Recruitment and Admission Management, Higher Education Institutions

  • Barrett J. TaylorEmail author
Living reference work entry

While levels of research intensiveness and service commitment vary widely, virtually all institutions engage in instruction (Weisbrod et al. 2008). Identifying a student who can successfully complete a degree or certificate program is therefore a near-universal task. However, the ways in which these core functions are pursued vary dramatically by national system and institutional context.

Graduation from a competitive higher education institution is correlated with higher wages, greater civic engagement, and a variety of other life outcomes (Allen 2016; McMahon 2009; Rivera 2015; Zimmerman 2014). It is perhaps no wonder that students and families work tirelessly to secure admission to the most prestigious university possible (Weis et al. 2014). Even in national systems that do not charge tuition fees, the amount of time, money, and other resources devoted to pursuing admission to a selective university can be formidable (Kosunen 2017). For students, admission is a high-stakes process...

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


  1. Allen, D. 2016. Education and equality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bastedo, Michael N., and Allyson Flaster. 2014. Conceptual and methodological problems in research on college undermatch. Educational Researcher 43 (2): 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Belasco, Andrew, and Michael J. Trivette. 2015. Aiming low: Estimating the predictors of postsecondary undermatch. The Journal of Higher Education 86 (2): 233–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belasco, Andrew, Kelly O. Rosinger, and James C. Hearn. 2015. The test-optional movement in America’s selective liberal arts colleges: A boon for equity or something else? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 37 (2): 206–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braun, Sebastian, and Nadja Dwenger. 2009. Success in the university admission process in Germany: Regional provenance matters. Higher Education 58 (1): 71–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coates, Hamish, and Tim Friedman. 2010. Evaluation of the special tertiary admissions test (STAT). Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 32 (2): 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cortes, Kalena E. 2010. Do bans on affirmative action hurt minority students? Evidence from the Texas Top 10% plan. Economics of Education Review 29 (6): 1110–1124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davidson, Cliff C. 2015. The university corporatization shift: A longitudinal analysis of university admission handbooks, 1980 to 2010. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education 45 (2): 193–213.Google Scholar
  9. Douglass, John A. 2007. The conditions for admission: Access, equity, and the social contract of public universities. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Fletcher, Jason M., and Adalbert Mayer. 2013. Tracing the effects of guaranteed admission through the college process: Evidence from a policy discontinuity in the Texas 10% plan. Contemporary Economic Policy 32 (1): 169–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Grodsky, Eric, and Melanie T. Jones. 2007. Real and imagined barriers to college entry: Perceptions of cost. Social Science Research 36 (1): 745–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hartley, Matthew, and Christopher C. Morphew. 2008. What’s being sold and to what end? A content analysis of college viewbooks. The Journal of Higher Education 79 (6): 671–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hillman, Nicholas W. 2012. Tuition discounting for revenue management. Research in Higher Education 53 (3): 263–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Howell, Cameron, and Sarah E. Turner. 2004. Legacies in black and white: The racial composition of the legacy pool. Research in Higher Education 45 (4): 325–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hübner, Malte. 2012. Do tuition fees affect enrollment behavior? Evidence from a ‘natural experiment’ in Germany. Economics of Education Review 31 (6): 949–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnstone, D.Bruce. 2004. The economics and politics of cost sharing in higher education: Comparative perspectives. Economics of Education Review 23 (4): 403–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kim, Young-Chul, Young-Joon Kim, and Glenn C. Loury. 2014. Widening gap in college admission and improving equal opportunity in South Korea. Global Economic Review 43 (2): 110–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kosunen, Sonja. 2017. Access to higher education in Finland: Emerging processes of hidden privatization. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 4(2), 67–77 Scholar
  19. Kuncel, N.R., and Sarah A. Hezlett. 2007. Standardized tests predict graduate students’ success. Science 315: 1080–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lemann, N. 1999. The big test: The secret history of the American meritocracy. New York: Farrar Strauss and Giroux.Google Scholar
  21. Marginson, Simon. 2006. Dynamics of national and global competition in higher education. Higher Education 52 (1): 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marginson, Simon. 2016. Global stratification in higher education. In Higher education, stratification, and workforce development: Competitive advantage in Europe, the US, and Canada, ed. Sheila Slaughter and Barrett J. Taylor, 13–34. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marginson, Simon, and Mark Considine. 2001. The enterprise university: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Marginson, Simon, and Gary Rhoades. 2002. Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher education: A glonacal agency heuristic. Higher Education 43 (3): 281–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McMahon, Walter W. 2009. Higher learning, greater good. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Menand, Louis. 2002. American studies. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.Google Scholar
  27. Nahai, Rebekah N. 2013. Is meritocracy fair? A qualitative case study of admissions at the University of Oxford. Oxford Review of Education 39 (5): 681–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nankervis, Bryan. 2011. Gender inequities in university admission due to the differential validity of the SAT. Journal of College Admission 213: 24–30.Google Scholar
  29. Posselt, Julie R. 2015. Inside graduate admissions: Merit, diversity and faculty gatekeeping. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Psacharopoulos, George, and George Papakonstantinou. 2005. The real university cost in a “free” higher education country. Economics of Education Review 24 (1): 103–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rivera, Lauren. 2015. Pedigree: How elite students get elite jobs. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rodriguez, Awilda. 2015. Tradeoffs and limitations: Understanding the estimation of college undermatch. Research in Higher Education 56 (6): 566–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rosinger, K.O., B.J. Taylor, and S. Slaughter. 2016. The crème de la crème: Stratification and accumulative advantage within US private research universities. In Higher education, stratification, and workforce development: Competitive advantage in Europe, the US, and Canada, ed. Sheila Slaughter and Barrett J. Taylor, 81–102. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Saichae, Kem, and Christopher C. Morphew. 2014. What college and university websites reveal about the purposes of higher education. The Journal of Higher Education 85 (4): 499–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Santos, Jose Luis, Nolan L. Cabrera, and Kevin J. Fosnacht. 2010. Is “race-neutral” really race-neutral?: Disparate impact towards underrepresented minorities in post-209 UC system admissions. The Journal of Higher Education 81 (6): 605–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schwager, Inge T.L., Ute R. Hülsheger, Brent Bridgeman, and Jonas W.B. Lang. 2015. Graduate student selection: Graduate record examination, socioeconomic status, and undergraduate grade point average as predictors of study success in a western European university. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 23 (1): 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sternberg, Robert J. 2012. College admissions: Beyond conventional testing. Change 44 (5): 6–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sternberg, Robert J., Christina R. Bonney, Liane Gabora, and Maegan Merrifield. 2012. WICS: A model for college and university admissions. Educational Psychologist 47 (1): 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stevens, Mitchell L. 2007. Creating a class: College admissions and the education of elites. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Taylor, Barrett J., and Brendan Cantwell. 2019. Unequal higher education: Wealth, status and student opportunity. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Taylor, Barrett J., and Christopher C. Morphew. 2010. An analysis of baccalaureate college mission statements. Research in Higher Education 51 (5): 483–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tolbert, Pamela S. 1985. Institutional environments and resource dependence: Sources of administrative structure in institutions of higher education. Administrative Science Quarterly 30 (1): 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weis, Lois, Kristin Cipollone, and Heather Jenkins. 2014. Class warfare: Class, race and college admissions in top-tier secondary schools. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Weisbrod, B. A., Ballou, J. P., and Asch, E. D. 2008. Mission and money: Understanding the university. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Wongsurawat, Winai. 2009. Does grade inflation affect the credibility of grades? Evidence from US law school admissions. Education Economics 17 (4): 523–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zimdars, Anna. 2010. Fairness and undergraduate admission: A qualitative exploration of admissions choices at the University of Oxford. Oxford Review of Education 36 (3): 307–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zimmerman, Seth D. 2014. The returns to college admission for academically marginal students. Journal of Labor Economics 32 (4): 711–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zwick, Rebecca. 2007. College admissions in twenty-first century America: The role of grades, tests and games of chance. Harvard Educational Review 77 (4): 419–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Counseling and Higher EducationUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Bjørn Stensaker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of OsloOsloNorway