Wednesday, April 12, 2017

Research Blog #10: Final Abstract and Works Cited

 There is a conflicting paradox in the merit-based system to grant educational access in higher education. The pursuit of higher education is a recognized method of upward class mobility, yet those in the lowest socioeconomic classes are relatively underrepresented in the demographics of students who attend college. This research analyzed ten works, varying from novels to academic journals, to deduct conclusions about the current governance of testocratic meritocracy in higher education and how it disables unequal educational opportunity for students with limited parental capital. This phenomenon is important to evaluate because unequal distribution of educational opportunity restricts potential for upward class mobility, which will concentrate wealth to the already wealthy. Students should not be penalized for their lack of parental class capital, however the disregard for testocratic merit’s actual value as a wealth-based merit hinders any change in educational democracy. The cycle of financial, social, and cultural prosperity will continue to circulate through higher education because of the hidden measure of testocratic merit. Paired with a pre-existing orientation to privileged students, the utilization of testocratic merit has corrupted the opportunistic intents of higher education. 

Works Cited
 Aisch, Gregor, et al. “Some Colleges Have More Students From the Top 1 Percent Than the Bottom 60. Find Yours.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 18 Jan. 2017, Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

Armstrong, Elizabeth A., and Laura T. Hamilton. Paying for the Party: How College
Maintains Inequality. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 2013, Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

Bourdieu, Pierre. “The Forms of Capital.” Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by J F Richardson, Greenwood Press, 1986, pp. 46–58, Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

Bourdieu, Pierre, and Jean-Claude Passeron. The Inheritors: French Students and Their Relation to Culture. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1979, Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

Carlson, Scott. “When College Was a Public Good.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 27 Nov. 2016, Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

Guinier, Lani. The Tyranny of the Meritocracy: Democratizing Higher Education in America. Boston, Beacon Press, 2016.

“Factors That Influence Success Among Racial and Ethnic Minority College Students in the STEM Circuit.” ASHE Higher Education Report, vol. 36, no. 6, 1 Jan. 2011, pp. 53–85. Ebscohost, Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

Karabel, Jerome. “The Dark Side of Meritocracy.” The Chosen: The Hidden History of Admission and Exclusion at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 2005, pp. 555–557.

Mijs, Jonathan J. B. “The Unfulfillable Promise of Meritocracy: Three Lessons and Their Implications for Justice in Education.” Social Justice Research, vol. 29, no. 1, 11 Jan. 2015, pp. 14–34. Ebscohost, doi:10.1007/s11211-014-0228-0. Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

Rondini, Ashley C. “Healing the Hidden Injuries of Class? Redemption Narratives, Aspirational Proxies, and Parents of Low-Income, First-Generation College Students.” Sociological Forum, vol. 31, no. 1, Mar. 2016, pp. 96–116. Ebscohost, doi:10.1111/socf.12228. Accessed 11 Apr. 2017.

No comments:

Post a Comment