The New Playbook: Race-Neutral Tactics, No Matter What “League” You're In at Forum Las Vegas
Colleges and universities inhabit different “leagues” when it comes to the use of race-conscious enrollment practices. Many use race-conscious policies and practices to achieve their mission-driven diversity goals. Some are forbidden from using race and ethnicity due to state laws. Others are permitted to consider race and ethnicity but choose not to do so. However, all of them have a common interest: identifying policies and practices that will create a dynamic, diverse, and successful student body. In light of the latest Supreme Court ruling, how can institutions further their common interest? In this session, participants will evaluate the implications of new race-neutral enrollment policies. Participants will brainstorm other strategies for ensuring diversity among their students.
Bradley Quin, Executive Director, Higher Education Advocacy, The College Board, VA
Timothy Brunold, Dean of Admission, University of Southern California, CA
Arthur Coleman, Managing Partner, EducationCounsel, DC
Matthew Gaertner, Research Scientist, Center for College and Career Success, Pearson, TX
Shannon Gundy, Director, Undergraduate Admission, University of Maryland, MD
Terri Taylor, Policy and Legal Advisor, EducationCounsel, LLC, DC
Tuesday, Oct. 28th, 2014
Bristlecone 6, First Floor
Appeals Court upholds the University of Texas at Austin’s Use of Race and Ethnicity in Admission
On July 15, 2014, the Fifth Circuit issued its opinion in the Fisher litigation, on remand from the Supreme Court. The three-judge panel (in a 2–1 decision) upheld the University of Texas at Austin’s race-conscious admission policy. In a 69-page opinion (a marked difference from the comparably slim Supreme Court decision last summer), the majority found that UT at Austin had demonstrated that its consideration of race was a necessary component of its admission policy. The majority concluded, “We are persuaded that to deny UT Austin its limited use of race in its search for holistic diversity would hobble the richness of the educational experience in contradiction of the plain teachings of Bakke and Grutter.” Judge Garza dissented (he previously authored the “special concurrence” to the original Fifth Circuit opinion, in which he lamented the Grutter decision).
New Survey from American Council on Education Aims to Examine Changing Admissions Policies
The College Board’s Access & Diversity Collaborative has
partnered with the American Council on Education’s Center for Policy Research
and Strategy on a new survey study to examine how legal challenges to
race-conscious admissions have changed contemporary admissions practices at
selective colleges and universities.
If you are an enrollment or admissions director, please take
a moment fill out the confidential and anonymous survey that will help ACE and
its partners learn how recent state and federal legislation and court rulings
have impacted admissions practices, and how to better support institutions as
they work to increase diversity on campuses.
Schutte v. BAMN Case Analysis Available
On April 22, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision against the constitutional challenge to Michigan's voter ban on the otherwise lawful use of race, ethnicity, and gender by the state and its public entities in Schutte v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigration Rights and Fight for Equality by Any means Necessary (BAMN). This case focused on the underlying race-conscious admission decisions at Michigan’s public institutions of higher education. The College Board’s Access & Diversity Collaborative has created a case and analysis of the decision to assist higher education institutions with their interpretation of the decision.