<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pedro Luís Silva</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Specialists or All-rounders: How best to select university students?</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Available at SSRN 3757434</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">University Choice &amp; Admission Tests &amp; Job Market &amp; General Skills.</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;This paper studies whether universities should select their students only using specialised subject-specific tests, or on the basis of a broader set of skills and knowledge. The empirical analysis is guided by a theoretical framework. The theoretical model shows that even if broader skills are not improving graduates’ outcomes in the labour market, the university chooses to use them as a criterion for selection alongside the mastery of more subject-specific tools. This is so because broader skills allow the university to select candidates who are on average abler. I test the model on a large administrative dataset of Portuguese students. Within programmes, I exploit the variation between specific and non-specific entrance exam sets. My central finding is that, on average, universities with less specialised admission policies admit a pool of students who obtain a higher final GPA.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record></records></xml>