Why do Low-Income, High-Achieving Students not Apply to Top Universities?

In this study, the behavior of low-income, high-achieving students when applying to prestigious universities is analyzed. It was postulated that this behavior is due to a lack of information provided to these students and the effect of several behavioral heuristics that influence these students’ application decisions — namely, availability, simulation, and the status quo bias. This paper focuses on the behavior of low-income, high-achieving students who do not apply to prestigious students and therefore behave in a manner typical to their income level rather than their ability. These students, who are less likely to attend magnet schools or live in major metropolitan areas, are often left out of initiatives and college resources available to high-income students. To address this disparity, two solutions are proposed to encourage income-typical students to apply to prestigious universities: the continuation of test-optional policies and virtual college tours.

Untested Admissions: Examining Changes in Application Behaviors and Student Demographics Under Test-Optional Policies

This study examines a diverse set of nearly 100 private institutions that adopted test-optional undergraduate admissions policies between 2005–2006 and 2015–2016. Using comparative interrupted time series analysis and difference-in-differences with matching, I find that test-optional policies were associated with a 3% to 4% increase in Pell Grant recipients, a 10% to 12% increase in first-time students from underrepresented racial/ethnic backgrounds, and a 6% to 8% increase in first-time enrollment of women. Overall, I do not detect clear evidence of changes in application volume or yield rate. Subgroup analyses suggest that these patterns were generally similar for both the more selective and the less selective institutions examined. These findings provide evidence regarding the potential—and the limitations—of using test-optional policies to improve equity in admissions.

COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges among rising high school seniors, Class of 2021 and effect on stress regarding college admissions

The high school Class of 2021, already facing challenges of their stressful junior year has had multiple changes to their academic routines, athletic & extracurricular opportunities and standardized testing amid the COVID-19 pandemic. With the lockdown, it is also facing unprecedented changes in the college admissions process. This study was undertaken as a survey of rising seniors in US high schools to understand handling of academic challenges, students’ stress regarding college admissions, changing landscape of the application cycle and attitudes towards strength of applications due to the pandemic. Survey was designed on google forms and was circulated among rising seniors through social media and snowballing methods. The data was analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. A total of 331 students responded, majority were females, white and from public schools. Significant stress regarding college admissions was reported by students (63.6%) before pandemic and increase in stress (72.3%) afterwards. About 75% had already taken ACT/SAT, the majority was not satisfied with their scores but 90% planned to re(take) despite colleges declaring a test optional process. 60% of participants with change in summer plans and 70% of students unable to visit colleges reported increase in stress. Level of access correlated with perceived support from college counselors (r=0.677) and uncertainty regarding financial aid and athletic scholarships contributed to stress. Two broad themes emerged while studying COVID-19 related increase in stress levels and factors contributing to that change: uncertainty about one’s own application strength and stress due to changes in institutional policies.

Malleability of Statistical Perception: Impact of Validity Presentation on College Admission Test Policy Preferences

Research evidence in the social sciences often relies on effect size statistics, which are hard to understand for the public and do not always provide clear information for decision-makers. One area where interpretation of research evidence has profound effects on policy is college admission testing. In this paper, we conducted two experiments testing how different effect size presentations affect validity perception and policy preferences toward standardized admission tests (e.g., ACT, SAT). We found that compared to traditional effect size statistics (e.g., correlation coefficient), participants perceived admission tests to be more predictively valid when the same evidence was presented using an alternative effect size presentation. The perceived validity of the admission test was also positively associated with admission test policies (e.g., test-optional policy) preferences. Our findings show that policy preferences toward admission tests depend on the perception of statistical evidence, which is malleable and depends on how evidence is presented.

Assessment in American Higher Education: The Role of Admissions Tests

In this article, I review the role of college admissions tests in the United States and consider the fairness issues surrounding their use. The two main tests are the SAT, first administered in 1926, and the ACT, first given in 1959. Scores on these tests have been shown to contribute to the prediction of college performance, but their role in the admissions process varies widely across colleges. Although test scores are consistently listed as one of the most important admissions factors in national surveys of postsecondary institutions, an increasing number of schools have adopted “test-optional” policies. At these institutions, test score requirements are seen as a barrier to campus diversity because of the large performance gaps among ethnic and socioeconomic groups. Fortunately, the decentralized higher education system in the United States can accommodate a wide range of admissions policies. It is essential, however, that the impact of admissions policy changes be studied and that the resource implications of these changes be thoroughly considered.