权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Access to Selective Colleges in the Pre- and Post-Grutter Eras among Racial, Ethnic, and Immigrant Groups

种族、族裔和移民群体在前和后垃圾时代进入精选大学的机会

基本信息

批准号：
1228207
负责人：
Amy Lutz
金额：
$ 20万
依托单位：
Syracuse University
依托单位国家：
美国
项目类别：
Standard Grant
财政年份：
2012
资助国家：
美国
起止时间：
2012-09-01 至 2017-08-31
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1228207&HistoricalAwards=false
关键词：
Access Selective Colleges Pre Post

项目摘要

The ability of selective colleges to use affirmative action in admissions changeddramatically from the mid--1990s into the 2000s due to state bans and the 2003 Grutter v.Bollinger Supreme Court decision that clarified how affirmative action may be used.Little research has compared racial-&#8208;ethnic and nativity differences in access to selective colleges across the twoaffirmative action contexts. Therefore, investigators examine application to, enrollment in, andgraduation from four--&#8208;year selective institutions, four--&#8208;year non--&#8208;selective institutions, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and two--&#8208;year institutions in the pre--&#8208; and post--&#8208;Grutter time periods to answer the following questions: 1) To what extent do native and immigrant black, white, Asian, and Latino students apply to, attend, and graduate from different types of colleges? 2) To what extent are racial--&#8208;ethnic and nativity differences in college destination and graduation explained by SAT scores and other indicators of merit? 3) To what extent are racial--&#8208;ethnic and nativity differences in college destination and graduation, SAT scores, and other indicators of merit explained by social and economic background characteristics? 4) How do group differences in college destination and graduation vary nationally across the pre-&#8208; and post-&#8208;Grutter time periods, and across states that banned and did not ban affirmative action? Investigators will analyze data from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS) and the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS). NELS and ELS are nationally--&#8208;representative surveys collected by the National Center for Education Statistics that reflect high school graduates' enrollments in college in 1994 and 2006, prior to and after the 2003 Supreme Court case.Understanding group differences in access to selective colleges is important to public concern about higher education because researchsuggests that selective colleges offer myriad advantages over non-&#8208;selective colleges (e.g., morerigorous courses, higher graduation rates, better career outcomes)

从20世纪90年代中期到21世纪初，由于各州的禁令和2003年最高法院（Grutter v.Bollinger）的裁决，名校在招生中使用平权法案的能力发生了巨大变化，该裁决澄清了平权法案的使用方式。很少有研究将种族-&amp；在两种平权行动背景下，进入名牌大学的种族和出生地差异。因此，调查人员审查了申请、入学和毕业的情况。四年级选择性院校——&amp；#8208；年非——和# 8208;选择性机构、传统黑人学院和大学，以及两所——&amp；#8208；年机构在前-&amp；#8208；和post -, # 8208;用不同的时间段来回答以下问题：1)本地和移民黑人、白人、亚裔和拉丁裔学生在多大程度上申请、就读并从不同类型的大学毕业？2)种族歧视到什么程度？——&amp；大学目的地和毕业的种族和出生地差异可以用SAT分数和其他优秀指标来解释吗？3)种族歧视到什么程度？——&amp；在大学目的地和毕业、SAT分数和其他指标上的种族和出生地差异，可以用社会和经济背景特征来解释吗？4)大学目的地和毕业程度在全国范围内的群体差异是如何变化的？和post和;# 8208;不同的时期，不同的州禁止或不禁止平权法案？调查人员将分析1988年国家教育纵向研究（NELS）和2002年教育纵向研究（ELS）的数据。NELS和ELS是全国性的——&amp；#8208；国家教育统计中心收集的具有代表性的调查，反映了1994年和2006年高中毕业生在2003年最高法院案件之前和之后的大学入学率。了解进入名牌大学的群体差异对公众关注高等教育很重要，因为研究表明，名牌大学比非名牌大学提供了无数优势。名牌大学（例如，更严格的课程，更高的毕业率，更好的职业前景）