IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ldr/wpaper/33.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimating the Responsiveness of College Applications to the Likelihood of Acceptance and Financial Assistance: Evidence from Texas

Author

Listed:
  • Rodney Andrews
  • Vimal Ranchhod

    (School of Economics, SALDRU, University of Cape Town)

  • Vijay Sathy

Abstract

This paper investigates the impact of Texas's Top Ten Percent Rule - which grants automatic to any public college in Texas for Texas high school graduates who graduate in the top decile - and subsequent targeted recruitment programs initiated by Texas's flagship universities. Using data on SAT test takers in Texas from 1996-2004, we find that the Top Ten Percent rule affects the set of colleges that students consider, and the targeted recruitment programs are able to attract the attention of students from poor high schools that were not traditional sources of students for the flagships in Texas.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodney Andrews & Vimal Ranchhod & Vijay Sathy, 2009. "Estimating the Responsiveness of College Applications to the Likelihood of Acceptance and Financial Assistance: Evidence from Texas," SALDRU Working Papers 33, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    • Handle: RePEc:ldr:wpaper:33
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://opensaldru.uct.ac.za/bitstream/handle/11090/22/2009_33.pdf?sequence=1
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marta Tienda & Sunny Xinchun Niu, 2006. "Flagships, Feeders, and the Texas Top 10% Law: A Test of the “Brain Drain” Hypothesis," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(4), pages 712-739, July.
    2. David Card & Alan B. Krueger, 2005. "Would the Elimination of Affirmative Action Affect Highly Qualified Minority Applicants? Evidence from California and Texas," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 58(3), pages 416-434, April.
    3. Dickson, Lisa M., 2006. "Does ending affirmative action in college admissions lower the percent of minority students applying to college?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 109-119, February.
    4. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    5. Thomas, M. Kathleen, 2004. "Seeking every advantage: the phenomenon of taking both the SAT and ACT," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 203-208, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Moulton, Brent R, 1990. "An Illustration of a Pitfall in Estimating the Effects of Aggregate Variables on Micro Unit," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(2), pages 334-338, May.
    8. Long, M.C.Mark C., 2004. "College applications and the effect of affirmative action," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 121(1-2), pages 319-342.
    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. Rodney Andrews & Omari Swinton, 2014. "The Persistent Myths of “Acting White” and Race Neutral Alternatives to Affirmative Action in Admissions," The Review of Black Political Economy, Springer;National Economic Association, vol. 41(3), pages 357-371, September.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Pastine, Ivan & Pastine, Tuvana, 2012. "Student incentives and preferential treatment in college admissions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 123-130.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    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. Andrew Kerr & Patrizio Piraino & Vimal Ranchhod, 2016. "Estimating the size and impact of Affirmative Action at the University of Cape Town," SALDRU Working Papers 172, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    10. 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).
    11. 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).
    12. Gandil, Mikkel & Leuven, Edwin, 2022. "College admission as a screening and sorting device," Memorandum 2/2022, Oslo University, Department of Economics.

    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. Dickson, Lisa & Pender, Matea, 2013. "Do in-state tuition benefits affect the enrollment of non-citizens? Evidence from universities in Texas," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 126-137.
    2. Fernanda Estevan & Thomas Gall & Louis-Philippe Morin, 2019. "Redistribution Without Distortion: Evidence from an Affirmative Action Programme at a Large Brazilian University," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(619), pages 1182-1220.
    3. 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.
    4. Li, Dong & Weisman, Dennis L., 2011. "Why preferences in college admissions may yield a more-able student body," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 724-728, August.
    5. Kate Antonovics & Ben Backes, 2013. "Were Minority Students Discouraged from Applying to University of California Campuses after the Affirmative Action Ban?," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 8(2), pages 208-250, April.
    6. Mariana Alfonso & Juan Carlos Calcagno, 2007. "Matriculación de minorías en universidades públicas de selectividad diversa, bajo distintos regímenes de admisión: El caso de Texas," Research Department Publications 4543, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    7. Sandra E. Black & Kalena E. Cortes & Jane Arnold Lincove, 2014. "Efficacy vs. Equity: What Happens When States Tinker with College Admissions in a Race-Blind Era?," NBER Working Papers 20804, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Mariana Alfonso & Juan Carlos Calcagno, 2007. "Minority Enrollments at Public Universities of Diverse Selectivity Levels under Different Admission Regimes: The Case of Texas," Research Department Publications 4542, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    9. Dennis L. Weisman & Dong Li, 2017. "Weeds in the Ivy: college admissions under preference constraints," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(3), pages 303-312, January.
    10. David Welsch, 2012. "Affirmative Action in College Admission Decisions and the Distribution of Human Capital," Working Papers 12-02, UW-Whitewater, Department of Economics.
    11. Maria Eduarda Tannuri Pianto & Andrew Francis, 2011. "The Redistributive Efficacy Ofaffirmative Action: Exploring The Role Of Race And Socioeconomic Statusin College Admissions," Anais do XXXVIII Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 38th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 218, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    12. Hinrichs, Peter, 2014. "Affirmative action bans and college graduation rates," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 43-52.
    13. Yagan, Danny, 2016. "Supply vs. demand under an affirmative action ban: Estimates from UC law schools," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 38-50.
    14. Francis, Andrew M. & Tannuri-Pianto, Maria, 2012. "The redistributive equity of affirmative action: Exploring the role of race, socioeconomic status, and gender in college admissions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 45-55.
    15. Andrews, Rodney J. & DesJardins, Stephen & Ranchhod, Vimal, 2010. "The effects of the Kalamazoo Promise on college choice," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 722-737, October.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Dylan Conger & Lisa Dickson, 2017. "Gender Imbalance in Higher Education: Insights for College Administrators and Researchers," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 58(2), pages 214-230, March.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    College Choice; Top Ten Percent Rule; Targeted Recruitment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • 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:ldr:wpaper:33. 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: Alison Siljeur (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sauctza.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.