Administrative Burden in Higher Education: Race, Criminal Records, and Street‐Level Bureaucrats in College Admissions

ABSTRACT This study investigates how administrative burden in college admissions affects individuals with criminal records, with attention to racial disparities. Grounded in administrative burden theory and the role of street‐level bureaucrats, it examines how admissions representatives respond to applicants with disclosed criminal histories. Through a correspondence audit experiment, fictitious applicants—Tyrone (presumed Black) and Christopher (presumed White)—sent inquiries to institutions of higher education (IHE) about how a criminal record might affect admissions. While most responses did not differ significantly in tone, warmth, or encouragement, Tyrone faced greater administrative burden in two key areas: Tyrone was more likely to receive a list of formal procedural requirements and to experience longer response times. These differences reflect psychological and compliance costs that disproportionately affect minoritized applicants. Findings underscore the need for targeted policy reforms that reduce discretionary barriers and promote more equitable pathways into IHEs for individuals with criminal justice involvement.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Administration Review
Published
2025-09-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70042
Primary Topic
Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Administrative Burden in Higher Education: Race, Criminal Records, and Street‐Level Bureaucrats in College Admissions

Douglas N. Evans, Long Tran, Victor St. John, Gregory D. Wilson et al.
Public Administration Review
Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
article

Administrative Burden in Higher Education: Race, Criminal Records, and Street‐Level Bureaucrats in College Admissions

Douglas N. Evans, Long Tran, Victor St. John, Gregory D. Wilson, Lydia Applin
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study investigates how administrative burden in college admissions affects individuals with criminal records, with attention to racial disparities. Grounded in administrative burden theory and the role of street‐level bureaucrats, it examines how admissions representatives respond to applicants with disclosed criminal histories. Through a correspondence audit experiment, fictitious applicants—Tyrone (presumed Black) and Christopher (presumed White)—sent inquiries to institutions of higher education (IHE) about how a criminal record might affect admissions. While most responses did not differ significantly in tone, warmth, or encouragement, Tyrone faced greater administrative burden in two key areas: Tyrone was more likely to receive a list of formal procedural requirements and to experience longer response times. These differences reflect psychological and compliance costs that disproportionately affect minoritized applicants. Findings underscore the need for targeted policy reforms that reduce discretionary barriers and promote more equitable pathways into IHEs for individuals with criminal justice involvement.

Public Administration Review
Fairleigh Dickinson University (US), The Ohio State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.