IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/18721.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tracing the Effects of Guaranteed Admission through the College Process: Evidence from a Policy Discontinuity in the Texas 10% Plan

Author

Listed:
  • Jason Fletcher
  • Adalbert Mayer

Abstract

The Texas 10% law states that students who graduated among the top 10% of their high school class are guaranteed admission to public universities in Texas. We estimate the causal effects of this admissions guarantee on a sequence of connected decisions: students' application behavior, admission decisions by the university, students' enrollment choices conditional on admission; as well as the resulting college achievement. We identify these effects by comparing students just above and just below the top 10% rank cutoff. While this design is in the spirit of a regression discontinuity, we note important differences in approach and interpretation. We find that students react to incentives created by the admissions guarantee - for example, by reducing applications to competing private universities. The results also suggest that the effects of the admissions guarantee depend on the university and the type of students it attracts, and that the law is binding and alters the decisions of the admissions committees. We find little evidence that the law increases diversity or leads to meaningful mismatch for the marginal student admitted.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason Fletcher & Adalbert Mayer, 2013. "Tracing the Effects of Guaranteed Admission through the College Process: Evidence from a Policy Discontinuity in the Texas 10% Plan," NBER Working Papers 18721, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:18721
    Note: ED
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18721.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    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. 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).
    3. Imbens, Guido W. & Lemieux, Thomas, 2008. "Regression discontinuity designs: A guide to practice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 615-635, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Lee, David S. & Card, David, 2008. "Regression discontinuity inference with specification error," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 655-674, February.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rajeev Darolia & Cory Koedel, 2018. "High Schools And Students' Initial Colleges And Majors," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(4), pages 692-710, October.

    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. 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).
    2. 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).
    3. 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).
    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. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. Bleemer, Zachary, 2023. "Affirmative action and its race-neutral alternatives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    9. 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).
    10. 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.
    11. Pastine, Ivan & Pastine, Tuvana, 2012. "Student incentives and preferential treatment in college admissions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 123-130.
    12. 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.
    13. Umut Dur & Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez, 2016. "Explicit vs. Statistical Preferential Treatment in Affirmative Action: Theory and Evidence from Chicago's Exam Schools," NBER Working Papers 22109, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Hinrichs, Peter, 2011. "The effects of attending a diverse college," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 332-341, April.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Joanne W. Golann & Kerstin Gentsch & Chang Y. Chung, 2012. "Does the "Mismatch Hypothesis" Apply to Hispanic Students at Selective Colleges?," Working Papers 31, Princeton University, School of Public and International Affairs, Education Research Section..
    18. Lincove, Jane Arnold & Cortes, Kalena E., 2016. "Match or Mismatch? Automatic Admissions and College Preferences of Low- and High-Income Students," IZA Discussion Papers 10150, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Zachary Bleemer, 2022. "Affirmative Action, Mismatch, and Economic Mobility after California’s Proposition 209," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 137(1), pages 115-160.
    20. Black, Sandra E. & Cortes, Kalena E. & Lincove, Jane Arnold, 2014. "Efficacy vs. Equity: What Happens When States Tinker with College Admissions in a Race-Blind Era?," IZA Discussion Papers 8733, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:18721. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.