomebackgrounds.

Additionally,thehumancapitalthat

studentsacquirebyattendingahighquality

institutionoftenleadstosignificanteconomic

returnsareevenmoresignificantforstudents

comingfromlow-incomebackgrounds.7Ifthe

talent,resources,alignmentwithinstitutional

mission,andopportunityforgreatreturnis

there,whyaretherenotmorehigh-achieving,

low-incomestudentsatthecountry’smost

selectivecollegesanduniversities?Enrollmentof

low-incomestudentsathighlyselectivecolleges

anduniversitieshaschangedverylittleoverthe

pasttwentyyears.

Researchindicatesthathigh-achieving,

low-incomestudentstypicallydonotapplyto

highlyselectiveinstitutionstowhichtheyare

qualifiedfortwomainreasons:theydonot

believetheycanafforditandtheydonotreceive

thorough,accurate,andindividualizedguidance

throughthecollegeapplicationprocess.8

However,aftermorethanadecadeofworking

successfullywithlow-incomestudents,theJoyce

IvyFoundationhasidentifiedactionsthatcan

helpovercomethebarriershigh-achieving,low-

incomestudentsfacewhenapplyingtocollege.

SECTION 4:

An Opportunity For Elite Institutions

11

Thefollowingsixleversofferwaystorecruitand

enrollgreaternumbersofhigh-achieving,low-

incomestudentstohighlyselectiveinstitutions,

oftenthroughcollaborationwithother

organizations.

1.CounselingandRecruitment

Manylow-incomestudentsdonotreceive

accurate,individualizedcounselingthroughoutthe

collegeapplicationprocess,andthelackofsuch

guidanceimpedestheirchancesofapplyingtoa

highlyselectiveinstitution,evenwhentheyare

qualified.Shiftingrecruitmentpracticesaswellas

investingmoreincollegecounselingresourcesare

twoleverstoovercomethisbarrier.

Recruitmenttravelforallcolleges,including

themostselective,oftencentersaround

metropolitanareasandhighschoolsthatprovide

collegeswiththegreatestnumberofapplicants.

Withanestablishedpresence,continuedtravelto

theseplacesoftenreproducesadvantagesforlocal

students.Thehighschoolsandstudentswhoare

mostfrequentlyvisitedbysomeofthemost

selectiveinstitutionsareoftentheoneswhocould

benefittheleast–manyofthesestudentsalready

havethemeanstomakeindividualtripsto

campusesthemselvesorarealreadyfamiliarwith

highlyselectioninstitutionsandthepreparation

necessarytoapply.Instead,collegesshould

continuetoexpandtheirpresencethroughvisitsto

under-resourced,public,urbanorruralhigh

schoolswherestudentsarenotfamiliarwith

highlyselectivecollegesandarelesslikelytobe

receivingindividualizedcollegeadvising.The

formatofacollege’spresentationshould

emphasizeaffordability,particularlyincomparison

tootherlocal,seeminglylessexpensiveoptions,

andprovidebroadinformationaboutthereturns

onahigh-qualityeducation.

TheJoyceIvyFoundationsendslow-income

studentstopre-collegeprogramsathighly

selectivecollegeseachsummer.Alumnaeofthe

JoyceIvyFoundationSummerScholarsprogram

frequentlycounselyoungerpeersintheirlocal

communitiesthefollowingyear.Theyare

frequentlycitedasrelatable,authenticsourcesof

information.

SECTION 5:

Levers For Change

Distanceprogrammingcanalsobe

effective.Virtualsessionsonline,andtargeted

printcommunicationscanalsoexpanda

college’sreachwhenthelimitsofin-person

travelarereached.

Statesandschooldistrictsalsohavearole

toplay.Inschoolcounselorsurveysconducted

bytheJoyceIvyFoundationinMidwestern

states,counselorsconsistentlyreportthattheir

caseloadsaretoohigh,theyareregularly

burdenedwithotheradministrativeduties–

oftenunrelatedtocounselingorcollegeguidance

–andofferedverylittleprofessional

developmenttolearnmoreabouthighly

selectiveadmissionsandfinancialaidpractices.

Stateandlocalleadersmustdomoretoinvestin

makingqualitycollegecounselingavailableto

theirstudents.

TheJoyceIvyCollegeAdmissions

Symposium,heldannuallyinMichigan,isan

exampleofcollaborationbetweenthe

Foundation,localcounselors,andadmissions

andfinancialaidprofessionalsfromhighly

selectivecolleges.Theseindividualswork

togethertoofferworkshopsonhighlyselective

admissionsandfinancialaidatnocostto

participants,whoincludeeducatorsandfamilies.

12

2.Pre-collegeProgramming

Manycollegesholdsummeracademic

programsontheircampusesthatofferachance

toexperiencelifeonacollegecampus.These

pre-collegeprogramscouldbebetterleveraged

tobreakdownbarriersthatlow-income

populationsface.Rarelyarethesesummer

programsdesignedtobe“feederprograms”for

theundergraduateadmissionsprocess;infact,

manyoperateasarevenueandprofitsourcefor

thehostinstitution.Theseprogramscanbe

someofthemostvaluableleversforbroadening

alow-incomestudentandfamily’sawarenessof

thefullrangeofcollegeoptions.Todoso,the

programmustofferneed-basedfinancialaidto

abroadrangeofstudents–notjustthosein

closeproximitytocampuswhocanbeoffereda

discountedrateorparticipateascommuters.

Theprogramsshouldalsoconsiderpartnering

withsecondaryschoolsandcommunity-based

organizationsthatservelow-incomestudents.

Overall,selectivecollegesand

universitiesneedtoembracethefactthattheir

campusesduringthesummermonthsrepresent

oneofthemostpowerfulleversattheirdisposal

forattractingandexposinglow-income

individualstotheirinstitution.Toooften,

summerdormitoryandacademiccapacityat

selectivecollegesareviewedmoreasan

incrementalrevenuesource,fromsummersports

campsorwealthyinternationalanddomestic

familieswhowanttoexposetheirchildrentolife

onaselectivecollege,andfromotherprograms

thatdonotdirectlyaddresstheneedtohelplow-

incomestudentsintheU.S.withthatcriticalstep

ofexperiencinglifeonaselectivecollegecampus.

TheJoyceIvyFoundationSummer

Scholarsprogramservesasamodelforhow

campusesandacademicprogramscanbe

leveragedduringthesummermonthstoserve

low-incomestudents.Eachyear,theFoundation

recruitshigh-achieving,low-incomestudentsvia

itsnetworkofcounselorsandviadirect

recruitmentusingstudents’standardizedtest

scores.Thesestudentsarethensupported

financiallyintheirquesttospendpartoftheir

summer,typicallyaftersophomoreorjunioryear

ofhighschool,onthecampusofahighlyselective

collegeoruniversity.TheJoyceIvyFoundation

currentlypartnerswithprogramsatBarnard,

Brown,Cornell,Emory,Harvard,JohnsHopkins,

MIT,Smith,Stanford,WashingtonUniversityinSt.

Louis,andYale.Theseelevencollegesand

universitieshavedonewhatmanyother

13

institutionshavenot:openedtheircoffersand

summerprogramstosupporthigh-achieving,

low-incomestudentsthroughouttheU.S.in

spendingimportanttimeexperiencinglifeonthe

campusofahighlyselectivecollege.These

summerprogrampartnerssharethescholarship

Exhibit5

Source:JoyceIvyFoundationScholarSurvey(2015).

ImpactofPre-collegeSummerProgramParticipation

programshavebeenintroducedathighly

selectiveinstitutionssuchasHarvard,Stanford,

andAmherstforstudentscomingfromfamilies

whoseincomesfallbelowacertainlevel.

Beyondinstitutionalaid,thenumberofstudents

receivingPellGrantshasalsoincreased.

KnowledgeoftheavailabilityofPell

Grantsandinstitutionalfinancialaidpackages

goalongwayininforminghigh-achieving,low-

incomestudentsthatattendingahighly

selectiveinstitutioniswithintheirreach.Infact,

costsareoftenlowesttoattendaselective

institutionforalow-incomestudent–on

average,yearlytuitionforalow-incomestudent

atthemostcompetitiveinstitutionsroundsout

to$6,754,whileyearlytuitionforalow-income

studentatalesscompetitiveinstitutionis

$26,335.9Byhavinganin-depthunderstanding

ofthefinancialaidpracticesatindividualhighly

selectiveinstitutions,high-achieving,low-

incomestudentsaremorelikelytoviewtheir

attendanceatahighlyselective,competitive

schoolasbeingfinanciallyfeasible.

PromisingresearchbyCarolineHoxby

showsthatpersonalizedmailingshelptogive

high-achieving,low-incomestudentsthe

financialaidliteracytheyneedinorderto

costswiththeJoyceIvyFoundation,thus

extendingthereachofboththeFoundationand

summerprogram’sbudgets.

AccordingtotheFoundation’s2015surveys

ofSummerScholars,96%reportedthatthe

experiencechangedtheircollegeplans,making

themmoreambitiousandgeographicallydiverse.

88%reportedanincreaseinacademicconfidence

and89%ultimatelyappliedtothecollegeor

universitythathostedtheirsummerprogram.

Theinfrastructurefortheseprograms

alreadyexists,andwithfurtherinvestmentin

financialaidbudgets,advisorsupportfor

participants,andsecondaryschooland

community-basedorganizationpartnerships,these

programscanserveagreaternumberoflow-

incomestudents–whilestillservingother

institutionalpriorities.

3.FinancialAidLiteracy

Whilemanyofthemostselectivecolleges

anduniversitiesinthecountryhavestickerprices

thatareunmanageableforthemajorityof

applicants,generousneed-based–andoftenneed-

blind–financialaidpracticesmakeattendancea

realityforstudentscomingfromthelowest

incomelevels.Overthelastdecade,“freetuition”

14

15

considerapplyingtohighlyselectiveinstitutions.

Bymailingpersonalizedlettersinvitingstudents

toapplytoagroupofcollegesbasedupontheir

gradesandtestscores,alongwithgraphsand

chartscomparingthecosttogototheseschools

versuslocalcommunitycollegesandstate

universitiesnearby,andeightvouchersfor

studentstoapplytoschoolsfreeofcharge,the

numberofhigh-achieving,low-incomestudents

whoappliedandwereadmittedtohighly

selectiveinstitutionsincreasedby31%.10

Hoxby’sresearchalsosuggeststhatthere

isanimportantrolefora“matchmaker”inthe

process;thisincludesthirdpartyorganizations

thatencourageastudenttoconsiderahighly

selectivecollege.TheJoyceIvyFoundationhas

foundvalueintheroleof“matchmaker”when

recruitingstudentstotheSummerScholars

program.Manystudentsareskepticalwhenthey

receivedirectrecruitmentmessagesfroma

collegeoruniversity,buttrustathirdparty

sourcethatservesstudentslikethem.

4.InstitutionalPriorities

Astheenrollmentofhigh-achieving,low-

incomestudentsincreasesathighlyselective

institutionswiththeinterventionsdescribed

above,institutionshavetobecognizantofthe

financialsustainabilityofsuchefforts.With

limitedspotsinfirst-yearclassesatthecountry’s

mosthighlyselectiveinstitutions,asone

populationofstudentsincreases–inthiscase,

high-achieving,low-incomestudents–another

populationmustinvariablydecrease,ifclasssize

istoremainconstant.Assuch,institutionsshould

considershiftinginstitutionalpreferencesinthe

admissionprocessawayfromathletesandlegacy

students,whotraditionallyreceiveconsiderable

benefit,tolow-incomestudents.Thepreference

thatathletesandlegacystudentsreceiveis

significant:morethan80%ofthenation’smost

selectiveinstitutionsgivepreferencetostudents

ofalumni,andathletesareoftenfourtimesas

likelytobeadmittedasothersimilarlyqualified

applicants,butonceadmitted,underperformin

comparisontootherstudentswithsimilar

academicprofiles.11Shiftingprioritiesand

preferencesawayfromthesetraditionally

favoredstudentpopulationstohigh-achieving,

low-incomeU.S.citizensiscontroversialwithin

highereducation.Themostselectivecollegesand

universitiescanaffordtodoso.Itremainsfor

themtoengageinamoreseriousdebatewith

theirconstituencies–alumni,donors,

government,faculty,andsocietyatlarge–about

therelativeprioritiesintheadmissionsprocess.

Areweasasocietycommittedtoasocioeconomic

diversity,orarewenot?And,inthose

circumstanceswhensuchacommitmentisalso

consistentwithacademicmeritocracy,what

debateisengagedtochallengetheassumptions

thatwouldsimultaneouslyrejectinvestments

thatsimultaneouslyimprovediversityand

academicmeritocracy.

5.ClassSize

Another,perhapsmoreviable,option

wouldbetoincreaseoverallclasssize,atactic

thatmanyoftheinstitutionswiththegreatest

increasesinPellallotmenthaveemployedover

thepastsixyears.

Infact,ofthecollegesandprivateand

publicuniversitieswiththegreatestincreasein

Pellallotmentsbetween2007and2012,only

three–Vassar,BostonUniversity,andUniversity

ofFlorida–increasedtheirPellallotments

withoutincreasingtheirfreshmenclasssize.

Ontheflipside,threeinstitutions–Bates,

ClaremontMcKenna,andMountHolyoke–stand

outfortheirincreasesinfreshmenclasssize,but

theirdecreaseinPellallotment,evidencing

perhapsanespeciallyopportunemomentto

increasethenumberofhigh-achieving,low-

incomestudentsoncampus.Ofcourse,increasing

classsizeisanimportantstrategicdecision,but

onethatshouldbeinextricablylinkedto

increasingsocioeconomicdiversityaboveallelse.

16

Whileweliketovieweducationasanequalizer

amongracesandclasses,therealityisstudents

fromthepoorestfamiliesinthecountryhavea

significantlyreducedchance,comparedtotheir

wealthypeers,ofattendinghighlyselective

institutions.Researchshowsthatthereare

thousandsoflow-incomestudentswiththe

capabilityofbeingsuccessfulathighlyselective

institutionswhosimplydonotapply,eliminating

theiraccesstogenerousfinancialaidand

powerfulnetworksthatwouldbenefitthem

tremendouslylaterinlife.

Asinstitutionsconsidertheirmissions

androleinincreasingaccess,somethingneedsto

change.Thereisnoone-size-fits-allsolution,but

collegesshouldcarefullyconsiderthesetof

leverspreviouslyoutlinedanddeterminethe

combinationthatbestmatchestheirresources

andaspirationstobetterservelow-income

students.

Additionally,greaterpartnershipswith

community-basedorganizations,andleveraging

existingprograms,suchaspre-collegesummer

programs,willhelprealizegainsmorerapidly.

SECTION 6:

Conclusion

Finally,statesandschooldistrictsalso

havearoleininvestinginqualitycollege

counselingandpartneringwithcollegesand

community-basedorganizationstoservetheir

students.

Whilecollegesanduniversitiesmayview

theirincreasedcommitmenttotheenrollmentof

low-income,high-achievingstudentsfroma

socialjusticeperspective,inthispresentmoment

inhighereducation,itmayalsostemfroma

purelypracticalone.Affirmativeactionincollege

admissions,althoughstilllegal,willundoubtedly

remainacontroversialtopicinyearstocome.

Whilenotaperfectproxy,aconsiderationof

socioeconomicdiversitycouldbecomemore

important,againmakingtherecommendations

listedaboveallthatmorerelevant.Regardless,it

isclearthatwithallthepiecesinplace-the

talent,resources,alignmentwithinstitutional

mission,andopportunityforgreatreturn-highly

selectiveinstitutionscanandshoulddomoreto

enrollthelargenumberoflow-income,high-

achievingstudentsinthiscountry.

17

18

1.CarolineM.HoxbyandChristopherAvery,TheMissing“One-Offs”:TheHiddenSupplyofHigh-Achieving,Low-IncomeStudents,NationalBureauofEconomicResearchWorkingPaper18586(2012),p.11.

2.Hoxby&Avery(2012),p.11.

3.JenniferGiancolaandRichardD.Kahlenberg,TrueMerit:EnsuringOurBrightestStudentsHaveAccesstoOurBestCollegesandUniversities,JackKentCookeFoundationReport(January2016),p.13.

4.Giancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.5.

5.Giancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.33.

6.CarrieAlexander,PellGrants&FreshmanClassSizesAtSelectiveAmericanSchools(March27,2015)

7.WilliamG.BowenadDerekBok,TheShapeoftheRiver:LongTermConsequencesofConsideringRaceinCollegeandUniversityAdmissions(Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,1998),p.118,276.

8.Giancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.14-16.

9.CarolineM.HoxyandChristopherAvery,TheMissing“One-Offs”:TheHiddenSupplyofHigh-Achieving,Low-IncomeStudents,NationalBureauofEconomicResearchWorkingPaper18586(2012),p.37,Table1,ascitedinGiancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.15.

10.CarolineM.HoxbyandSarahTurner,“ExpandingCollegeOpportunitiesforHigh-Achieving,Low-IncomeStudents,”DiscussionPaperNo.12-014(Stanford,CA:StanfordInstituteforEconomicPolicyResearch,2013)ascitedinGiancola&Kahlenberg(2016),p.15.

11.Giancola&Kahlenburg(2016),p.23,25.

SECTION 7:

Sources

Source:JoyceIvyFoundation2008&2014CounselorSurveys

P.O. BOX 2396 | ANN ARBOR, MI 48106 | 734-661-0229 | info@joyceivyfoundation.org