​annotated bibliography

​

1. Meer, J. (2017, January 19). University ranks last in economic mobility and diversity among elite public colleges. In The Michigan Daily. Retrieved February 21, 2017, from https://www.michigandaily.com/section/news/new-york-times-ranks-university-among-worst-socioeconomic-diversity.

   1. This article, while not scholarly, is a huge help to me when talking about the disadvantages of coming from a small town to a big university, as usually small towns/high schools are generally linked to lower incomes. In addition, low income households, often exist in low income areas, which in turn produces low-achieving students. This puts an interesting criticism upon the university for its admissions criteria and standards of acceptance.

2. Economic diversity and student outcomes at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. (2017). In The New York Times: The Upshot. Retrieved February 21, 2017, from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/university-of-michigan-ann-arbor.

   1. In this New York Times interactive data set, The University of Michigan was named as one of the lowest ranking public universities in the nation for economic diversity within its student body. These interactive statistics from The Equality Project, and various other sources, gives an inside look into how economic diversity can drastically affect the racial and gender makeup of a university’s population, which directly correlates to achievement and behavior.

3. Leonhardt, D. (2017, January 18). America’s Great Working-Class Colleges. In The New York Times: Sunday Review. Retrieved February 21, 2017, from https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/opinion/sunday/americas-great-working-class-colleges.html?referer=https://www.google.com/.

   1. Again in the NYT, the University of Michigan is mentioned as one of the lowest ranking in socioeconomic status diversity, as well as other forms of diversity, within their student body. In addition to explore SES and income among students and their families, Leonhardt also explains the importance of the “non-traditional” student. Different ages, languages, and economic classes create for a more diverse subset of opinions and political views. This will be important to me when looking at the intersectionality of SES, race, and gender.

4. Barker, R. G., & Gump, P. V. (1964). Big School, Small School: High School Size and Student Behavior (pp. 154-172). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

   1. This may seem irrelevant, but I think this gives me a new perspective and new questions to ask when interviewing my participants. Behaviors were something I thought about less, rather than emotions. I think behavioral responses to this big transition will be interesting to look as, especially in self-reflection. For example, I went from being very social in high school with all-A grades to being very shy with C-grades during my first two semesters freshman year.

5. Rogers, M. (2012, July 11). Social sustainability and the art of engagement—the small towns: big picture experience [Electronic version]. The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 10(2), 109-124.

   1. I think that this article is important to my work because it analyzes how people work together and how their values can come together (or drive division) in communal settings. I’m interested to ask my interviewees about how institutions and opportunities within their communities, such as churches, community programming, or the absence of these, has affected their ability to adjust to a larger university where so many opportunities and communities are present.