Dissertation Research: Admissions and Success in Education and the Labor Market.

斯坦福大学当白人面临亚洲人在现行游戏规则下似乎超过白人的情况时，他们对传统精英标准重要性的看法是否会变得有可塑性？ 在美国，亚洲人在各种社会经济地位指标（大学学位、收入中位数和专业管理职业集中度）上相对于白人的成功，以及亚洲人在精英高等教育机构中的过度代表性，提供了一个新兴的社会背景，可以在其中研究对精英管理理念的承诺，正如大学录取标准所表明的那样。 通过对1000名加州成年人的随机抽样调查，对不同大学环境中的大学生进行的实验室实验，以及深入访谈，该项目测试了基于社会学和政治心理学的关于种族，公众舆论和公共政策之间关系的理论：这里，公立大学招生标准。 在竞争激烈的本科招生背景下，标准化的考试准备课程和大学申请私人导师已经成为既大的钱和全球化的业务，激烈的大学预科教学和规划可以开始早在幼儿园前，这项研究揭示了概念的组成部分（例如个人主义和群体态度），构成支持当前的学术大学招生标准。 如果对当前招生标准的支持，作为精英制度的指标，不仅基于对个人主义和公平的价值承诺，（例如，奖励辛勤工作），但也作为守门机制之间的种族化群体在高风险的竞争中争夺稀缺和宝贵的高等教育资源，传统上代表性不足的群体应被迫参加讨论，设想大学的录取标准既能奖励努力学习，又不能用来复制群体的劣势和不平等。 本研究的结果可以提供一个更确定的基础，讨论和进一步研究基于群体的态度和不平等，政治价值观，高等教育政策。

SES-0802645David GruskyFrank SamsonStanford UniversityDo whites' views about the importance of traditional meritocratic criteria become malleable when they are confronted with circumstances in which Asians appear to be surpassing whites under the current rules of the game? The relative success of Asians compared to whites in the United States on various socioeconomic status indicators (college degrees, median earnings, and professional-managerial occupational concentration) as well as the over-representation of Asians at elite higher educational institutions present an emerging social context in which to study commitment to the idea of meritocracy, as indicated by university admissions criteria. Using a survey-based experiment of a random sample of 1000 California adults, lab-based experiments of college students in various university settings, and in-depth interviews, this project tests sociological and political psychology-based theories about the relationship between race, public opinion, and public policy: here, public university admissions criteria. In a hyper-competitive undergraduate admissions context where standardized test prep courses and college application private tutors have become both big money and globalized businesses, and intense college preparatory instruction and planning can commence as early as pre-Kindergarten, this study sheds light on the ideational components (e.g. individualism and group attitudes) that constitute support for current academic university admissions criteria. If support for current admissions criteria, as indicators of meritocracy, have a basis in not only value commitments to individualism and fairness (e.g. rewards for hard work) but also serve as gate-keeping mechanisms amidst racialized groups vying in high-stakes competition for the scarce and valued resource of higher education, traditionally underrepresented groups should be compelled to participate in discussions that re-conceive of university admissions criteria that can reward hard work yet not be used to reproduce group disadvantages and inequalities. The results of this research can provide a more certain footing for discussion and further research around group-based attitudes and inequalities, political values, and higher education policy.