Enacted Versus Espoused: The Complementarity of Interviews and Observations in Diversity-Focused Yield Recruitment

• In Event: Qualitative Evidence and Systemic Interrogations of Admissions Research, Logics, Practices, and Norms

Abstract

Amid a contentious policy environment for race-conscious admissions, portraying an institutional commitment to diversity represents a critical aim for admissions professionals who are charged with developing and executing strategies that enhance student diversity. A survey of enrollment managers conducted by the American Council on Education revealed 53% of institutions affected by affirmative action bans increased their emphasis on yield recruitment initiatives targeting students from racially and ethnically minoritized groups (Espinosa, Gaertner, & Orfield, 2015). However, getting underrepresented students of color to enroll in predominantly white institutions (PWIs), which are struggling to manage campus climate or improve the diversity of their student bodies, may prove a difficult challenge. With growing awareness of anti-Black racism and campus incidents targeting Black students, recruitment necessarily involves both attracting students to the campus racial environment as well as making them aware of the various supports available that will be at their disposal once they enroll (Espinosa et al., 2015). Yet, few studies examine yield recruitment despite its importance in the admissions process. The sparse empirical research on undergraduate recruitment has taken a macro-level perspective—documenting patterns and trends across institutions and the implications for diverse student enrollment (Salazar, Jacquette, & Han, 2021). The vast majority of research on college admissions, quantitative in nature, is limited in its ability to reveal the complexities and unintended consequences of diversity-focused admissions practices.

The current study offers a window into diversity-focused yield recruitment through an in-depth case study of yield recruitment at the University of Michigan, a “battleground for affirmative action” (Berrey, 2015) that has struggled to attract Black students since enacting a statewide ban on affirmative action. Drawing from semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of 16 enrollment management professionals (EMPs) and 23 hours of ethnographic observations of yield-recruitment events, I examine the structure and scope of yield initiatives targeted at different populations of students and document emerging scripts used by admissions professionals for talking about diversity in these settings.

Using my findings, I will discuss the utility and complementarity of semi-structured interviews (interviews) and ethnographic observations (observations) for studying critical questions in admissions research. For example, while interviews helped me to ascertain the espoused commitment to diversity, observations of yield activities were critical for understanding the ways in which diversity is enacted, by whom and in what context—the notion of which some admissions professionals may feel uncomfortable discussing in an interview or may otherwise be only marginally aware. I will also explain how combining these qualitative approaches: (1) deepens our understanding of the expansive role of college admissions professionals (2) tempers the possible influence of socially desirability bias in interviews, an important consideration given the contentious environment for college admissions, and (3) offers a window into yield-recruitment strategies as a mechanism for understanding racial inequities in student enrollment in selective campuses, in post-affirmative action contexts, and in higher education more broadly.

Author

• Kelly Slay, Vanderbilt University
  Presenting Author