The Access and Diversity Collaborative's Quarterly Update

The College Board Access and Diversity Collaborative (ADC) quarterly newsletter informs members on the happenings in federal education policy and national news, with emphasis on matters of access, enrollment, diversity, and inclusion. Each quarter, we highlight best practices among members and provide updates on ADC publications and events, and periodically include insight from an ADC sponsor on a topic of interest.

Federal Court Action Involving Enrollment Issues of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender
Admissions Practices and Campus Policies
Financial Aid and Cost of College
Student Enrollment, Experience, and Outcomes
Federal Higher Education Policy
ADC in Action

Federal Court Litigation Involving Enrollment Issues of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender

Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, U.S. District Court for the North Carolina Middle District.
On January 18, 2019, the University of North Carolina (UNC) and Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) each filed motions for summary judgment asking the court to rule in their favor based on law and their written filings, rather than going to trial. In these filings, SFFA argued that UNC mechanically considers race as a dominant factor in admissions; acts in a manner that indicates a lack of sincere interest in the educational benefits of diversity; and fails to use race neutral alternatives that UNC admitted in its Fisher amicus brief are workable, rendering UNC’s consideration of race unnecessary. UNC denies SFFA’s claims and argues that it actively engages diversity to gain research-based educational benefits for students; has a rigorous, high-quality admission program in which readers are unaware of the racial composition of the class; and over a 10-year period, two committees and the Admissions Office considered many neutral alternatives and has been unable to find any neutral alternative that would provide the same diversity and academic quality as the current model. (See the January 2019 newsletter for more detail.) As in the Harvard case, SFFA and UNC present experts with conflicting findings.

On September 30, 2019, the federal district court issued an order denying summary judgment to both parties. In this order, three issues were discussed:

1) the sufficiency of UNC’s articulation of goals/objectives and definition of critical mass;

2) whether race is a “plus” or “dominant” factor in admissions; and

3) whether UNC pursued all workable race-neutral alternatives.

In discussion on the sufficiency of UNC’s articulation of goals/objectives and definition of critical mass, the judge recognized UNC’s compelling interest in diversity, but did not grant summary judgment on that issue. The judge concluded that each of the remaining issues presented questions of fact appropriate for trial. The trial of the case is scheduled for June 8, 2020.

Since the October 2019 newsletter, there have not been significant updates in the Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College or the Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences v. New York University Law Review et al. cases. For an overview of those cases, please see our October 2019 newsletter. Additionally, the ADC and EducationCounsel produced a preliminary analysis of the District Court’s opinion in SFFA v. Harvard which is available here and held an ADC webinar to discuss the decision, a recording of which is available here.

Relevant Articles

Admissions Practices and Campus Policies

On November 4, researchers from Duke University, the University of Georgia, and the University of Oklahoma published a research paper titled “Recruit to Reject? Harvard and African American Applicants,” which discusses the relationship between sale of SAT score data on application rates, including by students who are not competitive candidates for schools like Harvard. Notably, one of the researchers was a principal expert witness for Students for Fair Admissions in the SFFA v. Harvard case. On November 19, Wall Street Journal published an article on this report titled “The Lucrative Selling SAT-Takers’ Names” building on an earlier Wall Street Journal article titled “For Sale: SAT-Takers’ Names. Colleges Buy Student Data and Boost Exclusivity.”

On November 5, Washington state voters rejected Referendum 88, a measure that would have overturned the statewide ban on the consideration of race as part of the college admissions process. Since 1998, Washington state has banned the consideration of race as part of college admissions. However, in April 2019, the state legislature introduced a measure that would have allowed colleges and universities to begin considering race in admissions again. As a result of significant opposition to this measure (as measured in resident’s signatures), the state required a public vote in the form of Referendum 88 in November 2019. Ultimately, 52 percent of Washington state voters rejected Referendum 88, while 48 percent supported it. This vote was discussed in a Chronicle of Higher Education article and New York Times article.

Relevant Articles

Financial Aid and Cost of College

Relevant Articles

Student Enrollment, Experience, and Outcomes

On November 20, USED released an updated College Scorecard, which now includes information on median earnings and median debt of a school's graduates, including earnings in chosen fields of study. Previously, the Scorecard would only provide information about median earnings based on the institution, not disaggregated by field of study. The revised Scorecard does have some limitations, including a lack of information on most small programs; not including information on students without earnings; not including students without federal aid; and earnings data does not reflect multiple years of earnings. A press release is here. The College Scorecard is here.

On October 30, the ACT published a report titled, "The Condition of College and Career Readiness 2019." The report, which is published annually, summarizes a review of the year's administration of the ACT and student results. Key findings of the report include identifying that nearly 1.8 million high school graduates took the exam in 2019; that 37 percent of test takers met at least three of the four ACT benchmarks for college and career readiness, which is a one percent decrease from 2018; and that 36 percent of test takers did not meet any of the four benchmarks, which is a one percent increase from 2018. The full report is here.

Relevant Articles

Federal Higher Education Policy

On October 15, House Education and Labor Committee Democrats released their proposal to reauthorize the Higher Education Act (HEA). The bill, H.R.4674, the "College Affordability Act," builds upon House Democrats' previous HEA proposal from the 115th Congress - H.R.6543, the "Aim Higher Act." This bill focuses on reinvesting in higher education by restoring state and federal investments, increasing quality through accountability measures, and expanding opportunities by investing in Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs). House Education and Labor Committee Chairman Bobby Scott (D-VA) unveiled the proposal with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).

ADC in Action

Sponsor Spotlight

Recent Publications & Webinars

The Playbook: Understanding the Role of Race-Neutral Strategies in Advancing Higher Education Diversity Goals
In November 2019, the College Board Access and Diversity Collaborative and EducationCounsel published The Playbook (2d Ed.). Designed principally for enrollment policy leaders and practitioners, this guide provides practical information regarding potentially viable race- and ethnicity-neutral strategies and selection criteria (“plays”) that may advance institutional diversity interests, including those associated with race and ethnicity. Framed in the context of relevant federal nondiscrimination law, and including descriptions of over 40 institutional and organizational illustrations and models, this second edition of The Playbook addresses nine plays:

As in the first edition of this guide, plays described are among the most commonly used and/or the most promising; have some evidence of effectiveness; and can be legally sustainable when properly designed and executed.

Additionally, in October 2019, the ADC hosted a webinar focused on race-neutral strategies, which expands upon this publication. A recording of the webinar is available here.

If you would like your institution/organization to be considered for future Sponsor Spotlights, please send a brief description of your initiative or practice to Emily Webb ([email protected]).

Upcoming Events

College Board Higher Education Colloquium—January 12–14, 2020 in Dana Point, CA
As part of a Post-Colloquium Session, the ADC will be sponsoring a workshop titled, “Beyond the Law: Exploring Systemic Policy Foundations and Advancing Student-Focused Diversity and Inclusion Strategies.” In this session, a panel of experts will engage participants in a discussion on the core elements of good diversity- and inclusion-related policy and practice, including: desired outcomes, student experiences, data and evidence, communication and institutional alignment. The workshop will conclude with a crosswalk of takeaways on Colloquium session themes that align with federal nondiscrimination law—making the explicit connection between good policy and legal compliance. This workshop will be held on January 14, 2020 from 12:30 pm until 3:00 pm. More information and complete Colloquium agenda available here.