This analysis uses data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen (NLSF) to study black immigrants and natives attending selective colleges and universities in the United States. In the NLSF, 747 black students were of native origin, and 281 were of immigrant origin, yielding an overall immigrant percentage of 27 percent. The overrepresentation of immigrants was higher in private than in public institutions and within more selective rather than less selective schools. We found few differences in the social origins of black students from immigrant and native backgrounds. The fact that most indicators of socioeconomic status, social preparation, psychological readiness, and academic preparation are identical for immigrants and natives suggests that immigrant origins per se are not favored in the admissions process but that children from immigrant families exhibit traits and characteristics valued by admissions committees. Prior to the civil rights era, Americans of African origin were largely excluded from selective colleges and universities in the United States through a combination of de facto and de jure mechanisms. Once discrimination in education was definitively banned by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, however, things began to change. During the late 1960s, elite schools throughout the country began to undertake various "affirmative actions" to increase black enrollment. As outlined in the celebrated speech made by President Lyndon B. Johnson at Howard University, the initial justification for this policy was restitution for past wrongs:

No abstract

Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen, a sample of nearly 3,924 students at 28 of the most selective college and universities in the United States, this paper tests hypotheses about religion, academic performance, and satisfaction at college. Two measures of religiosityattending religious services every week or more and a 1 to 10 scale of observance of one's religious traditions and customs-increase the amount of hours students report spending on academic work and extracurricular activities, as well as reduce the hours students report going to parties. Even when controlling for time spent partying, studying and in extracurricular activities, regular attendance at religious services increases academic achievement. Finally, students who attend religious services weekly and those who are more observant of their religious traditions also report being more satisfied at college.

Although affirmative action programs for minority students form just one of several criteria for preferential admissions to American colleges and universities, little research has compared the impact of other large "affirmative actions" programs such as those for athletes and legacies. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen (NLSF), a sample of nearly 4,000 students in 28 elite American colleges and universities, we develop models that test claims about the effects of affirmative action-namely mismatch hypothesis and stereotype threat-on college performance in three groups: minorities, athletes, and legacies. First, we estimate models predicting two direct and indirect effects suggested by stereotype threat: hours studied per week and the degree of psychological performance burden reported by students. Next we include these direct and indirect measures of stereotype threat and the mismatch hypothesis on grades earned through the end of sophomore year and the likelihood of leaving school by spring of junior year. We do not find strong evidence for the mismatch hypothesis as applied to minorities and athletes, although legacies who enjoyed a greater admissions bonus earned lower grades. Minorities attending institutions that practice greater affirmative action were less likely to drop out but did report lower grades. We also find that legacies and athletes who attend a school that practices institutional affirmative action are indeed more likely to drop out of school.

Using a sample of 1,112 heads of household from the Mexican Migration Project (MMP), I develop a multinomiallogit regression to test the hypothesis that migrants with social ties to other migrants in their place ofsettlement will have a greater risk of investing their remittances and savings on a productive activity or a home than of spending them on consumption. I find that migrants who live with family members or townspeople during their last migration trip have a higher risk of investing their savings on a productive activity or a home relative to spending them on consumption. Migrants who belong to a social club with other migrants have a higher risk ofinvesting their remittances on production or housing than ofusing them for consumption.Studying what conditions lead migrants to invest their remittances is of great practical importance because of the enormous sums of money migrants send to their countries of origin, estimated at $75 billion worldwide (Taylor et al. 1996). In 1999 migrants sent $6.8 billion in remittances to Mexico. This sum is greater than all Mexican agricultural exports, almost equals the country's income from tourism, is more than two-thirds the value of oil exports, and is more than 50% the size of the foreign direct investment in Mexico (Multilateral * I would like to acknowledge the assistance of participants in the Princeton University Department of Sociology's empirical seminar of 1999-2000, especially Professor Frank Dobbin. Paul Bern and Dan Edelstein of Princeton's Data and Statistical Services provided crucial programming support. Dana Glei and Aaron Sparrow ofthe Office ofPopulation Researchassisted in refining my models. I would also like to thank Doug Massey for his helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article and invitation to present my work at the University