(C) Common Dreams
This story was originally published by Common Dreams and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



State affirmative action bans helped White, Asian students, hurt others [1]

['Janice Kai Chen', 'Daniel Wolfe']

Date: 2023-06-29

Higher Education State affirmative action bans helped White, Asian students, hurt others While highly selective schools saw diversity decline, data shows other schools saw growth

Listen 8 min Comment on this story Comment Gift Article Share

The Supreme Court has ruled to restrict affirmative action and eliminate race-conscious admissions in higher education, overturning more than four decades of court precedent. A Washington Post review of 30 years of race and ethnicity data from the eight states that currently ban race-based admission policies in higher education shows how a federal ban on affirmative action might harm minority students across the United States.

In states with bans, Hispanic and Native Americans were less represented Where race-based admission policies were banned in 2021, already underrepresented racial groups had even lower representation when compared to states without bans. States where affirmative action in public schools: is not banned is banned White Asian Native Hawaiian / Pacific Islander Native American Black Hispanic Multiracial -4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Percentage points above or below the group’s population Banned states in 2021 include Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Washington. In states with bans, Hispanic and Native Americans were less represented Where race-based admission policies were banned in 2021, already underrepresented racial groups had even lower representation when compared to states without bans. States where affirmative action in public schools: is not banned is banned Under Parity Over White Asian Native Hawaiian / Pacific Islander Native American Black Hispanic Multiracial -4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Percentage points above or below the group’s population Banned states in 2021 include Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Washington. In states with bans, Hispanic and Native Americans were less represented Where race-based admission policies were banned in 2021, already underrepresented racial groups had even lower representation when compared to states without bans. States where affirmative action in public schools: is not banned is banned Underrepresented Parity Overrepresented White Asian Native Hawaiian / Pacific Islander Native American Black Hispanic Multiracial −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Percentage points above or below the group’s population Banned states in 2021 include Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Washington. In states with bans, Hispanic and Native Americans were less represented Where race-based admission policies were banned in 2021, already underrepresented racial groups had even lower representation when compared to states without bans. States where affirmative action in public schools: is not banned is banned Underrepresented Parity Overrepresented White Asian Native Hawaiian / Pacific Islander Native American Black Hispanic Multiracial −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 5 6 4 Percentage points above or below the group’s population Banned states in 2021 include Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Washington.

Two lawsuits, against the University of North Carolina and Harvard University, are behind the high court’s decision to federally restrict affirmative action. Plaintiffs in both cases contend that race-conscious admissions favor some students — Black, Hispanic and Native Americans — over others.

At the University of North Carolina, White students have been overrepresented for the past 30 years, with the White freshman class approaching racial parity only in 2020, when compared to state demographics. Black students have remained underrepresented by around 10 points.

Advertisement

In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the plaintiffs argued that Asian Americans were discriminated against through the use of subjective personality scores, in favor of White, Black and Hispanic applicants.

Unlike previous state bans on affirmative action, the court’s federal ruling restricts race-conscious admissions policies at private universities, like Harvard. The data suggests a ban on affirmative action in private schools could change the racial and ethnic makeup of American schools considerably. Private universities enrolled 29 percent of students attending four-year institutions in 2021. Researchers find it hard to project the extent of the impacts because of the unprecedented nature of such a restriction. One place to consider is how previous state bans changed freshman classes at highly selective public schools.

Decreased diversity in highly selective public schools

In California, where the college-age Hispanic population grew by 8 percentage points since the state’s ban came into effect in 1998, representation has lagged at the most selective schools: UCLA and the University of California at Berkeley. Hispanic students at those universities made up 21.5 percent of the 2020 first-year class, 29 points below the state’s college-age Hispanic population.

Advertisement

Black and Hispanic student representation at UC Berkeley both dropped by around 50 percent immediately following the ban. Those students probably attended less selective public universities in the state, the analysis suggests.

California’s affirmative action ban kept Berkeley and UCLA from diversifying When race-based bans were put into effect, selective schools saw drops in Black and Hispanic enrollment. In less selective public universities, meanwhile, their representation increased. HOW TO READ THESE TRENDS: More representative Less representative area shrinks towards population parity (zero) area expands from parity (zero) Fall freshman racial and ethnic diversity Within selective schools UCLA and UC Berkeley, the freshmen class overall became less diverse after the affirmative action ban 40 pts Overrepresented Asian and Pacific Islander Native American 0 Parity Black White Hispanic −40 pts Underrepresented 8 5 1998 first year ban applied 5 10 Years before Years after All public universities in California, 10 years after the ban moved closer to parity 40 pts Overrepresented 0 Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 8 5 1998 first year ban applied 5 10 Years before Years after California’s affirmative action ban kept Berkeley and UCLA from diversifying When race-based bans were put into effect, selective schools saw drops in Black and Hispanic enrollment. In less selective public universities, meanwhile, their representation increased. HOW TO READ THESE TRENDS: More representative Less representative area shrinks towards population parity (zero) area expands from parity (zero) Fall freshman racial and ethnic diversity Within selective schools UCLA and UC Berkeley, the freshmen class overall became less diverse after the affirmative action ban 40 pts Overrepresented Asian and Pacific Islander 20 Native American 0 Parity Black White −20 Hispanic −40 pts Underrepresented 8 5 1998 first year ban applied 5 10 Years before Years after All public universities in California, 10 years after the ban moved closer to parity 40 pts Overrepresented 20 0 Parity −20 −40 pts Underrepresented 8 5 1998 first year ban applied 5 10 Years before Years after California’s affirmative action ban kept Berkeley and UCLA from diversifying When race-based bans were put into effect, selective schools saw drops in Black and Hispanic enrollment. In less selective public universities, meanwhile, their representation increased. HOW TO READ THESE TRENDS: More representative Less representative area shrinks towards population parity (zero) area expands from parity (zero) Fall freshman racial and ethnic diversity Within selective schools UCLA and UC Berkeley, the freshmen class overall became less diverse after the affirmative action ban 40 pts Overrepresented Asian and Pacific Islander 20 Native American 0 Parity Black White −20 Hispanic −40 pts Underrepresented 8 5 1998 first year ban applied 5 10 Years before Years after All public universities in California, 10 years after the ban moved closer to parity 40 pts Overrepresented 20 0 Parity −20 −40 pts Underrepresented 8 5 1998 first year ban applied 5 10 Years before Years after California’s affirmative action ban kept Berkeley and UCLA from diversifying When race-based bans were put into effect, selective schools saw drops in Black and Hispanic enrollment. In less selective public universities, meanwhile, their representation increased. HOW TO READ THESE TRENDS: More representative Less representative area shrinks towards population parity (zero) area expands from parity (zero) Fall freshman racial and ethnic diversity Within selective schools UCLA and UC Berkeley, the freshmen class overall became less diverse after the affirmative action ban All public universities in California, 10 years after the ban moved closer to parity Overrepresented 40 pts Asian and Pacific Islander 20 Native American Parity 0 Black White −20 Hispanic Underrepresented −40 pts 8 5 1998 first year ban applied 5 10 8 5 1998 first year ban applied 5 10 Years before Years after Years before Years after

Other states also saw immediate drop-offs following affirmative action bans in enrollment among Black, Hispanic and Native American students at their most selective public universities. (Note: Enrollment rates do not equate to admission rates. Factors such as financial aid programs, school reputation and culture affect decisions to enroll.)

The University of Florida, the state’s most selective university, saw Black student enrollment drop to 6 percent in the 20 years since the ban — 15 percentage points below the state’s college-age Black population in 2020.

In states where minority enrollment decreased at selective universities, less selective universities saw those same demographics rise. This inverse phenomenon is what researcher Zachary Bleemer, an assistant professor of economics at Yale University, calls the “cascade effect” — in which a decrease at selective schools then causes an increase at less selective schools.

Advertisement

Only less selective schools see representation improvements from bans State by state, selective universities in banned states often see no improvements toward a more representative freshman class. Meanwhile, racial and ethnic parity closes in for less selective public universities in those states. Asian and Pacific Islander Black Hispanic Native American White ARIZONA Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2011 ban Years before Years after All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2011 ban Years before Years after FLORIDA Selective schools Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 2000 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented 0 Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2000 IDAHO Selective schools Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 2020 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented 0 Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2020 MICHIGAN Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2006 10 5 5 10 All other public universities Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 2006 10 5 5 10 NEBRASKA Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2009 10 5 5 10 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2009 10 5 5 10 NEW HAMPSHIRE Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2012 10 5 5 10 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2012 10 5 5 10 OKLAHOMA Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2012 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented 0 Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2012 WASHINGTON Selective schools Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 1999 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented 0 Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 1999 Only less selective schools see representation improvements from bans State by state, selective universities in banned states often see no improvements toward a more representative freshman class. Meanwhile, racial and ethnic parity closes in for less selective public universities in those states. Asian and Pacific Islander Hispanic Black Native American White ARIZONA Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2011 ban Years before Years after All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2011 ban Years before Years after FLORIDA Selective schools Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 2000 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented 0 Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2000 IDAHO Selective schools Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 2020 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented 0 Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2020 MICHIGAN Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2006 10 5 5 10 All other public universities Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 2006 10 5 5 10 NEBRASKA Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2009 10 5 5 10 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2009 10 5 5 10 NEW HAMPSHIRE Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2012 10 5 5 10 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented Parity 0 −40 pts Underrepresented 2012 10 5 5 10 OKLAHOMA Selective schools 40 pts Overrepresented Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2012 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented 0 Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 2012 WASHINGTON Selective schools Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 1999 All other public universities 40 pts Overrepresented 0 Parity −40 pts Underrepresented 10 5 5 10 1999 Only less selective schools see representation improvements from bans State by state, selective universities in banned states often see no improvements toward a more representative freshman class. Meanwhile, racial and ethnic parity closes in for less selective public universities in those states. Asian and Pacific Islander Hispanic Native American White Black Selective schools All other public universities ARIZONA Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 10 5 5 10 2011 ban 2011 ban Years before Years before Years after Years after FLORIDA Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 10 5 5 10 2000 2000 IDAHO Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 10 5 5 10 2020 2020 MICHIGAN Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 2006 2006 10 5 5 10 10 5 5 10 NEBRASKA Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 2009 2009 10 5 5 10 10 5 5 10 NEW HAMPSHIRE Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 2012 2012 10 5 5 10 10 5 5 10 OKLAHOMA Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 10 5 5 10 2012 2012 WASHINGTON Overrepresented 40 pts Parity 0 Underrepresented −40 pts 10 5 5 10 10 5 5 10 1999 1999

Bleemer, who studied the long-term impacts of California’s ban, has found that Black and Hispanic students who attended less selective universities have poorer outcomes, such as lower graduation rates, graduate school enrollment and income.

“[At more selective schools] they might have been able to build networks that they couldn’t have otherwise had, learned certain kinds of information that were just not available to them in their high school setting,” Bleemer said.

Those networks translate to higher wages in the labor market, Bleemer found. Among previous University of California applicants, the number of Black and Hispanic individuals in their early 30s earning more than $100,000 was estimated to be 3 percent lower after the ban, compared with cohorts who benefited from affirmative action. Meanwhile, wages among White and Asian applicants remained about the same before and after the ban, suggesting there’s little trade-off when Black and Hispanic populations take home higher salaries.

Advertisement

“Higher education is increasingly necessary for any job that will get you into the middle class and any job that will produce economic gains for the individuals, for communities and for states,” said Gary Orfield, co-founder and director of the Civil Rights Project and a professor at UCLA.

Bans on affirmative action have ripple effects beyond individualized outcomes. Dan Ly, assistant professor of medicine at UCLA, found in a 2022 study that the enrollment of underrepresented students at public medical schools fell from 15 percent to 10 percent following state bans.

“College admissions are going to be greatly affected based on past experience,” Ly said, including “the racial, ethnic diversity of colleges, of graduate schools and professional schools.”

These impacts reverberate to public health outcomes, Ly said: “When you see someone who looks like you and may understand your experience better, you’re just more likely to have trust in your physician and listen to them more. That leads to better care.”

Advertisement

Diversifying without affirmative action

Texas, where affirmative action was prohibited from 1996 to 2003, automatically admits the top 10 percent of every high school’s graduating class to one of its state-funded universities (with the exception of the University of Texas at Austin, which accepts the top 6%). Public universities in other states, such as UC Berkeley and the University of Michigan, have tried to use indicators such as socioeconomic status and geography to increase enrollment by students of color. However, researchers are doubtful that proxies can fully account for the loss of affirmative action.

“You’re always using something that is, in effect, inefficient,” said Mark Long, dean and professor at the University of California at Riverside’s School of Public Policy, who has studied the efficacy of alternative policies to affirmative action. Long said policies meant to replace affirmative action use variables that try to approximate race but do not consider race explicitly.

Advertisement

Researchers have found that affirmative action is a key mechanism in maintaining diverse student populations in higher education. “The colleges are trying to fix the disparities that exist,” Long said. “The courts are, in a sense, taking away one of the tools that is most efficacious for them.”

In 2020, BerkeleyNews applauded the university’s “most ethnically diverse freshman admitted class in more than 30 years.” Black and Hispanic students saw a 34% increase in enrollment overall from the fall of 2019 to 2020. Despite California’s ban, the new director of undergraduate admissions, Olufemi Ogundele, credits the diversity to a strengthened community outreach program, improved yield rates across admissions and a revamp of how the admissions board is trained. Ogundele cautions against too much optimism, however: “The news is impressive because of where we’re coming from, not where we are,” as UC Berkeley is still recovering from the enrollment drops experienced after the ban.

For Ogundele, “I think we still have a lot of work to do. We still are not representative of the state just yet. I also recognize that it is important for people to know that you can be selective, diverse and excellent. Those things are not mutually exclusive.”

Advertisement

Regardless of any restriction on affirmative action, “my true hope,” Ogundele said, “is that we start to have a conversation in this country about the disparate experiences of K-12 education and the growing gap between the privileged and the underprivileged. It is not closing. It is growing, and it’s growing significantly.”

About this story

States where affirmative action was banned before 2021 and later challenged or repealed are not considered in this analysis. Charts represent data from public four-year institutions and do not include enrollment of part-time undergraduates or students not seeking a degree. Selective schools are based on the university with the lowest admissions rate for the given state in recent years. In the case of California, UCLA and UC Berkeley are used for selective schools. For Arizona, the state’s flagship school, the University of Arizona, is considered as its selective school.

Advertisement

Fall enrollment and admissions data is from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) at the National Center for Education Statistics. IPEDS adopted new race reporting guidelines in 2008, which separated the Asian/Pacific Islander group into two separate categories of “Asian” and “Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.” These changes are reflected in this story’s analysis from 2010 onward.

Population data is from the American Community Survey and National Cancer Institute. National Cancer Institute data includes a singular “Asian/Pacific Islander” category. In cases where comparisons between student and state populations were made, Asian, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander categories were standardized to “Asian/Pacific Islander.” International students and students with unknown race/ethnicity in the data are not included in totals.

John Harden contributed to this report. Editing by Emily M. Eng and Kevin Uhrmacher.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/06/29/affirmative-action-banned-what-happens/

Published and (C) by Common Dreams
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0..

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/commondreams/

You are viewing proxied material from magical.fish. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.