DeBriefing the Impact of Supreme Court Rulings: Upholding DEI Efforts in Higher Education and Beyond (Predictions and Actions)
As I attended the virtual presentation by Dr. Shaun R. Harper at the USC Race and Equity Center, I was struck by the insightful predictions he shared regarding the potential consequences of the Supreme Court ruling on university and college admissions programs. Dr. Harper’s predictions offered valuable perspectives on how this decision might shape the landscape of higher education.
Additionally, he provided guidance on legal actions that institutions can employ to continue advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts within the boundaries of the law. Drawing parallels between the higher education sector and the private sector, his framework serves as a blueprint for building a national coalition to broaden and strengthen our collective commitment to inclusivity.
His Eight Predictions About the Impact
Prediction 1: Black student enrollments will decline at many predominantly white institutions, with all minoritized students being negatively affected, and black students facing the most devastating consequences. Dr. Harper referred to previous instances in different states where similar declines were observed, emphasizing the urgency of addressing this issue.
Prediction 2: Enrollments will increase at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). HBCUs have historically played a crucial role in providing opportunities for Black students, and Dr. Harper’s prediction suggests that their significance will further grow in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling.
Prediction 3: Schools with Big-Time Sports Programs will miraculously find admissible black athletes, despite their potential absence from official sports registers. This prediction highlights the need for institutions to ensure equitable representation and access in athletic programs.
Prediction 4: Interpretive Overreach will lead to decreases in race-focused campus initiatives, such as Black Student Unions and other identity-based groups. Dr. Harper cautioned against overinterpretation of the ruling, emphasizing the importance of preserving and sustaining initiatives that promote racial diversity and inclusivity on campuses.
Prediction 5: The number of Faculty and Administrators of Color will decline, particularly in higher-level roles. While representation may persist in trades and labor roles, the underrepresentation of BIPOC individuals in leadership positions remains a pressing concern that institutions must actively address.
Prediction 6: People of color will be further marginalized at predominantly white institutions, exacerbating the feelings of isolation and marginalization already reported by students of color in these environments. The prediction underscores the urgent need to create inclusive and supportive campus climates.
Prediction 7: White students will learn too little and enter professions even less prepared due to fewer opportunities to engage with diverse perspectives. Dr. Harper highlighted the importance of interactional diversity, emphasizing that white students, in particular, benefit greatly from exposure to individuals who do not look like themselves. Failure to provide these opportunities could hinder their preparedness for a racially diverse society, potentially leading to microaggressions.
Prediction 8: White women will be largely unaffected, as historically they have been the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action policies. This prediction serves as a reminder of the ongoing inequities that persist within the higher education landscape and calls for a comprehensive approach to address systemic barriers.
To navigate these challenges, Dr. Harper proposed a set of legal actions that institutions can employ to advance DEI efforts while adhering to legal frameworks:
Action 1: Consistently communicate and demonstrate commitment to diversity and inclusion. It is essential for institutions to articulate their dedication to DEI and consistently demonstrate it through tangible actions. Clear and transparent communication can reinforce the institution’s commitment to fostering an inclusive environment.
Action 2: Develop an institutional strategy that goes beyond mere taskforce reports. An effective strategy should be multi-pronged, measurable, and resource-backed, addressing areas such as admissions, hiring, and community outreach. It should provide a comprehensive framework for advancing DEI efforts.
Action 3: Pursue solutions both internally and collaboratively with peer institutions. Engaging in collective impact strategies with similar institutions can yield powerful outcomes. Collaboration allows for sharing of best practices, collective problem-solving, and amplification of impact.
Action 4: Read the full Supreme Court opinion, resist overreach, and misinterpretation. Understanding the nuances of the ruling is crucial to protect existing diversity initiatives and prevent misinterpretation that might hamper progress. Leveraging the court’s opinion can provide institutions with the legal grounds to maintain their diversity-focused programs.
Action 5: Triangulate legal counsel by seeking diverse perspectives from both internal and external legal experts. Multiple viewpoints and expertise are invaluable in navigating the complex legal landscape surrounding DEI efforts. Engaging external legal counsel and consulting established organizations can provide a broader understanding of the permissible strategies.
Action 6: Discontinue the use of standardized entrance exams, such as the SAT, ACT, and others, in undergraduate and graduate admissions. Relying less on these tests helps address biases and barriers that might disproportionately affect marginalized communities and ensures a more equitable admissions process.
Action 7: Drop out of the US News and World Report Rankings. Institutions must reconsider their reliance on rankings that emphasize exclusivity, as these rankings often perpetuate inequities. A shift away from such rankings encourages a focus on the overall quality of education and diversity initiatives.
Action 8: Invest more resources and strategic focus into college preparatory partnerships, particularly for highly selective institutions. Recognizing their social responsibility, wealthier institutions should allocate resources to support college prep programs that serve students from marginalized communities. By investing in pipeline programs and partnerships, these institutions can help bridge educational gaps and provide equitable opportunities.
Action 9: Adopt proactive recruitment practices akin to big-time football and men’s basketball coaches. Instead of waiting for prospective students to apply, institutions should actively seek out and recruit talented students from diverse backgrounds, expanding their outreach efforts to include a broader range of schools and communities.
Action 10: Provide race-conscious professional learning experiences for admissions officers and other staff. Implicit bias training and ongoing professional development can equip admissions officers with the knowledge and skills to implement legally permissible and culturally sensitive recruitment strategies. Such efforts contribute to a more inclusive admissions process.
Action 11: Avoid raceless marketing techniques and adopt targeted marketing strategies that acknowledge and appeal to various communities. By tailoring marketing efforts to specific groups and their unique experiences, institutions can better communicate their commitment to diversity and attract a more diverse pool of applicants.
Action 12: Publicly and continuously communicate the impact of the Supreme Court decision on DEI efforts. Sharing the effects and consequences of the ruling on a national scale raises awareness and puts pressure on elected officials to address the issues surrounding diversity and inclusion in education.
Action 13: Address the mindsets that undermine student and faculty diversity. Recognizing that policies and practices alone cannot eliminate barriers, institutions must also address implicit biases and prejudiced beliefs that hinder the full realization of diversity. Measuring and monitoring mindset shifts is essential to fostering inclusive environments.
Action 14: Support and contribute to efforts that combat politicized attacks on DEI. By supporting organizations like The National DEI Defense Fund, institutions can collectively counter well-funded movements that seek to undermine DEI initiatives. Financial support can help defend the legality of race-conscious admissions and promote alternative approaches.
In conclusion, the predictions and legal actions discussed in Dr. Harper’s presentation shed light on the complex challenges and opportunities that arise from Supreme Court rulings impacting DEI efforts in higher education. By navigating these challenges with intention, commitment, and collaborative action, institutions can continue advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion within the framework of the law.
Embracing these strategies and staying vigilant in addressing systemic barriers will help foster inclusive environments that benefit all members of our society, both in academia and beyond.
Effenus Henderson
