Letters of Recommendation by High School Counselors in Selective College Admissions: Differences by Race and Socioeconomic Status in Letter Length and Topics Discussed

Brian Heseung Kim, Julie J. Park (), Pearl Lo, Dominique Baker, Nancy Wong, Stephanie Breen, Huong Truong, Jia Zheng, Kelly Rosinger and OiYan A. Poon
Additional contact information
Brian Heseung Kim: Common App
Julie J. Park: University of Maryland
Pearl Lo: University of Maryland
Dominique Baker: University of Delaware
Nancy Wong: University of Maryland
Stephanie Breen: University of Maryland
Huong Truong: University of Maryland
Jia Zheng: University of Massachusetts
Kelly Rosinger: Pennsylvania State University
OiYan A. Poon: University of Maryland

Research in Higher Education, 2025, vol. 66, issue 5, No 2, 35 pages

Abstract: Abstract Letters of recommendation from school counselors are required to apply to most selective universities. We use cutting-edge natural language processing techniques to algorithmically analyze a national dataset of over 600,000 student applications and counselor recommendation letters submitted through the Common Application. We examine how the length and topical content of letters (e.g., sentences about Personal Qualities, Athletics, Intellectual Promise, etc.) relate to race/ethnicity, sex, and proxies for socioeconomic status. We explore whether differences in letter characteristics persist when accounting for additional student, school, and counselor characteristics; letters written by the same counselor; and for students with higher standardized test scores. We found noteworthy naïve differences in letter length and content across nearly all demographic groups, many reflecting known inequities (e.g., longer letters and more sentences on Personal Qualities for private school students). However, the ultimate implications of these patterns hinge on exactly how and when letters are used in admissions processes (e.g., are letters evaluated at face value across all students, or are they mostly compared to other letters from the same high school or counselor?). Findings reflect the importance of reading letters and applications in the context of structural opportunity, although they do not point to a clear recommendation on whether institutions should keep or discard requirements related to letters or standardized tests. We discuss additional implications and recommendations for admissions policy and practice.

Keywords: Admissions; Diversity; Equity; Letters of recommendation; Counselors (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11162-025-09847-5 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:reihed:v:66:y:2025:i:5:d:10.1007_s11162-025-09847-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/11162

DOI: 10.1007/s11162-025-09847-5

Access Statistics for this article

Research in Higher Education is currently edited by Robert K. Toutkoushian

More articles in Research in Higher Education from Springer, Association for Institutional Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().