Sociology of Higher Education Final

Cree Dueker

Professor Collier
Sociology 450
11 June 2015

1. Affirmative Action and Alternative Admission Standards

Affirmative action programs were designed to reduce discrimination within admissions as

well as giving admissions staff the opportunity to closely inspect their decisions and practices to
make sure they are providing equal access to all types of students. Some states had issues with
these affirmative action programs because they felt that they focused on race and gender and
gave these students unfair advantages over others or felt their spots within higher education were
being taken by someone less deserving or with less merit. The top x% programs were devised as
a way to better serve students seeking higher education without using affirmative action
programs. They try to create a diverse class of student without using race as one of their
considerations during admissions and instead taking the best and brightest from each high
school graduating class.
There are currently 3 top x% programs that exist within the US; Californias 9% plan,
Texas 10% plan, and Floridas Talented 20% plan. The California 9% plan guarantees admission
to one of the UC schools to students in the top 9% of their high school graduating class who have
completed the required college prep courses by their junior year. The Texas 10% plan takes the
top 10% of each high school graduating class and guarantees admission for any University of
Texas campus and the top 7% are guaranteed admission to UT Austin. Floridas Talented 20%
plan guarantees students who graduate in the top 20% of their high school class and complete the
required college prep courses will get into one of 10 state universities, but first they must apply
to and get rejected by 3. (2015, Collier Lecture).
Affirmative action was used to create, an environment that makes possible the
examination of traditional assumptions that maintain and intensify societal privilege and that
permit traditional stereotypes to go unchallenged. Affirmative Action encourages institutions to
take account of biases and shortcomings in traditional criteria and to examine the merit of each

individual (Wildman, 2001: 431). This is where the top x% programs are unable to match the
success of Affirmative Action. They took the top x % from high schools and gave them access to
higher education but they do not challenge the privileged system of those within those groups
nor do they seek to look beyond traditional criteria such as test scores which are not objective.
These schools are providing a disservice to their students because research has shown that, both
white and nonwhite students at schools with diverse populations become better critical thinkers,
less prejudiced individuals, and better citizens who are more likely to volunteer or give to
charities (Garland n.d.: 3). Affirmative Action was able to create a more diverse school
population as well as giving more opportunities to minority students and creating a society where
the community is altogether improved. Having a non-diverse campus does not lead to a societal
change, learning cultural awareness and competency, and does not give students the benefit of
being exposed to or learning about different groups and lifestyles.
These programs had other issues as well, they only guaranteed admission to one of the
state schools provided which means it may not have been the students first choice in school or
location especially if they were looking to study out of state or at a top tier university. These
programs also do not do anything for low SES students who may have good grades and be in the
top x % but do not have the money to complete the college prep courses or may not have the
money to apply to apply to multiple schools and get rejected such as the Florida plan requires.
According to Long, Effectively, there are not enough minority students in the top x% of their
high school for the program to maintain minority enrollment shares. Furthermore, most minority
students who are in the top x% would be accepted without the program anyhow. Thus, the top-x
% programs cannot greatly enhance their prospects (Long, 2004: 1021). Their goal of making
college more accessible to minority students was largely unsuccessful because there are not

enough minority students in these top x % of high school classes that equal to the enrollment of
minority students under affirmative action. These programs were designed in a way that they are
helping out the already advantaged students who because of their grades more than likely would
have gotten into one of these schools anyway. Instead of working to create a more conscious
admissions plan that looks to increase diversity and look outside of test scores these programs
benefit those who did not need help in pursuing higher education and decrease access to students
who do.
Because of its demonstrated unsuccessful nature in creating a more diverse pool of
enrollment I do not believe replacing affirmative action with these top x% programs would
create a fairer way to do admissions. Unfortunately many students were lost under these types
of programs who could have pursued a higher education under affirmative action. These plans
also do nothing to address shadow education and the educational inequalities among high
schools and their curriculum. Affirmative Action seeks to explore the individual rather than their
test scores which is what they are reduced to under the top x% programs. These programs are
keeping the elite in power by legitimizing their cultural capital and shadow education while
limiting access and having detrimental effects on the habitus of underrepresented students.
Works Cited
Collier Lecture 2015
Garland, S. (n.d.). The Unfinished Work of Affirmative Action.
Long, M. (2004). Race and College Admissions: An Alternative to Affirmative Action?
Wildman, S. (2001). Affirmative Action: Necessary for Equality for All Women.
2. Gender Inequalities Within Higher Education
There are many intersecting identities that can have an effect on a students access and
persistence in higher education. These intersecting identities include race, class, and gender.
Although one of your identities may give you privileges such as being of a high class another

part of your identity may cause discrimination and affect your habitus such as being a woman.
These many identities are important to keep in mind when looking at data since they are always
interesting and creating conflict. More women are entering college than men making up,56.8%
of undergraduates, 61% earned associate's degrees, 57.2% earned bachelor's, 60.4% earned
master's, and 52% earned their Ph.D.s. (Karen, 2002). Although their degree completion rates are
higher it is still important to look at how their identity as women affect their access to different
institutions, gendered major choices, and their own habitus formed by societies view and values
regarding women.
As a whole the US society and culture devalues the feminine and things associated with
women (Collier, 2015). This devaluation of the feminine has results not only on the habitus of
women but on their experiences and expectations within higher education. To understand the
different ways in which women experience these differences in college we can first start with the
gender dominated majors. Engineering, computer science, and other highly technical majors are
more often than not dominated by men. Education, social work, child and family studies, and
other more nurturing majors are more often than not dominated by women. So why is this an
issue? Well unfortunately not all schools offer every major. Engineering schools are more likely
to be located in highly selective colleges and Education schools are more likely to be located in
less highly ranked colleges. This means that although we may see major as free choice there are
still gendered divisions informed by habitus contributing to women being less likely to have one
of these majors as well as attend an elite university (Collier, 2015). With the devaluation of the
feminine this means that not only are these majors gendered but that they lead to a gendered
career with a correspondingly gendered pay. Decreasing womens access to elite institutions is
also the fact that women are more likely than men to be enrolled in school part-time. Generally

the higher prestige of the university means the lower proportion of part time students. These
differences also intersect with the students class, race, and the type of institution in relation to
their gender.
Although women face discrimination in many fields while in school and discrimination in
their career paths after school they continue to persist and complete degrees. This is done either
because the woman feels that this kind of discrimination no longer exists and is a thing of the
past or they feel that the benefits of education outway the obstacles. To look at why women
persist in higher education we must also understand their habitus and cultural capital. Habitus is
the key to understanding gender differences in higher education because it is informative on the
individual process which matches up to the expectations of society. Studying cultural capital
while ignoring habitus leaves Bourdieu's theoretical framework incomplete in its practical
application. It is necessary to consider both one's resources (capital) and the orientation one has
toward using those resources (habitus) to implement the model of practice in the educational
field in the way that Bourdieu intended (Dumais, 2002: 45). This is to say that even if a woman
comes from a high SES background her gender will impact the type of degree she pursues, the
job she takes, what she earns, etc in relation to if it were a man in the same situation.
These differences in habitus and cultural capital are learned and can begin to have their
impact and can even begin forming and being expressed in childhood. Dumais found that,
Children who have more cultural capital (having been exposed to it from birth in their upper
middle- and upper-class families) feel more comfortable in school, communicate easily with
teachers, and are therefore more likely to do well in school (De Graaf, De Graaf, and Kraaykamp
2000). Lower-class students, on the other hand, find the school environment different from their
home environment and lack the capital necessary to fit in as well as the higher-SES students

(Dumais, 2002: 46). Even at a young age disadvantages not only between girls and boys can
occur but also between classes. These differences only grow wider with age which can be seen
when in order to achieve the same results as their male counterparts women need to handle their
cultural capital differently. In order to achieve the same results as their male counterparts females
may need to have more of the same assets to convert at unfavorable rates or additional assets to
convert at higher rates (Collier, 2015). Originally Bourdieu proposed that cultural capital was
important for women because they could use that capital to get husbands and because women
play key roles in the transmission of cultural capital to children. Dumais then argues that with
women's increased presence in the labor market, cultural capital is valuable because it provides
an edge in competition with others (Collier, 2015). These uses of cultural capital can transition
into higher education when looking at how the gender difference in habitus can lead to different
uses of cultural capital.
Works Cited
Collier Lecture 2015
Dumais. (2002). Cultural Capital, Gender, and School Success: The Role of Habitus.
England, & Li. (2006). The Changing Gender Composition of College Majors. 1971-2002.
Karen. (2002). Changes in Access to Higher Education in the United States: 1980-1992.
4. Design your own higher education system
If I were to have my own higher educational system it would borrow from policies that I
believe are working or beneficial in current systems while eliminating or altering policies that do
not adequately serve the students. There would be the same levels of current universities with
community colleges offering associate's and vocational degrees, state and private colleges
offering bachelor's, master's, and professional degrees. Higher education is a privilege which
people choose to pursue for a variety of reasons but a main draw is for social mobility and

qualifying for a career or field of interest. Because of this I believe there should be more
emphasis placed on careers and job skills while students are pursuing their undergraduate
degrees as well as professional development within graduate programs and beyond. My system
would strive to be accessible to many different types of students while also focusing on the
retainment and success of underrepresented groups. Within my new model of a higher education
system there would be emphasis placed on success both during and following their academic
career. This system would break down to be 30% theory, 50% practice, 20% creativity to equal
out to 100% talent.
My institutions would be funded in a similar way to how they are currently but improved
by allocating money from different areas back into education. Similar to some European higher
educational systems I would strive to make college ideally free to all students, eliminating tuition
and fee costs while leaving the student responsible for housing, transportation,and books. If
Americans could come to the consensus that higher education is a public good funding could be
drawn from personal taxes as well as state sales taxes. On a federal level funding could be
increased by taking money away from the War on Drugs a decidedly unsuccessful campaign
which focuses on capitalistic punishment rather than reform or intervention. According to the
Drug Policy Alliance, More than $51 billion annually is spent in the US on the war on drugs
(Wasted Tax Dollars, n.d.). If even a fifth of this money could be put towards education we
would be looking at $10 billion annually that could go towards federal financial aid such as
grants, loans, and scholarships and other types of support specifically for the universities. This
would mean that for the students within my system would be relying on financial aid not to cover
their tuition and fees but instead to live on campus in residence halls or to cover their books for
class or how they will get to campus and their other outside needs. Because these students would

not need to focus on covering such a hefty price to go to school or be overly burdened by
needing to take out loans these students would be able to better focus on their academic career
through having the luxury of choosing if they would work while in school. These students could
support themselves through working if they do not receive any grants or scholarships or they
could take out loans and choose not to work, or a combination of both. This sense of financial
freedom could help students who are at a disadvantage financially or students with dependents to
not be heavily burdened with tuition and fees and instead they would be able to focus on the
necessities and better focus on their studies, also leading to more successful students.
Since this system is focused on student success and retention the class size and professors
would be different from a lot of what is currently happening. Classes would have a cap at 35
students so that the experience can be more personalized with professors earning a good salary
and being restricted to teaching 3 classes or less per term so that they would be more engaged
and be able to personalize their courses for the students. This cap would also exist so that
professors could focus on community building and having time for their own research outside of
the classroom. Something similar to tenured tracks would be put into place so that professors had
a sense of stability in their career but without the often abused status of power it brings them
currently. Because of these caps schools would be a lot smaller and would also need to
implement an incoming student cap at about 3,000 freshman and 2,000 transfer students per year.
To make sure that this cap does not impede disadvantaged students from enrollment schools
would need to meet an affirmative action type of system where at least x% of each incoming
class would be from an underrepresented group. This percentage would be determined by the
schools surrounding population and would have to represent the demographic of the area. Each
department would be housed within their own building so that resources pertaining to students

with those fields of study is easily accessible. Departments, advising and career services,
tutoring, and computer labs would all be located in one building specific to each major. Other
resource centers such as diversity based centers, veterans centers, queer resource centers,
women's resource centers, community centers, health and counselling, financial aid, food
pantries, clothing donation, etc would have one building separate from the major buildings so
that students should not feel a great sense of confusion when navigating these spaces. Each space
would also offer a weekly tour and information session so that new students could learn about
the different resources and what they are entitled to use during their academic career.
Since college is now primarily being used so that a student can qualify for the career of
their choice it is important to have career services that are specific to their field of study. This
would happen within their majors building but it would also be important to have internships
within their department available to these students so that they can gain experience within their
field. Within this system schools would have community partners that they would connect with
to build mutually beneficial partnerships that would focus on the creation of internships, job
shadowing, and part time as well as full time job opportunities being available to the students.
These partnerships would also involve advisory boards consisted of professionals from different
business fields who are able to communicate with staff and faculty what they are looking for in
candidates, what skills they will need, etc so that courses and faculty can change depending on
the needs of employers and the changing skills needed to be successful within a career.
Students within my system can look forward to a degree which emphasizes writing skills,
community engagement, critical thinking, and life skills. A life skills course will be required of
every incoming student in order to complete their degree to try and make sure every student has
the same knowledge of things like credit cards, career options, taxes, budgeting, resources, etc to

focus on students not falling behind or making uninformed choices. This alongside the general
education program would seek to give students equal knowledge as well as looking at the general
requirements that emphasize strengthening students reading and writing skills, group work and
discussions instead of reliance on lectures, so that students can be set up for success in their
future coursework.
Since there is a cap on incoming students admissions standards must be established.
These standards of evaluation would move away from act and sat scores which favor shadow
education and are not true indicators of a students academic abilities. Instead there would be a
minimum gpa requirement, with conditional admission permitted on an individual basis.
Students would be asked to submit a written essay, a photo essay, and a resume which would
focus on their responsibilities outside of the classroom such as volunteer work they had done,
part time work, familial responsibility, and other community involvement. Students who made it
past these first qualifying steps would then either do a video or in person interview with an
admissions staff as well as a faculty member from the department they are interested in. This
would ensure that students could express themselves outside of relying on their writing skills as
well as offering the opportunity to include why they are looking at pursuing higher education.
The admissions process is where there can be a more defined link to k-12 education as well.
Instead of having emphasis placed on test scores moving to a more community based evaluation
would mean that students in high school would need to be reminded and encouraged to take on
extra-curricular activities through their school or do volunteer work, students who had jobs either
for extra money or necessity would then go through training on how to market those skills so that
they are not dismissed from the admissions process.

While creating a new admissions process would make higher education more accessible
to many students there must also be reform for international and undocumented students.
International and undocumented students would need to meet the same admissions requirements
as other students but state or federal laws would need to be passed in order to make college more
easily accessible for them. International students who were accepted would need special focused
help in obtaining job and internship opportunities that relate to their visa status as well as their
career goals. These special student groups would also have access to the free tuition and fees for
universities so that they also do not face a large financial burden.
This new system would be in constant renovation depending on what works and what
issues still need to be addressed. Educational systems should never become stagnant and
unproductive and they should evolve alongside our social times. To ensure that students from
different backgrounds are not left behind there should be little to no room for shadow education,
giving students formal credit in high school for life experiences or work could mean giving
students who do not have access to ap courses better chances at getting ahead before college.
Higher education will become a public good where student success and retention is truly the
focus of the system. Preparing these students to be successful would also mean focusing on
careers and making college a more easily attainable dream that results in social mobility. Having
the idea of a student not as a customer but instead as a citizen in need of certification or higher
learning would facilitate higher education to be the best it can be.

Works Cited
Wasted Tax Dollars. (n.d.). Retrieved June 10, 2015, from
http://www.drugpolicy.org/wasted-tax-dollars

5. Extra Credit
Starting college can be an exciting and intimidating time in many new students lives.
College is a time of growth and new experiences and for many students it is a time of self
discovery and exploration of the world around them. It can also be a time of hardship and
overcoming new sets of obstacles. While these things happen for all students low-income
students attending elite institutions face additional issues in comparison to their peers. Many of
these issues revolve around capital and the advantages that their peers have which they may not.
Some of the issues that these low income students faced at elite institutions were cultural
capital issues which relate to inadequacy, inferiority, and intimidation (Collier, 2015). Many of
the experiences of these students revolved around their academic and social status in relation to
their peers. Many experiences with their peers caused them not only to be more self conscious
but also to feel inferior, inadequate, or intimidated. One way these students felt inadequate
compared to their peers was how they, came to view their own parents through a new lens as

they compared their parents to the parents of the affluent students, and the differences seemed
associated with deficiency. Their parents had less education, and their parents occupations held
less status and prestige (Aries & Seider, 2005: 427). They felt distant and inadequate compared
to their peers because their parents had blue collar working class types of jobs in comparison to
their peers parents whose positions and social status lead them to be better equipped to help
their children with assignments and navigating higher education. Low income students felt
inferior which was many times linked to their lack of economic capital. They did not have the
same experiences as their peers such as travelling out of the country which often times would aid
them in their foreign language skills. Intimidation often occurred from low income students who
were afraid to talk in class or social settings because they did not want to be judged or seen as
less than by their peers.
Some new forms of capital that low income students developed from these elite
universities were middle/upper class speech, attire, & behavior. They also developed increased
self confidence, increased self respect, and an improvement in their habitus (Collier, 2015). Low
income students assimilated into the elite little ivy life by altering aspects of their speech,
dress, and behavior so that it was more aligned and associated with middle or upper class
behavior markers. The changes were motivated, in part, by students desires to win acceptance
in this new environment (Aries & Seider, 2005: 431). Lower income students were also at first
easily distinguished by their regional accents and so to assimilate they learned to speak like the
elite students which mean altering their speech patterns and changing their vocabulary. These
low income students also gained self confidence, self respect, and a better outlook on their place
in the world. With these changes their previous feelings of inadequacy, inferiority, and
intimidation diminished over time. These students realized that they had the same academic

potential as their peers and this lead to the recognition of their own success. These schools also
opened up new opportunities that put low income students on a new path for their goals in
society. Several lower income students spoke of feeling they inhabited a new position in
relation to the world around them (Aries & Seider, 2005: 432). Although they faced obstacles in
the beginning these students were able to accumulate valuable cultural capital that would lead to
networking, job opportunities, and a new view of what they were able to achieve.
Works Cited
Aries, & Seider. (2005). The Interactive Relationship Between Class Identity and the
College Experience: The Case of Lower Income Students.
Collier Lecture 2015