Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    An AI-Driven Work Force
    AI and Microcredentials
Sign In
News

Defending Diversity

Using solid data and tracking progress are key to race-conscious admissions

By Eric Hoover February 26, 2017
Defending Diversity 2
Illustration by Martín Elfman for The Chronicle

Without precise goals, reams of research, and continuing discussions among campus leaders, your college’s race-conscious admissions program is probably toast.

Although the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last year in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin wasn’t so blunt, the takeaways are clear. Campus leaders concerned about enhancing diversity — and helping their institution survive a legal challenge — are wise to stay knee-deep in good data. “The question of evidence is front and center,” says Arthur L. Coleman, managing partner of EducationCounsel LLC, which advises colleges on student-diversity strategies. “We’ve moved from the concept of diversity being a compelling interest to, now, a clear lens on the illustrative kinds of evidence that it takes to make a case for diversity policies.”

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

Defending Diversity 2
Illustration by Martín Elfman for The Chronicle

Without precise goals, reams of research, and continuing discussions among campus leaders, your college’s race-conscious admissions program is probably toast.

Although the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last year in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin wasn’t so blunt, the takeaways are clear. Campus leaders concerned about enhancing diversity — and helping their institution survive a legal challenge — are wise to stay knee-deep in good data. “The question of evidence is front and center,” says Arthur L. Coleman, managing partner of EducationCounsel LLC, which advises colleges on student-diversity strategies. “We’ve moved from the concept of diversity being a compelling interest to, now, a clear lens on the illustrative kinds of evidence that it takes to make a case for diversity policies.”

Since the court affirmed once again that colleges could use race as one of many factors in admissions, so long as those policies are “narrowly tailored” to achieve educational goals, colleges have been taking stock of their own practices. Many institutions are using big data to refine their recruitment, admissions, and retention strategies in ways that might enhance diversity. That’s just a first step. To comply with the legal precedents restated in Fisher, enrollment officials know they must carefully track their progress. Without measures of effectiveness, a diversity policy is legally risky and, perhaps, educationally unsound.

Given the ever-present threat of lawsuits, colleges might seem confined by a long list of proscriptions. Yet Philip A. Ballinger was encouraged by a key line in the court’s opinion: “Public universities … can serve as ‘laboratories of experimentation.’ "

Mr. Ballinger, associate vice provost for enrollment and undergraduate admissions at the University of Washington, is overseeing an admissions experiment. In 2015 the university incorporated robust geodemographic information — data on where people live — into its review of applicants. More socioeconomic data points, he hoped, would give admissions officers a better glimpse of students’ life circumstances, and, in turn, help the university enroll a more diverse class. “Before, we were missing all this information,” he says, “about the families from which students come, their neighborhoods, what’s happening in their schools.”

So the university created a “Geo-Index,” which merges information from students’ applications with census and high-school data. All that is distilled to a single number (from 1 to 5), designed to measure the adversity experienced by each applicant.

Because Washington banned racial preferences in 1998, the Geo-Index does not include data on race or ethnicity. It can reveal disadvantages among white students from rural areas as well as among black students in urban neighborhoods, Mr. Ballinger says: “This is based purely on the word ‘Where.’ It’s more contextual, a really powerful distillation of what we’re asking about in holistic review.”

After just one year, it’s difficult to judge Washington’s experiment. There were more underrepresented minority freshmen in the fall of 2016 than in the preceding year, which Mr. Ballinger suspects is a result of several factors. To gauge the Geo-Index’s effectiveness, the university will have to study it over time. “We do think it can make a difference on the margins,” he says.

At Texas, a robust blend of evidence helped the university prevail in the Fisher case.

ADVERTISEMENT

Mr. Coleman, the consultant, a former deputy assistant secretary in the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, has seen more institutions gathering a broader variety of data. Some are surveying underrepresented minority students about their experiences on campus, and compiling statistics on the number of courses in which such students are underrepresented. Anecdotal insights gleaned from focus groups can help, too.

“We recommend, without exception, that senior leadership engage periodically with students,” Mr. Coleman says. “The student voice can be instrumental.”

The University of Maryland at College Park has taken an especially deep look at its race-conscious strategies over the years. “The takeaway from Fisher, as from previous cases, is that this is a continual process,” says Shannon Gundy, director of admissions. “You can’t rest on your laurels.”

After the Supreme Court’s 2003 rulings in the University of Michigan affirmative-action cases, which upheld the use of race as one of multiple factors in admissions evaluations, Maryland officials engaged in some soul-searching: What did the institution value? What was most important when choosing applicants?

ADVERTISEMENT

The answers led to the “Statement of Philosophy of Undergraduate Admissions,” which describes diversity as “an integral component of the educational process and academic excellence.” The document links specific institutional goals to Maryland’s holistic review process, which includes 26 factors that could influence admissions decisions, including an applicant’s race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic background, as well as leadership, community involvement, and “breadth of life experiences.”

TAKEAWAY

How to craft an admissions program that stands up legally

  • Evidence counts. Colleges must be able to demonstrate the impact of race-conscious admissions programs.
  • Reviewing diversity policies isn’t a one-time thing. Continuing assessment of campus-specific data is crucial.
  • The Fisher case affirmed that colleges “can serve as laboratories of experimentation,” meaning they should look to refine policies and practices.

Maryland’s rendering of its admissions process reflects the tight fit between institutional goals and practices that legal experts say is crucial. Moreover, its policies clearly define an array of diversity components that go beyond race. The 26 admissions factors are “flexibly applied”; eschewing a rigid formula, admissions officers conduct individualized reviews of applicants and their unique circumstances.

To help justify the necessity of race-conscious programs, Maryland has investigated alternatives. Recently the university used data to determine whether a race-neutral plan like the one in Texas might limit diversity (the answer was yes). Several years ago, the admissions staff spent much of the summer “re-reviewing” a subset of that year’s applicant pool without considering any student’s race. The experiment allowed Maryland to document the extent to which a race-neutral policy would hinder its efforts to enroll underrepresented minority students. “It’s daunting and it’s expensive,” Ms. Gundy says. “But you have to do the work to collect the evidence.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Admissions policies get all the attention, but the Fisher case affirmed that colleges must consider the full spectrum of enrollment policies. “The discussion is reorienting around the question of what success looks like,” Mr. Coleman says. “It’s not just a question of compositional diversity, but a question of student success on campus, which includes student satisfaction and students feeling like they belong.”

At College Park, discussions of students’ success are continuous. Recently, Barbara Gill, associate vice president for enrollment management, participated in a four-hour strategic-planning exercise with colleagues from other departments. They described the kind of experiences they wanted students to have in 2022. And they discussed ways of promoting more interaction among students from different backgrounds. “In classrooms, there’s that mixing, but in terms of how students define their social lives, it’s more homogeneous than they want,” she says. “So the next question is, How do we do that?”

Whatever the university decides, the answers are sure to be well documented.

Eric Hoover writes about admissions trends, enrollment-management challenges, and the meaning of Animal House, among other issues. He’s on Twitter @erichoov, and his email address is eric.hoover@chronicle.com.

A version of this article appeared in the March 3, 2017, issue.
Read other items in The 2017 Trends Report.
We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
Eric Hoover
About the Author
Eric Hoover
Eric Hoover writes about the challenges of getting to, and through, college. Follow him on Twitter @erichoov, or email him, at eric.hoover@chronicle.com.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Related Content

How Studying Classroom Diversity Helped the U. of Texas Win Its Case

More News

Photo illustration showing Santa Ono seated, places small in the corner of a dark space
'Unrelentingly Sad'
Santa Ono Wanted a Presidency. He Became a Pariah.
Illustration of a rushing crowd carrying HSI letters
Seeking precedent
Funding for Hispanic-Serving Institutions Is Discriminatory and Unconstitutional, Lawsuit Argues
Photo-based illustration of scissors cutting through paper that is a photo of an idyllic liberal arts college campus on one side and money on the other
Finance
Small Colleges Are Banding Together Against a Higher Endowment Tax. This Is Why.
Pano Kanelos, founding president of the U. of Austin.
Q&A
One Year In, What Has ‘the Anti-Harvard’ University Accomplished?

From The Review

Photo- and type-based illustration depicting the acronym AAUP with the second A as the arrow of a compass and facing not north but southeast.
The Review | Essay
The Unraveling of the AAUP
By Matthew W. Finkin
Photo-based illustration of the Capitol building dome propped on a stick attached to a string, like a trap.
The Review | Opinion
Colleges Can’t Trust the Federal Government. What Now?
By Brian Rosenberg
Illustration of an unequal sign in black on a white background
The Review | Essay
What Is Replacing DEI? Racism.
By Richard Amesbury

Upcoming Events

Plain_Acuity_DurableSkills_VF.png
Why Employers Value ‘Durable’ Skills
Warwick_Leadership_Javi.png
University Transformation: a Global Leadership Perspective
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin