This single case study uses the Advocacy Coalition Framework and Multiple Streams Framework to understand the ways higher education policy actors at the city-, state-, and system-level used information to build coalitions and change admission standards during the remediation debate at the City University of New York. By examining what information was used, when it was presented, by whom, and for what purposes, this study helps improve our understanding of the policymaking process and the role information can play in high-stakes debates with major consequences, including limiting student access to baccalaureate degrees. Implications for policy and future research are discussed.

此案例研究使用“倡导联盟框架和多流框架”来理解市，州和系统级高等教育政策参与者在城市大学的补救辩论期间如何利用信息来建立联盟和更改入学标准纽约。通过研究使用了什么信息，何时提供信息，由谁提供信息以及出于什么目的，本研究有助于增进我们对决策过程的理解，并且信息可以在高风险辩论中发挥作用，从而产生重大后果，包括限制学生获得信息的机会。学士学位。讨论了对政策和未来研究的影响。