Why Admissions Leaders Have — or Haven’t — Spoken Up for Prospective Protesters

David Quinn started the campaign from his couch. Last Wednesday he came home from work and read an article that irked him. A school superintendent in Texas had threatened to suspend students who protest gun laws during school hours. “I put myself in the mind of those kids,” Quinn says, and imagined them fearing that such a punishment would hurt their chances of getting into college.

So Quinn, who coordinates the International Baccalaureate program at Edmonds-Woodway High School, in Washington, emailed an admissions dean he knows on the East Coast. “Wouldn’t it be great,” the message said, if admissions leaders said publicly that they wouldn’t penalize any students disciplined for such a protest?

Soon admissions officers became part of the unfolding story about the aftermath of this month’s fatal shootings at a high school in Parkland, Fla. Since last week, many college officials have spoken up in a way that they rarely do, saying applicants need not worry about repercussions for peaceful protests. On other campuses, the question of what, if anything, to say has prompted a lot of discussion — and hesitation. At least a couple of institutions, fearing a political backlash in a nation divided over gun rights, have chosen to say nothing at all.

Deb Shaver, dean of admission at Smith College, felt obligated to chime in right away. “The flame is so hot in college admissions,” she says, “and this was a chance to cool it down.”

Within minutes of receiving an email from Quinn, Shaver tweeted from her personal account: “For students worried about disciplinary action for getting suspended for standing up for your beliefs: we’ve got you on this side. #Smith2022.”

As supportive as those words might have sounded, though, Shaver didn’t intend to make a political statement; nor did she signal a departure from policy. She was simply affirming a fact: A disciplinary infraction doesn’t automatically disqualify an applicant or result in a rescinded offer of admission. After all, not all infractions are the same.

Was a student suspended for violence — or for a harmless prank? Was an applicant caught plagiarizing in his freshman year and never again — or as a senior? Those are the kinds of questions Shaver asks when considering an infraction. As with other evaluations of an applicant’s record, the key, she says, is “context.”

Raining Assurances

What’s obvious to admissions officers isn’t necessarily obvious to the public, of course. And that’s one reason why so many admissions officials — at DePaul University, Trinity College in Connecticut, and the California Institute of Technology, among others — soon followed Shaver’s message with similar tweets. As the week ended, assurances were raining down from dozens of colleges.

Meanwhile, nervous teenagers were calling and emailing admissions offices all over the country. At MIT some applicants asked “if they have to choose between speaking out and getting in,” as Stu Schmill, dean of admissions and student financial services, wrote in a thoughtful blog post last Thursday. Stating that his staff wouldn’t look unfavorably on punishments for “peaceful participation in a protest,” he encouraged students to “undertake whatever course of action in life is most meaningful to, and consistent with, their own principles.”

As the weekend unfolded, applicants weren’t the only ones asking questions. A social-media wildfire raged, with some high-school counselors demanding that colleges publicize their positions. A fast-growing horde of interested parties wanted to know: Where does this college stand on the issue?

At the University of Southern California, the question came from alumni as well as employees. “This was becoming something bigger than just the admissions decision,” says Kirk Brennan, director of undergraduate admission. “It was about what the university was standing for within its community, how our actions in admissions are seen as a reflection of our institution.”

The moment called for an official statement, something more permanent than a tweet, officials decided. On Saturday, Brennan took a break from reading applications to write a post for the university’s admissions blog. He grounded the immediate question (would the university support suspended protesters?) in deeper reflections on the meaning of discovery. “Furthering knowledge requires students and faculty who are willing to share their views and consider others,” he wrote. “Therefore, we do not penalize students for speaking up. In fact, we seek them.”

In a personal passage, Brennan also described the late Joseph P. Allen, the dean of admissions who hired him. Though remembered fondly “for promoting education as a path towards peace and justice,” he was, Brennan noted, a convicted felon, having resisted the draft during the Vietnam War: “We can all think of examples of civil disobedience that resulted in important, lasting improvements to our world.”

Readers’ responses affirmed that a once-small question about discipline had grown into an opportunity to engage a broader audience, including alumni and parents. “As an alumnus of this grand university, I am exceptionally proud of this decision,” wrote one commenter. “More proud to be a Trojan mother and daughter than a Cal grad,” wrote another.

Pouring Scorn

Still, a statement that pleases one reader can turn off another. “It should be made explicitly clear that this includes students on both sides of the political spectrum,” one reader said. “It seems that there could be some bias behind this announcement.”

As more colleges made statements supporting protest, plenty of scorn poured in. On Saturday the University of Massachusetts at Amherst responded on Twitter to someone who had accused it of “pushing a leftist agenda.” It apparently didn’t respond to another person who tweeted: “It is irresponsible encouraging minors to absent themselves regardless of the motivation, and it borders on child endangerment.”

Praise won out, though. The statements colleges issued pleased many faculty members. An apparently delighted associate professor of history on the Amherst campus tweeted a message for prospective students: “If you participate in protests against gun violence, please come take my classes on 20th-century U.S. history!” Prospective students noticed, too (“never been more excited to be a part of the UMass Class of ’22!!!”).

Many people who tweeted praise for one college’s statement tagged their own alma mater, urging them to hop on the bandwagon if they hadn’t done so already. Institutional peer pressure seemed to take hold. The trend built a momentum of its own.

Wes K. Waggoner could practically feel it. Just a few days earlier, Waggoner, associate vice president for enrollment management at Southern Methodist University, hadn’t thought that a public statement was really necessary. “Then it began to swell on social media, that we all needed to weigh in, to make this loud and clear,” he says. “We didn’t want the lack of a statement to be perceived as not supporting students.”

On Sunday afternoon the university launched messages into social media. Applicants’ chances, it said, “will in no way be jeopardized for participating in peaceful protest.”

Some admissions officials who had hoped to make similar statements were barred from doing so. Over the weekend two deans at institutions in different states told The Chronicle that their presidents, their boards, or both had vetoed the idea, for fear of inviting criticism from gun-rights supporters and others. Speaking on condition of anonymity, one of the officials said: “Our position is that we’re not going to hold it against students, but there’s a fear of announcing it publicly. What a major missed opportunity to make an important statement.”

With emotions running high over the last week, some admissions officials and high-school counselors have assumed the worst about colleges that didn’t immediately make announcements.

The Clearinghouse

Some institutions, though, just didn’t finish their statements as quickly as others did. The University of Michigan at Ann Arbor did so on Monday. The University of Texas at Austin expected to do so by Tuesday, according to a spokesman.

Texas A&M University at College Station, though, might not. “At this point, we don’t have plans to put something out boldly on this, except that we support students’ right to protest, as long as it’s lawful,” says Amy Smith, a university spokeswoman. “There’s no debate or consternation about it.”

By Monday the plot thickened for admissions offices. A new website had sprung up. Its stated purpose: “to encourage universities to stand up for their high-school applicants that may face disciplinary actions for peacefully protesting as part of the #NeverAgain movement.”

The website lists dozens of colleges that have publicly assured applicants that disciplinary infractions for peaceful protests won’t affect their admission status. There’s also a list of colleges that haven’t made such announcements. For each of the latter, visitors can click a button that generates a message urging the college “to take action.”

Alex Garcia, a computer-engineering major at the University of California at San Diego, stayed up until 5 a.m. on Sunday creating the website while munching on popcorn. “My hope is that more and more colleges will come out in support of this movement,” he says, “and this will help students who might be on the fence about whether to protest.”

Late Monday, Garcia was busy updating his list. At one point, he removed the University of Chicago from the ranks of institutions with a “confirmed statement” of support. As The Chicago Maroon reported, the university on Saturday released a statement expressing opposition to violence and support for students’ free expression, but stopped short of saying that it would not penalize applicants suspended for peaceful protests. A university spokesman confirmed the accuracy of that report but declined to elaborate.

Meanwhile, Garcia, who had been essentially unknown a couple of days earlier, fielded requests from strangers. One woman tweeted a link to Princeton University’s recent statement.

“Thank you so much,” he tweeted back. “Princeton has been updated!”

“I don’t think my alma mater is even on your list,” someone else tweeted. “San Francisco State University.”

“Added SFSU,” he replied. “Thanks!”

For one reason or another, people wanted to make sure a college they cared about wasn’t overlooked.

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.