IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uhejxx/v86y2015i6p807-833.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disciplinary Logics in Doctoral Admissions: Understanding Patterns of Faculty Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Julie R. Posselt

Abstract

Ph.D. attainment rates by race and gender vary widely across the disciplines, and previous research has found disciplinary variation in graduate admissions criteria and practices. To better understand how disciplines shape admissions preferences and practices, which in turn may shape student access to graduate education, this article uncovers disciplinary patterns of faculty evaluation in doctoral admissions. Building on our knowledge of disciplinary cultures, I conducted comparative ethnographic case studies of doctoral admissions in ten highly selective programs in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences, including 86 interviews with 68 participants and 22 hours of admissions committee observations. In this article, I analyze patterns of faculty evaluation evident in three programs representing two high-consensus disciplines, economics and philosophy. Their prevailing theories, epistemologies, methodologies, and practical priorities each have a formative influence on judgments of applicants and the conduct of admissions decision making. I propose that institutionalized disciplinary assumptions are the basis for disciplinary logics: models of rationality by which faculty legitimize in-group standards of quality and evaluative practice that outsiders may deem contestable.

Suggested Citation

  • Julie R. Posselt, 2015. "Disciplinary Logics in Doctoral Admissions: Understanding Patterns of Faculty Evaluation," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 86(6), pages 807-833, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:uhejxx:v:86:y:2015:i:6:p:807-833
    DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2015.11777385
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00221546.2015.11777385
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00221546.2015.11777385?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Federick Ngo, 2019. "Fractions in College: How Basic Math Remediation Impacts Community College Students," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 60(4), pages 485-520, June.
    2. MacLachlan, Anne J, 2017. "PRESERVATION OF EDUCATIONAL INEQUALITY IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION: Tacit Knowledge, Implicit Bias and University Faculty by Anne J. MacLachlan, UC Berkeley CSHE 1.17 (January 2017)," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt8kh0c74r, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.
    3. MacLachlan, Anne J., 2017. "PRESERVATION OF EDUCATIONAL INEQUALITY IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION: Tacit Knowledge, Implicit Bias and University Faculty by Anne J. MacLachlan, UC Berkeley CSHE 1.17 (January 2017)," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt5zv6c3nj, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.

    More about this item

    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:taf:uhejxx:v:86:y:2015:i:6:p:807-833. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/uhej .

    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.