Author
Listed:
- OiYan Poon
- Douglas H. Lee
- Eileen Galvez
- Joanne Song Engler
- Bri Sérráno
- Ali Raza
- Jessica M. Hurtado
- Nikki Kahealani Chun
Abstract
This study focuses on how admissions at selective colleges and universities represent key racialized organizations. We analyzed data from 50 individual interviews of admissions professionals, through a theory of racialized organizations to recognize admissions as practices that consistently reproduces systemic inequities. We reveal how organizational structures centering an array of institutional priorities can maintain the systemic reproduction of intersectional racial inequalities, by privileging priorities like budgetary constraints, geographic diversity, and other interests, minimizing racial diversity as a priority. Our study bears key implications for future research and practice, by demonstrating that much like a Möbius strip, admissions organizations are difficult to fundamentally change for diversity and equity goals. Even with seemingly dramatic alterations to practices (e.g. test-optional policies) in isolation, Möbius strips generally maintain their structure. Institutional priorities, especially fiscal priorities, maintain the durability in racially unequal admissions outcomes through logics of racial capitalism. Unless institutional priorities fundamentally change, admissions processes will likely continue to reproduce inequalities. Research and systemic change efforts in college admissions should go beyond focusing on isolated elements (e.g. test requirements) and approaches to admissions (e.g. percent plans) to confront admissions and enrollment management systems, by interrogating underlying institutional logics and routines.
Suggested Citation
OiYan Poon & Douglas H. Lee & Eileen Galvez & Joanne Song Engler & Bri Sérráno & Ali Raza & Jessica M. Hurtado & Nikki Kahealani Chun, 2024.
"A Möbius Model of Racialized Organizations: Durability of Racial Inequalities in Admissions,"
The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 95(3), pages 399-424, April.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:uhejxx:v:95:y:2024:i:3:p:399-424
DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2023.2203630
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:95:y:2024:i:3:p:399-424. 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.