A Sociological Analysis of Structural Racism in “Student List” Lead Generation Products

Abstract

Colleges identify prospective students by purchasing “student lists.” Student list products are selection devices that use search filters to select students. Drawing from the sociology of race, we conceptualize some filters as “racialized inputs,” defined as inputs that are correlated with race because disadvantaged racial groups have historically been excluded from the input. Using a national sample of high school students, we explore the relationship between racialized search filters and the racial composition of included versus excluded students. Using data about actual lists purchased by public universities, we investigate how college administrators utilize racialized search filters. We discuss implications for federal and state policy. We motivate policy research about structural racism embedded in selection devices that allocate students to opportunities.

The Next Chapter of Critical Educational Policy Research: Research Informing Policy Design

“…Of note is that their intended effect went beyond individuals with disabilities; today, these cuts benefit everyone, including people pushing strollers, kids riding their bikes, the elderly using walkers, and those rolling a bag. Jaquette and Salazar (2024) and Nichols and Dixon-Román (2024) suggest the need for this design principle in the design of education technology platforms and tools. Both papers describe how these platforms and tools prioritized the needs of the technology (e.g., interoperability and scale without regard for more equitable access) above all other considerations, hence becoming de-facto policy actors.…”

“…These harms are perpetuated, in part, by such race-evasive discourse. Jaquette and Salazar's (2024) and Nichols and Dixon-Román's (2024) analyses find that race-evasive language like "access" and "quality" is used to champion education platforms and tools, and to rationalize the implementation of technologies that replicate the status quo. Echoing these observations, Dhaliwal et al (2024), Zabala-Eisshofer and colleagues (2024), and Vue et al ( 2024) find similar race-evasive discourse used to advocate for corporal punishment (CP), school resource officers (SRO), and CRT bans include key terms like "rational," "safety," "love," "order," "discipline," "protection," and "logical."…”

Improving Researchers’ Capacity to Address Injustice: An Introduction to the Special Issue

“…Third, from a broader standpoint, scholars can use their research to explore the "inevitability" of larger societal trends that can play a direct role in schooling. In this special issue, authors (Jaquette & Salazar, 2024;Nichols & Dixon-Román, 2024) document how aspects of technology work to reproduce inequity. These authors are able to highlight how current practices are actually based on assumptions about technology, its fallibility, and its beneficiaries.…”