AbstractCracking the Code: Chief Admission Officers’ Solutions for Inclusive STEM Admissions in Public Research Universities

byOlufemi A. Ogundele Doctor of Education University of California, Berkeley Professor Jabari Mahiri, Co-Chair Professor Lisa García Bedolla This study examined the role of chief admission officers (CAOs) in Research 1 (R1) public flagship institutions and how they understand and address the misalignment between admission criteria to STEM majors and the disparate access to STEM opportunities for diverse students in the applicant pool. The research questions this study explored were (a) how the case CAOs characterized and analyzed the challenges that underrepresented minority (URM) applicants face in the admission process to STEM majors and (b) what strategies CAOs employ to overcome these challenges and provide access to STEM majors for URM students. Guided by critical race theory in education and anti-deficit theory to interrogate the STEM admission pipeline and excavate strategies that provide access to STEM majors, qualitative data was collected at six R1 public flagship institutions. This qualitative study explored various data sources, including a leadership questionnaire, and semi-structured one-on-one interviews with chief admission officers, as well as an examination of institutional admission websites and publicly available admission data. The study’s findings reveal that CAOs characterize the challenges as institutional and environmental factors contributing to an admission pathway that disproportionately keeps URM students from pursuing STEM majors. Institutional factors include interpretations of the public flagship missions and current enrollment goals that are at odds with diversifying STEM and the additional admission criteria for STEM applicants. The study also highlights the significant impact institutional faculty have on setting admission guidelines. Environmental factors that impact college admission include varied educational contexts of the applicant pool, academic opportunity gaps amongst students, and other neighboring institutions. To address the misalignment of college admission requirements and the lived experiences of their applicant pools, CAOs employ strategies like pipeline development, nuanced application evaluation, and embedding equity values in admission staff. After examining the history of exclusion in higher education and current college admission practice, this study concludes that while the STEM admission pipeline to public universities is skewed to keep URM students from participating, CAOs have strategies to ameliorate the impact. With implications for policy development, best practices, and future research this study provides insights for public university faculty and admission professionals to reconsider admission policies, definitions merit and meritocracy in admission.