'They're outside of the Process': How Admissions Officers Maintain Inequality When Evaluating Course Rigor through Holistic Admissions
Saved in:
| Title: | 'They're outside of the Process': How Admissions Officers Maintain Inequality When Evaluating Course Rigor through Holistic Admissions |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Awilda Rodríguez (ORCID |
| Source: | American Educational Research Journal. 2025 62(5):1019-1055. |
| Availability: | SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 37 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | High Schools Secondary Education Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Admission (School), Admissions Officers, Admission Criteria, Holistic Approach, Course Selection (Students), High Schools, High School Students, Student Evaluation, Equal Education, College Admission, Administrator Attitudes, Bias, Disadvantaged, Course Evaluation, Advanced Placement |
| DOI: | 10.3102/00028312251360905 |
| ISSN: | 0002-8312 1935-1011 |
| Abstract: | Admissions officers practicing holistic admissions judge students' course taking based on what was available to them, yet how representatives learn about students' high school context and subsequently evaluate students' course rigor within it remains underexamined. Using signaling theory and effectively maintaining the inequality framework, we leveraged interview data with college admissions representatives to investigate how they construct their understandings of high- versus low-resourced schools and how they evaluate course taking within each context. We found that admissions officers were less likely to understand low-resourced schools' course offerings, had different approaches for determining how students made the most of their opportunities, and held deficit-oriented beliefs about them. These findings provide insights into the holistic admissions process and the ways it disadvantages low-resourced schools and students. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1483727 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Admissions officers practicing holistic admissions judge students' course taking based on what was available to them, yet how representatives learn about students' high school context and subsequently evaluate students' course rigor within it remains underexamined. Using signaling theory and effectively maintaining the inequality framework, we leveraged interview data with college admissions representatives to investigate how they construct their understandings of high- versus low-resourced schools and how they evaluate course taking within each context. We found that admissions officers were less likely to understand low-resourced schools' course offerings, had different approaches for determining how students made the most of their opportunities, and held deficit-oriented beliefs about them. These findings provide insights into the holistic admissions process and the ways it disadvantages low-resourced schools and students. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0002-8312 1935-1011 |
| DOI: | 10.3102/00028312251360905 |
