Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Race, Friends, and College Readiness: Evidence from the High School Longitudinal Study

  • Published:
Race and Social Problems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Close friends are likely to transmit influence on students’ educational attitudes and decisions that are independent of students’ own background abilities and motivations. However, previous research suggests that close friends may have uneven effects on educational outcomes by race and ethnicity. We analyze the impact of close friends who are college bound on students’ college readiness using new and restricted panel data from the High School Longitudinal Study (2009–2011). Descriptive analyses suggest that having a college-bound friend is positively associated with college readiness and that these impacts are felt by racial and ethnic subgroups in separate and unique ways. Results from propensity score models suggest that while having a college-bound friend generally yields positive effects on all students, it has a more consistent effect on white students’ college readiness compared with Asians, blacks, and Latinos. A formal sensitivity analysis suggests that these treatment effects are robust to the confounding influence of an unobserved confounder.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. AP STEM courses include any of the following: AP Math, AP Science, AP Biology, AP Chemistry, AP Physics, and AP Computer Science. The intercorrelation for the outcome variables is low (0.24) and the Cronbach’s alpha is also low (0.56). Both of these statistics suggest that combining the outcomes leads to an unreliable measure of a single construct and separating the outcomes is likely capturing multiple dimensions of college readiness.

  2. STEM enrichment programs include: Mathematics, Engineering, Science Achievement (MESA), Upward Bound, Talent Search, GEAR Up, and Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID).

  3. These school-level STEM resources are as follows: whether the school has a special focus in math or science, whether the school partners with MESA or similar STEM enrichment program, whether the school partners with a college or university that offers a math or science summer program, whether the school sponsors a science or math summer and after school programs, whether the school pairs students with a science or math mentor, whether the school holds math or science fairs, workshops or competitions, whether the school brings in guest speakers to talk about math or science, whether the school takes students on math- or science-relevant field trips, whether the school tells students about math or science contests, websites, blogs, or other programs, whether the school or district offers incentives to attract full-time high school science or math teachers, and whether the school offers AP Calculus (AB and BC), Computer Science (A and AB), Biology, Chemistry, and Physics on-site.

  4. In order to control for heterogeneity in selection into the treatment and outcome that lies between schools, we included school-level variables in the matching model. This adjustment allows us to partially account for the clustered nature of the data and accurately specify the propensity score model (Arpino and Mealli 2008).

  5. The pstest command relies on the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) estimation based on the psmatch2 command.

References

  • Adelman, C., Riley, R. W., McGuire, C. K., Lacampagne, C., & Dorfman, C. H. (1999). Answers in the toolbox: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Jessup, MD: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison, P. D. (2002). Missing data. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarado, S. E., & Turley, R. N. L. (2012). College-bound friends and college application choices: Heterogeneous effects for Latino and white students. Social Science Research, 41(6), 1451–1468. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.05.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • An, B. P. (2013a). The impact of dual enrollment on college degree attainment: Do low-SES students benefit? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(1), 57–75. doi:10.3102/0162373712461933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • An, B. P. (2013b). The influence of dual enrollment on academic performance and college readiness: Differences by socioeconomic status. Research in Higher Education, 54(4), 407–432. doi:10.1007/s11162-012-9278-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • An, B. P. (2015). The role of academic motivation and engagement on the relationship between dual enrollment and academic performance. Journal of Higher Education, 86(1), 98–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcidiacono, P., & Nicholson, S. (2005). Peer effects in medical school. Journal of Public Economics, 89(2–3), 327–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arpino, B., & Mealli, F. (2008). The specification of the propensity score in multilvel observational studies Munich Personal RePEc Archive Paper No. 17407, posted 20.

  • Aud, S., Fox, M. A., & Kewal-Ramani, A. (2010). Status and trends in the education of racial and ethnic groups. (NCES 2010-015). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

  • Augurzky, B., & Schmidt, C. (2001). The propensity score: A means to an end. Discussion Paper No. 271.

  • Bates, L. A., & Anderson, P. D. (in press). Do expectations make a difference? A look at the effect of educational expectations and academic performance on enrollment in post-secondary education. Race and Social Problems.

  • Becker, S. O., & Caliendo, M. (2007). Sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects. Stata Journal, 7(1), 71–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, S. O., & Ichino, A. (2002). Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. The STATA Journal, 2(4), 358–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, M. A., & Sass, T. R. (2013). Classroom peer effects and student achievement. Journal of Labor Economics, 31(1), 51–82. doi:10.1086/666653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(1), 31–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, S., & Starks, B. (2002). Racial differences in the effects of significant others on students' educational expectations. Sociology of Education, 75(4), 306–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. (1961). The adolescent society: The social life of the teenager and its impact on education. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, K. D., & Sanford, S. (2007). A college-ready nation: An idea whose time has come. In N. Hoffman, J. Vargas, A. Venezia, & M. S. Miller (Eds.), Minding the gap: Why integrating high school with college makes sense and how to do it. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conley, D. (2012). A complete definition of college and career readiness. Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosnoe, R., Cavanagh, S., & Elder, G. H. (2003). Adolescent friendships as academic resources: The intersection of friendship, race, and school disadvantage. Sociological Perspectives, 46(3), 331–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosnoe, R., & Schneider, B. (2010). Social capital, information, and socioeconomic disparities in math course work. American Journal of Education, 117(1), 79–107. doi:10.1086/656347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Agostino, R. B. (1998). Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Statistics in Medicine, 17(19), 2265–2281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehejia, R. (2005). Practical propensity score matching: A reply to smith and todd. Journal of Econometrics, 125(1-2), 355–364. doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2004.04.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desmond, M., & Lopez Turley, R. (2009). The role of familism in explaining the hispanic-white college application gap. Social Problems, 56, 311–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiPrete, T. A., & Gangl, M. (2004). Assessing bias in the estimation of causal effects: Rosenbaum bounds on matching estimators and instrumental variables estimation with imperfect instruments. Sociological Methodology, 34(1), 271–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. U. (1986). Black students' school success: Coping with the "burden of acting white". Urban Review, 18(3), 176–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, K. (1999). The race factor in african americans' college choice. Urban Education, 34(1), 4–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamoran, A. (1989). Measuring curriculum differentiation. American Journal of Education, 97(2), 129–143. doi:10.1086/443918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giordano, P. C., Cernkovich, S. A., & Demaris, A. (1993). The family and peer relations of black adolescents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55(2), 277–287. doi:10.2307/352801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, T. J., & Kwak, S. (2012). What is a peer? The role of network definitions in estimation of endogenous peer effects. Applied Economics, 44(3), 289–302. doi:10.1080/00036846.2010.505557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallinan, M., & Sorensen, A. (1985). Ability grouping and student friendships. American Educational Research Journal, 22(4), 485–499. doi:10.3102/00028312022004485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallinan, M. T., & Williams, R. A. (1987). The stability of students’ interracial friendships. American Sociological Review, 52(5), 653–664. doi:10.2307/2095601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallinan, M. T., & Williams, R. A. (1989). Interracial friendship choices in secondary schools. American Sociological Review, 54(1), 67–78. doi:10.2307/2095662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallinan, M. T., & Williams, R. A. (1990). Students’ characteristics and the peer-influence process. Sociology of Education, 63(2), 122–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., Markman, J. M., & Rivkin, S. G. (2003). Does peer ability affect student achievement? Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18, 527–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, R. M. (1970). Context and consex: A cautionary tale. American Journal of Sociology, 75(4), 645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J., Ichimura, H., Smith, J., & Todd, P. (1998). Characterizing selection bias using experimental data., 66(5), 1017–1098.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, L. D. (2008). School strategies and the “college-linking” process: Reconsidering the effects of high schools on college enrollment. Sociology of Education, 81(1), 53–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, D. E., Imai, K., King, G., & Stuart, E. A. (2007). Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Political Analysis, 15(3), 199–236. doi:10.1093/pan/mpl013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossler, D., & Gallagher, K. S. (1987). Studying student college choice: A 3 phase model and the implications for policy makers. College and University, 62(3), 207–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoxby, C. (2000). Peer effects in the classroom: Learning from gender and race variation. Working Paper No. 7867.

  • Hurtado, S., Inkelas, K. K., Briggs, C., & Rhee, B. S. (1997). Differences in college access and choice among racial/ethnic groups: Identifying continuing barriers. Research in Higher Education, 38(1), 43–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imai, K., King, G., & Stuart, E. A. (2008). Misunderstandings between experimentalists and observationalists about causal inference. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series a-Statistics in Society, 171, 481–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imbens, G. (2004). Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: A review. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 4–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, G. A. (1990). Financial-aid, college entry, and affirmative action. American Journal of Education, 98(4), 523–550. doi:10.1086/443975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kao, G. (2004). Social capital and its relevance to minority and immigrant populations. Sociology of Education, 77(2), 172–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karp, M. (2012). “I don’t know, I’ve never been to college!” dual enrollment as a college readiness strategy. New Directions for Higher Education, 158, 21–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klopfenstein, K. (2004). Advanced placement: Do minorities have equal opportunity? Economics of Education Review, 23(2), 115–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubitschek, W. N., & Hallinan, M. T. (1998). Tracking and students’ friendships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61(1), 1–15. doi:10.2307/2787054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson, R. W., Richards, M. H., Sims, B., & Dworkin, J. (2001). How urban african american young adolescents spend their time: Time budgets for locations, activities, and companionship. American Journal of Community Psychology, 29(4), 565–597. doi:10.1023/a:1010422017731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leuven, E., & Sianesi, B. (2003). PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Levinger, G. (1976). Social psychological perspective on marital dissolution. Journal of Social Issues, 32(1), 21–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C. F. (1993). Identification of endogenous social effects: The reflection problem. Review of Economic Studies, 60(3), 531–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mora, T., & Oreopoulos, P. (2011). Peer effects on high school aspirations: Evidence from a sample of close and not-so-close friends. Economics of Education Review, 30(4), 575–581. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.01.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, S. L., & Winship, C. (2014). Counterfactuals and causal inference: Methods and principles for social research (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. (1963). On the concept of influence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 27(1), 37–62.

  • Perna, L. W. (2000). Differences in the decision to attend among african americans, hispancis, and whites. Journal of Higher Education, 71(2), 117–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riegle-Crumb, C., Farkas, G., & Muller, C. (2006). The role of gender and friendship in advanced course taking. Sociology of Education, 79(3), 206–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riegle-Crumb, C., & Grodsky, E. (2010). Racial-ethnic differences at the intersection of math course-taking and achievement. Sociology of Education, 83(3), 248–270. doi:10.1177/0038040710375689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. (2002). Observational studies. New York: Springer.

  • Rosenbaum, P., & Rubin, D. (1983a). Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, 45(2), 212–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P., & Rubin, D. B. (1983b). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1985). Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. American Statistician, 39(1), 33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royston, P. (2005). Multiple imputation of missing values: Update of ice. The Stata Journal, 5(4), 527–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. (1977). Assignment to treatment group on the basis of a covariate. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 2, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D., & Thomas, N. (1996). Matching using estimated propensity scores: Relating theory to practice. Biometrics, 52(1), 249–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. (1978). Bayesian inference for causal effects: The role of randomization. Annals of Statistics, 6(1), 34–58. doi:10.1214/aos/1176344064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sacerdote, B. (2001). Peer effects with random assignment: Results for Dartmouth roommates. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(2), 681–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sacerdote, B. (2011). Peer effects in education: How might they work, how big are they and how much do we know thus far? Handbook of the Economics of Education, 3(3), 249–277. doi:10.1016/S0169-7218(11)03004-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, P. M., & Tai, R. H. (2007). Weighting for recognition: Accounting for advanced placement and honors courses when calculating high school grade point average. National Association of Secondary School Principles, 91(1), 5–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • St. John, E. P. (1991). What really influences minority attendance? sequential analyses of the high school and beyond sophomore cohort. Research in Higher Education, 32(2), 141–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stack, C. (1974). All our kin. New York: Harper & Row.

  • Stearns, E., Potochnick, S., Moller, S., & Southworth, S. (2010). High school course-taking and post-secondary institutional selectivity. Research in Higher Education, 51(4), 366–395. doi:10.1007/s11162-009-9161-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Struhl, B., & Vargas, J. (2012). Taking college courses in high school: A strategy for college readiness: The college outcomes of dual enrollment in texas. Boston: Jobs for the Future.

  • Stuart, E., & Rubin, D. B. (2008). Best practices in quasi-experimental designs: Matching methods for causal inference. In J. Osborne (Ed.), Best practices in quantitative methods (pp. 155–176). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Suarez-Orozco, C., & Suarez-Orozco, M. (1995). Transformations: Migration, family life, and achievement motivation among latino adolescents. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

  • Texas P-16 Council. (2007). Study on dual credit programs in texas: A report to the 80th legislature from the texas P-16 council. Austin, TX: Texas Education Agency.

  • Vigdor, J. L., & Nechyba, T. S. (2007). Peer effects in North Carolina public schools. In L. Woessmann & P. E. Peterson (Eds.), Schools and the equal opportunity problem (pp. 73–101). Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, P. T. (2007a). Regression with missing Ys: An improved strategy for analyzing multiply imputed data. Sociological Methodology, 37, 83–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, P. T. (2007b). Regression with missing Ys: An improved strategy for analyzing multiply imputed data. Sociological Methodology, 37, 83–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Way, N., & Chen, L. (2000). Close and general friendships among African American, Latino, and Asian American adolescents from low-income families. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15(2), 274–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winship, C., & Morgan, S. L. (1999). The estimation of causal effects from observational data. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 659–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, D. J. (2003). Peer effects in academic outcomes: Evidence from a natural experiment. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(1), 9–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cornell University, 336 Uris Hall, Ithaca, New York, 14853, USA

    Steven Elias Alvarado

  2. University of Iowa, 493 Lindquist Center North, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA

    Brian P. An

Authors
  1. Steven Elias Alvarado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brian P. An
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven Elias Alvarado.

Appendix: Rationale for Sensitivity Analysis

Appendix: Rationale for Sensitivity Analysis

The propensity score model is useful over traditional regression analysis because it can give us a sense of the extent to which we are meeting the assumption of ignorability. That is, we can formally assess how balanced observed characteristics are between students with and without CBF. When balance is high, selection bias (on observables) is low, and we can almost say that our estimated ATT mimics an experimental setting where covariates are essentially randomly distributed across students with and without CBF. Unfortunately, it is close to impossible to achieve this assumption. Therefore, we assessed our deviation from this ideal by using the pstest command in Stata, which yielded mean standardized bias estimates before and after matching. Our post-matching bias ranged from 2.56 (Asians; any AP) to 3.57 (Latinos; any AP), which are below the 5 percent bias threshold that is generally considered sufficient (Caliendo and Kopeinig 2008). The PSM model appears to have successfully reduced the bias on observed characteristics relative to traditional regression, but did not do so completely. This leaves open the possibility that unobserved covariates related to both CBF and the outcome may still bias our estimated CBF effects. Therefore, we conducted a sensitivity analysis that allowed us to assess how large an unobserved confounder, U, and its associated selection bias, must be in order to undermine our results.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alvarado, S.E., An, B.P. Race, Friends, and College Readiness: Evidence from the High School Longitudinal Study. Race Soc Probl 7, 150–167 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-015-9146-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-015-9146-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation