When Affirmative Action Disappears: Unexpected Patterns in Student Enrollments at Selective U.S. Institutions, 1990–2016

Discussions of U.S. affirmative action policy assume that considering race in undergraduate admissions increases Black and Latinx student enrollments. We show that this assumption that affirmative action is linked to Black and Latinx student enrollments holds true for higher-status colleges and universities, but not institutions across the field of higher education. We use fixed effects modeling to analyze the association between a stated affirmative action admissions policy and enrollment trends for first-year students of different racialized backgrounds between 1990 and 2016 at 1,127 selective institutions. We find that, at the most selective institutions, stated policy usage was associated with increased Black student enrollments. However, at less selective institutions, policy usage was associated with decreased Black student enrollments and increased Non-U.S. resident enrollments. We also identify close-to-zero estimates of this relationship for enrollment trends of additional demographic backgrounds. We use these findings to elaborate the role of field-level status dynamics in racialized organizations theory. Paradoxically, U.S. American higher education’s contemporary racialized status order roughly consists of higher-status institutions that consider race in admissions but do not enroll racially heterogeneous cohorts, middle-status institutions that do not consider race but enroll racially heterogeneous cohorts, and lower-status non-selective institutions that enroll disproportionately high numbers of Black, Indigenous, and Latinx students.

Untested Admissions: Examining Changes in Application Behaviors and Student Demographics Under Test-Optional Policies

This study examines a diverse set of nearly 100 private institutions that adopted test-optional undergraduate admissions policies between 2005–2006 and 2015–2016. Using comparative interrupted time series analysis and difference-in-differences with matching, I find that test-optional policies were associated with a 3% to 4% increase in Pell Grant recipients, a 10% to 12% increase in first-time students from underrepresented racial/ethnic backgrounds, and a 6% to 8% increase in first-time enrollment of women. Overall, I do not detect clear evidence of changes in application volume or yield rate. Subgroup analyses suggest that these patterns were generally similar for both the more selective and the less selective institutions examined. These findings provide evidence regarding the potential—and the limitations—of using test-optional policies to improve equity in admissions.

Gratz v. Bollinger

This chapter studies Gratz v. Bollinger, which challenged the racially attentive undergraduate admissions practices of the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts in the University of Michigan (UM). Grutter v. Bollinger, which challenged the Law School's admissions practices, was filed soon thereafter. These cases put UM on a crash course with the Supreme Court. The chapter then highlights UM's defense of affirmative action, showing how the university's co-optation of racial justice aligned with the rightward shift of the Supreme Court since the 1980s. UM leaders' preference for diversity over the social justice rationale, their discomfort with enrollment targets, their efforts to make affirmative action serve business interests, and their selective incorporation of social science that promoted the benefits of interracial contact all made UM's chances of swaying at least one conservative justice more likely.

The More Divided Academy: Did the Fall of the Faculty and the Rise of the All-Administrative University Increase Racial Conflict in Higher Education?

Despite efforts to redress racial grievances, American’s most progressive institutional sector, higher education, suffers racial incidents with disturbing frequency. We hypothesize that one explanation lies in the bureaucratization of higher education. Various trends have led to what Benjamin Ginsberg calls “the fall of the faculty” and “the all-administrative university.” We hypothesize that insulated from students and responsive to national employment markets, administrators adopt policies promoting the short-term appearance of successful integration, and driven by ideology. Faculty, in contrast, may focus on long-term student well-being, acknowledging policy tradeoffs. Using the North American Academic Survey Study ( n = 1,643 faculty and 808 administrators), we construct statistical models of attitudes toward race-based undergraduate admissions and faculty hiring. Contrary to predictions, both faculty and administrators offer nuanced support for affirmative action acknowledging potential tradeoffs. Further, ideology better explains faculty than administrator support. Implications are discussed.

Sports Participation is Worth Two Letter Grades in Undergraduate Admissions Decisions

The current study aimed to assess the impact of sports participation on undergraduate admissions decisions at universities, colleges, and conservatoires in the United Kingdom. A between subjects, experimental design was employed. Participants from providers of undergraduate courses completed an on-line experiment that required them to make a decision on one of three randomly assigned undergraduate applications written for the study: one without sport participation included (control) and two modified versions with sport participation included (one for team sports and one for individual sports). Participants were asked to decide whether to make an offer or reject the application. Significant differences were found between the control and sport-modified applications for one and two grade differences overall, as participation in sport elevated the undergraduate application. As this study was delimited to sport participation, the findings cannot be generalized to other extra-curricular activities. Future researchers could extend this investigation by examining the economic and social impact of participation in sports at secondary school post-University.

Spencer’s Reply to Glasgow, Haslanger, and Jeffers

Quayshawn Spencer clarifies that his defense of biological racial realism in Chapter 3—which is called “OMB race theory”—is meant to be a part of a larger radically pluralist theory about the nature and reality of race in American English. Next, Spencer defends OMB race theory against the South Asian mismatch objection from Glasgow and Jeffers. Third, Spencer raises an empirical adequacy objection against Glasgow’s, Haslanger’s, and Jeffers’s race theories insofar as they are unable to predict how race and races are talked about in multiple national discussions, such as whether Rachel Dolezal is wrong to claim a Black racial identity and whether Harvard University has been unlawfully discriminating against Asian applicants in undergraduate admissions.