Photo credit: www.higheredjobs.com
In a landmark decision over a year ago, the Supreme Court invalidated race-based admissions practices at colleges and universities across the United States. This ruling raised concerns among many observers who foresaw a decline in campus diversity. However, the impact of this decision remains ambiguous, primarily due to a growing trend of students opting not to disclose their race or ethnicity and universities’ selective presentation of demographic data.
As institutions of higher education begin compiling the racial composition of the incoming class of 2028— the first cohort affected by the 2023 ruling— the emerging data appears confusing and inconclusive.
In observing the nuances of how institutions gather and present demographic information, several factors contribute to this lack of clarity regarding racial diversity on campuses.
Students’ Choices in Identifying Race
A number of students refrain from selecting a racial or ethnic category, often feeling that the available choices do not accurately represent their identity. Before the option to select “one or more” for multiracial students was introduced in 2010, many opted to leave their race or ethnicity undisclosed. Some students even protested against such categories altogether by completely avoiding the checkboxes.
Moreover, a significant portion of students may downplay the significance of their race. According to research, about 67% of students who categorize their race as “unknown” are white, with a third of these individuals asserting that their racial or ethnic identity holds little relevance to them, as indicated by findings shared in 2008.
Interestingly, the rise of students categorized as “race unknown” is noteworthy. At Harvard University, the percentage of undergraduate students in this category doubled from the previous year. This shift complicates efforts to ascertain the actual demographic diversity of student populations, muddying the waters regarding the effects of the recent ruling against race-conscious admissions.
Concerns About Admission Opportunities
For some students, apprehension about potential discrimination on the basis of their race or ethnicity can deter them from disclosing this information. This fear is particularly amplified within selective institutions, which exhibit higher nonresponse rates — approximately 4% compared to an average of 1-2% at less selective colleges.
My research indicates that the likelihood of students opting not to identify their race is even higher at selective law schools, where prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, race could factor into various admissions criteria. On average, 8% of students at these institutions choose not to identify their race, compared to 4% at less selective law schools.
University Reporting Practices and Their Influence
The way universities choose to report their demographic information can significantly influence public perception of diversity statistics. For example, Harvard University does not disclose its percentage of white students, impacting the overall narrative of diversity.
Additionally, some institutions employ data manipulation techniques to give the impression of greater diversity than actually exists. Tactics may include counting multiracial students multiple times for each race they identify with, or classifying international students as a distinct demographic category. This can create a misleading perception of a more varied student body.
Future Implications of the Supreme Court Decision
Despite varying reporting practices at individual institutions, all colleges and universities must adhere to a standardized reporting protocol set by the federal government through the Integrated Post Secondary Education Data System (IPEDS). An important report detailing the characteristics of the 2024 enrollment class will be published in spring 2025, which should shed light on the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling for diversity in higher education.
However, this clarity may be short-lived. Starting in 2027, the federal government plans to revise how student race and ethnicity are reported, adding a specific category for Middle Eastern and North African individuals. Currently, these identities are categorized as white, which could misleadingly indicate a decline in white enrollment at numerous institutions after these changes take effect.
Moreover, the future guidelines will alter how Hispanic or Latino ethnicity is acknowledged on enrollment forms. At present, students who identify as both Hispanic and white are classified as Hispanic, whereas the new standards will categorize such students as multiracial. These changes could further obfuscate the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling, as fluctuations in reported Hispanic enrollment might be influenced by either the court’s decision or the newly established categories.
In conclusion, as colleges and universities adapt to forthcoming changes in data collection protocols and as students continue to withhold their racial identities, the true impact of the ban on race-conscious admissions will likely remain ambiguous, complicating the landscape of diversity in higher education.
Source
www.higheredjobs.com