The Missing "One-Offs": The Hidden Supply of High-Achieving, Low-Income Students
The Missing "One-Offs": The Hidden Supply of High-Achieving, Low-Income Students
复制标题
DOI：
10.1353/eca.2013.0000
复制
发表时间：
2012-12
影响因子：
5.9
通讯作者：
C. Hoxby;Christopher Avery
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Hoxby;Christopher Avery
我们发现，绝大多数低收入的高成就学生并不申请任何一所名牌大学。尽管事实上，由于慷慨的财政援助，选择性机构通常比实际申请的两年制和非选择性四年制机构花费更少。此外，低收入的高成就者没有理由相信他们会在选择性的机构失败，因为那些申请的人被录取并以高比率毕业。我们发现，低收入高成就者的应用行为与他们的高收入同行有很大的不同，具有类似的成就。后者通常遵循专家的建议，申请几个“同行”，几个“达到”，和几个“安全”的大学。我们将低收入的高成就者分为那些申请行为与高收入同行相似的人（“成功典型”）和那些申请没有选择性机构的人（“收入典型”）。我们发现，收入典型的学生并不比收入典型的学生处于更不利的地位。然而，与成就型学生相比，收入型学生来自太小的地区，无法支持选择性的公立高中，没有足够的高成就学生，也不太可能遇到一位上过选择性大学的老师。我们证明，广泛使用的政策-大学招生招聘，校园访问，大学辅导计划-很可能是无效的收入典型的学生。我们认为，有效的政策必须减少对高成就者地理集中的依赖。
We show that the vast majority of low-income high achievers do not apply to any selective college. This is despite the fact that selective institutions typically cost them less, owing to generous financial aid, than the two-year and nonselective four-year institutions to which they actually apply. Moreover, low-income high achievers have no reason to believe they will fail at selective institutions since those who do apply are admitted and graduate at high rates. We demonstrate that low-income high achievers' application behavior differs greatly from that of their high-income counterparts with similar achievement. The latter generally follow experts' advice to apply to several "peer," a few "reach," and a couple of "safety" colleges. We separate low-income high achievers into those whose application behavior is similar to that of their high-income counterparts ("achievement-typical") and those who apply to no selective institutions ("income-typical"). We show that income-typical students are not more disadvantaged than the achievement-typical students. However, in contrast to the achievement-typical students, income-typical students come from districts too small to support selective public high schools, are not in a critical mass of fellow high achievers, and are unlikely to encounter a teacher who attended a selective college. We demonstrate that widely used policies—college admissions recruiting, campus visits, college mentoring programs—are likely to be ineffective with income-typical students. We suggest that effective policies must depend less on geographic concentration of high achievers.