IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoedu/v87y2022ics027277572100114x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uniform admissions, unequal access: Did the top 10% plan increase access to selective flagship institutions?

Author

Listed:
  • Klasik, Daniel
  • Cortes, Kalena E.

Abstract

The Top 10% Plan admissions policy has now been in place in Texas for over two decades. We analyze 18 years of post-Top 10% Plan data to look for evidence of increased access to the selective Texas flagship campuses among all Texas high schools. We describe new sending patterns from high schools that did not have a history of sending students to the flagship campuses. Our analysis reveals an increase in the likelihood that high schools in non-suburban areas sent students to the flagship campuses, but ultimately little to no equity-producing changes over this 18-year period in terms of regular attendance at flagships by students who attended high schools without a previous sending history. Thus, the purported high school representation benefits of the policy may not go as far as advocates might have hoped in terms of generating equity of access to the flagship campuses in the state.

Suggested Citation

  • Klasik, Daniel & Cortes, Kalena E., 2022. "Uniform admissions, unequal access: Did the top 10% plan increase access to selective flagship institutions?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:87:y:2022:i:c:s027277572100114x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2021.102199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027277572100114X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econedurev.2021.102199?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrews, Rodney J. & Ranchhod, Vimal & Sathy, Viji, 2010. "Estimating the responsiveness of college applications to the likelihood of acceptance and financial assistance: Evidence from Texas," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 104-115, February.
    2. Mariana Alfonso & Juan Carlos Calcagno, 2007. "Minority Enrollments at Public Universities of Diverse Selectivity Levels under Different Admission Regimes: The Case of Texas," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 6729, Inter-American Development Bank.
    3. Kalena E. Cortes & Jane Arnold Lincove, 2016. "Can Admissions Percent Plans Lead to Better Collegiate Fit for Minority Students?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 348-354, May.
    4. Cortes, Kalena E., 2010. "Do Bans on Affirmative Action Hurt Minority Students? Evidence from the Texas Top 10% Plan," IZA Discussion Papers 5021, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Andrews, Rodney J. & Imberman, Scott A. & Lovenheim, Michael F., 2020. "Recruiting and supporting low-income, high-achieving students at flagship universities," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    6. Sandra E. Black & Jeffrey T. Denning & Jesse Rothstein, 2023. "Winners and Losers? The Effect of Gaining and Losing Access to Selective Colleges on Education and Labor Market Outcomes," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 26-67, January.
    7. Mark C. Long & Victor Saenz & Marta Tienda, 2010. "Policy Transparency and College Enrollment: Did the Texas Top Ten Percent Law Broaden Access to the Public Flagships?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 627(1), pages 82-105, January.
    8. Raj Chetty & John N. Friedman & Emmanuel Saez & Nicholas Turner & Danny Yagan, 2017. "Mobility Report Cards: The Role of Colleges in Intergenerational Mobility," Working Papers 2017-059, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    9. Sandra E. Black & Kalena E. Cortes & Jane Arnold Lincove, 2020. "Apply Yourself: Racial and Ethnic Differences in College Application," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(2), pages 209-240, Spring.
    10. Cullen, Julie Berry & Long, Mark C. & Reback, Randall, 2013. "Jockeying for position: Strategic high school choice under Texas' top ten percent plan," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 32-48.
    11. Kalena E. Cortes, 2010. "Do Bans on Affirmative Action Hurt Minority Students? Evidence from the Texas Top 10% Plan," Upjohn Working Papers 10-168, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    12. Sandra E. Black & Kalena E. Cortes & Jane Arnold Lincove, 2015. "Academic Undermatching of High-Achieving Minority Students: Evidence from Race-Neutral and Holistic Admissions Policies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 604-610, May.
    13. Jonathan Smith & Joshua Goodman & Michael Hurwitz, 2020. "The Economic Impact of Access to Public Four-Year Colleges," NBER Working Papers 27177, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Kalena E. Cortes & Andrew I. Friedson, 2014. "Ranking Up by Moving Out: The Effect of the Texas Top 10% Plan on Property Values," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 67(1), pages 51-76, March.
    15. Angel Harris & Marta Tienda, 2010. "Minority Higher Education Pipeline: Consequences of Changes in College Admissions Policy in Texas," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 627(1), pages 60-81, January.
    16. Benjamin T. Skinner, 2019. "Choosing College in the 2000s: An Updated Analysis Using the Conditional Logistic Choice Model," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 60(2), pages 153-183, March.
    17. Niu, Sunny Xinchun & Tienda, Marta & Cortes, Kalena, 2006. "College selectivity and the Texas top 10% law," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 259-272, June.
    18. Marta Tienda & Kevin T. Leicht & Teresa Sullivan & Michael Maltese & Kim Lloyd, 2003. "Closing the Gap?: Admissions & Enrollments at the Texas Public Flagships Before and After Affirmative Action," Working Papers 303, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Office of Population Research..
    19. Marta Tienda & Sunny Xinchun Niu, 2006. "Capitalizing on Segregation, Pretending Neutrality: College Admissions and the Texas Top 10% Law," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 312-346.
    20. Sunny Xinchun Niu & Marta Tienda, 2010. "The impact of the Texas top ten percent law on college enrollment: A regression discontinuity approach," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(1), pages 84-110.
    21. Cortes, Kalena E., 2010. "Do bans on affirmative action hurt minority students? Evidence from the Texas Top 10% Plan," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 1110-1124, December.
    22. Sean F. Reardon & Rachel Baker & Matt Kasman & Daniel Klasik & Joseph B. Townsend, 2018. "What Levels of Racial Diversity Can Be Achieved with Socioeconomic†Based Affirmative Action? Evidence from a Simulation Model," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(3), pages 630-657, June.
    23. Mark Hoekstra, 2009. "The Effect of Attending the Flagship State University on Earnings: A Discontinuity-Based Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(4), pages 717-724, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cortes, Kalena E. & Klasik, Daniel, 2020. "Uniform Admissions, Unequal Access: Did the Top 10% Plan Increase Access to Selective Flagship Institutions?," IZA Discussion Papers 13988, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Liu, Haoyang & Song, Yang & Zhang, Xiaohan, 2022. "Moving to better opportunities? Housing market responses to the top 4% policy," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    3. Andrews, Rodney J. & Imberman, Scott A. & Lovenheim, Michael F., 2020. "Recruiting and supporting low-income, high-achieving students at flagship universities," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    4. Peter Arcidiacono & Michael Lovenheim, 2016. "Affirmative Action and the Quality-Fit Trade-Off," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(1), pages 3-51, March.
    5. Rodney J. Andrews & Kevin M. Stange, 2019. "Price Regulation, Price Discrimination, and Equality of Opportunity in Higher Education: Evidence from Texas," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 31-65, November.
    6. Cecilia Machado & Germ'an Reyes & Evan Riehl, 2023. "The Direct and Spillover Effects of Large-scale Affirmative Action at an Elite Brazilian University," Papers 2305.02513, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    7. Cecilia Machado & Germán Reyes & Evan Riehl, 2023. "The Efficacy of Large-Scale Affirmative Action at Elite Universities," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0311, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    8. Page, Lindsay C. & Scott-Clayton, Judith, 2016. "Improving college access in the United States: Barriers and policy responses," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 4-22.
    9. Sandra E. Black & Jeffrey T. Denning & Jesse Rothstein, 2023. "Winners and Losers? The Effect of Gaining and Losing Access to Selective Colleges on Education and Labor Market Outcomes," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 26-67, January.
    10. Fajnzylber, Eduardo & Lara, Bernardo & León, Tomás, 2019. "Increased learning or GPA inflation? Evidence from GPA-based university admission in Chile," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 147-165.
    11. Jason M. Fletcher & Adalbert Mayer, 2014. "Tracing The Effects Of Guaranteed Admission Through The College Process: Evidence From A Policy Discontinuity In The Texas 10% Plan," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 32(1), pages 169-186, January.
    12. Sandra E. Black & Kalena E. Cortes & Jane Arnold Lincove, 2020. "Apply Yourself: Racial and Ethnic Differences in College Application," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(2), pages 209-240, Spring.
    13. Lindsay C. Page & Judith Scott-Clayton, 2015. "Improving College Access in the United States: Barriers and Policy Responses," NBER Working Papers 21781, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Kamis, Rais & Pan, Jessica & Seah, Kelvin KC, 2023. "Do college admissions criteria matter? Evidence from discretionary vs. grade-based admission policies," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    15. Bleemer, Zachary, 2023. "Affirmative action and its race-neutral alternatives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    16. Machado, Cecilia & Reyes, Germán & Riehl, Evan, 2022. "Alumni Job Networks at Elite Universities and the Efficacy of Affirmative Action," IZA Discussion Papers 15026, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Nicolás de Roux & Evan Riehl, 2019. "Isolating Peer Effects in the Returns to College Selectivity," Documentos CEDE 17413, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    18. Jane Arnold Lincove & Kalena E. Cortes, 2016. "Match or Mismatch? Automatic Admissions and College Preferences of Low- and High-Income Students," NBER Working Papers 22559, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Alon, Sigal & Malamud, Ofer, 2014. "The impact of Israel's class-based affirmative action policy on admission and academic outcomes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 123-139.
    20. Hinrichs, Peter, 2014. "Affirmative action bans and college graduation rates," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 43-52.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Affirmative action; College admissions policies; Racial and ethnic diversity; Geographical diversity; Top 10% plan; Top X% plans; Equity and access; College quality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality
    • J18 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Public Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:87:y:2022:i:c:s027277572100114x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/econedurev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.