Vol. 2 No. 1 (2026): Research for Responsive Practice
Articles

Understanding Equity in University Admissions: A Comparative Analysis of Applicant and Qualifier Data

PDF
  • Joseline Santos,
  • Erwin Capardo
Joseline Santos
Bulacan State University
Erwin Capardo
Bulacan State University
Bio
10.67741/20251231115
Categories

Published 2026-08-15

Keywords

  • university admissions,
  • admissions equity,
  • socioeconomic status,
  • geographic access,
  • qualification outcomes,
  • institutional data
    • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Santos, J., & Capardo, E. (2026). Understanding Equity in University Admissions: A Comparative Analysis of Applicant and Qualifier Data. Sidhaya: The Official Research Journal of Bulacan State University, 2(1), 48–61. Retrieved from https://lunday.bulsu.edu.ph/index.php/sidhaya/article/view/162

Abstract

This study examined socioeconomic and geographic associations with university admission outcomes using institutional applicant and qualifier data for AY 2026-2027. A quantitative descriptive-correlational approach was used to profile applicants, compare qualification rates, test bivariate associations, and identify underrepresented groups. Results showed that applicants were predominantly from low-income households; income bracket was not significantly associated with qualification status, and observed differences in qualification rates were minimal. Academic preparation indicators, particularly the senior high school strand and GPA band, showed clearer variation in qualification outcomes. Geographic patterns revealed strong concentration in Region III, with limited participation from other regions, suggesting that equity concerns began at the application and information-access stage. Vulnerable socioeconomic groups showed relatively high qualification rates, but aggregate data limited interpretation. Because the available data were marginal summaries rather than applicant-level records, the study did not estimate logistic regression models or claim independent predictors. The study concludes that admissions equity is multidimensional and requires applicant-level monitoring, targeted outreach, accessible admissions communication, and preparation support for underrepresented geographic and academic groups in future admission cycles and program planning.

PDF

References

  1. Australian Government Department of Education. (2024). Australian Universities Accord: Final report. https://www.education.gov.au/australian-universities-accord/resources/final-report
  2. Chetty, R., Deming, D. J., & Friedman, J. N. (2023). Diversifying society’s leaders? The determinants and causal effects of admission to highly selective private colleges (NBER Working Paper No. 31492). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w31492
  3. Chetty, R., Deming, D. J., & Friedman, J. N. (2026). Diversifying society’s leaders? The determinants and causal effects of admission to highly selective private colleges. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. https://opportunityinsights.org/paper/collegeadmissions/
  4. Esquivel, J. A., & Esquivel, J. A. (2020). Using a binary classification model to predict the likelihood of enrolment to the undergraduate program of a Philippine university. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.15601
  5. Gorjian, M. (2025). Statistical perspectives on urban inequality: A systematic review of GIS-based methodologies and applications [Preprint]. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.08296
  6. Higher Education Authority. (2022). National access plan: A strategic action plan for equity of access, participation and success in higher education 2022–2028. https://hea.ie/policy/access-policy/national-access-plan-2022-2028/
  7. Lee, J., Borchers, C., Alvero, A. J., Joachims, T., & Kizilcec, R. F. (2026). The digital divide in generative AI: Evidence from large language model use in college admissions essays [Preprint]. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.17791
  8. Lee, J., Harvey, E., Zhou, J., Garg, N., Joachims, T., & Kizilcec, R. F. (2024). Algorithms for college admissions decision support: Impacts of policy change and inherent variability [Preprint]. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.11199
  9. Low, A. M., & Kalender, Z. Y. (2024). Predictors and socio-demographic disparities in STEM degree outcomes: A UK longitudinal study using hierarchical logistic regression. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.05853
  10. Meyer, J. C., Passante, G., & Wilcox, B. R. (2023). Disparities in access to US quantum information education. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.08629
  11. Moores, E. (2024). Why a “whack-a-mole” approach to widening participation won’t work: A policy brief. Frontiers in Education. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education
  12. OECD. (2024). Education at a glance 2024: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en
  13. Republic of the Philippines. (2017). Republic Act No. 10931: Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act. https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2017/ra_10931_2017.html
  14. Taylor, Z. W., Chu, M. H., & Li, J. J. (2022). Text simplification of college admissions instructions: A professionally simplified and verified corpus. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.04529
  15. UNESCO. (2022). Beyond limits: New ways to reinvent higher education. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/