ABSTRACT
Highly routinized processes often produce outcomes that are misaligned with what is intended, because elements of the routine are laced with unexamined assumptions that contradict practitioners’ stated values. Graduate admissions is one area where everyday routines may contradict commitments to diversity, because unexamined assumptions directly affect the assessment of applicants. In this study we therefore explore routines in application review generally as well as one specific sub-routine: transcript review. Through in-depth interviews with members of admissions committees including a deep analysis of how faculty carry out the routine activity of reviewing student transcripts, we hope to uncover habits of mind and underlying assumptions that can be tweaked via relatively small changes to create more equitable routines. This project also strives to understand how faculty may be thinking differently about student grades for the Fall 2020 admissions cycle in light of COVID-19.
Project Lead
Deborah Southern
University of Southern California
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. How do the routines that STEM faculty use when assessing graduate student applications align with, complicate, or contradict espoused program values of inclusion and equity?
2. In the routine of reviewing applicant transcripts, how do STEM faculty conceptualize grading schemes to make inferences about admissibility in light of COVID-19
THEORITICAL PERSPECTIVES
• Organizational routines (Pentland & Feldman, 2005)
• Racialized organizations (Ray, 2019)
METHODS
Analysis of in-depth interviews conducted in 2020 with faculty from STEM programs in the physical sciences, engineering, and biological sciences. In addition to directly inquiring about the The interview includes an elicitation activity transcript review activity in which we hope to uncover habits of mind and underlying assumptions about student grades that may be less salient when faculty asked to reflect generally upon their priorities and practices as admissions decision makers.
CONTRIBUTION TO PROJECT GOALS
This study informs faculty learning about the equity issues inherent in selecting graduate students. Unchecked professional discretion applied in everyday routines influences evaluations, and shapes disparities in how individuals from different racial groups thrive or suffer, and whether they advance or are held back. As graduate programs seek to advance equity via their admissions processes, organizational theory suggests one way they can do so is by recognizing how everyday work involves racialized routines and developing more equity-minded habits through ongoing reflection and adaptation. Our findings support conclusions by Ray (2019) and others, that if the alignment of rules, values, and practice is not itself assessed, then new routines may themselves become little more than the latest technology in the production of inequality. The cognitive routines that professionals engage in are likely to fall short in reaching organizational equity and diversity goals unless explicit equity checks are incorporated at each step (Posselt et al., 2020).
FOCUS AREA WITHIN GRADUATE EDUCATION
Admissions
INVESTIGATORS
Deborah Southern, University of Southern California
Theresa Hernandez, University of Southern California
Gloria Anglón, University of Southern California
Julie Posselt, University of Southern California