Existing literature finds that holistic admission practices may result in biased decision-making at the undergraduate and doctoral level. This decision-making may happen during the application review or policymaking process. Few studies directly examine master's admission processes as a unique entity. Additionally, researchers have not yet considered the connections between critical methodologies and the decision-making practices of master's admission offices. The present study relies on an author-created conceptual framework of biased admission decision-making grounded in critical race theory. Through a mixed-methods survey distributed to 43 respondents from four national higher education professional organizations and four semi-structured interviews, results indicate that minimizing bias may not be first priority during decision-making processes. Findings suggest that admission professionals are not focused on minimizing bias as a function of their work unless the minimization of bias is regularly and consistently identified and communicated as a strategic institutional goal. This study concludes with directions for future research, along with recommendations for admission professionals to bridge the gap between superficial cycle assessment and a purposeful redesign of applicant evaluation processes and methodologies. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]