The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling nullifying affirmative action in college admissions is sure to have ripple effects across higher education for years to come. The debate leading up to the court’s ruling sparked a passion for accessibility, fairness, and merit in the complex admissions process, and some misconceptions about affirmative action.

Now that it is illegal to consider race in admissions decisions, how will educators continue to accommodate racially diverse students in the future, and how will they pay for the high costs of doing so? I am worried about paying.

Common misconceptions about the role and practice of affirmative action include:

Affirmative action takes advantage of racial assignments

incorrect. The U.S. Supreme Court has voided the use of racial quotas. 1978 Judgment on Alan BakkeA white man twice denied admission to medical school at the University of California, Davis, despite having higher grades and test scores than incoming students of color. But the court also ruled that race could be used as one of several factors in college admissions to create a diverse class.

Affirmative Action Benefits Only Students of Color

Not according to research. Affirmative action helps create a diverse hierarchy. Years of research have shown Students of all races and ethnicities benefit from its diversity and are able to develop higher levels of social, emotional and cognitive skills such as critical thinking and problem solving. Diversity experience will also help you in your career. In one survey of large employers, 96% said it was “important” for employees to “feel comfortable working with colleagues, customers and/or clients from diverse cultural backgrounds.”

Affirmative action keeps qualified Asian students away from top schools

Admissions procedures are usually shrouded in secrecy, making it difficult to know why students are accepted or rejected by top universities. However, Asian Americans make up the largest percentage of students of color in most select institutions, including those that employ affirmative action, and that percentage is disproportionate. At Harvard University, for example, Asian Americans make up 20% of undergraduates, followed by Latinos at 12% and Black students at 9%. Federal University Scorecard Latest update April 2023.

At USC, Asian Americans make up 24% of undergraduate students, Latino students 17%, and Black students 6%.

Asian-Americans also make up the largest population group at the University of California, a percentage that is the largest since the 1996 passage of Proposition 209, which outlaws the use of race and gender in public education, employment, and contracting. Not much has changed. In 1995, before the ban, and in 1998, the first year of enrollment after the ban took effect, Asian Americans made up 35% of first-year students at UC. That figure will rise to 38% by the fall of 2022, according to University of California data. At the University of California, black and Latino student numbers fell after the Proposition 209 ban, but have since increased to exceed previous levels.

Outstanding students from all backgrounds are routinely rejected by elite institutions for lack of seats. Carol Christ, president of the University of California, Berkeley, used to say that her campus could fill every seat with straight-A students, but there just wasn’t enough space to accommodate them all.

Most Universities Nationwide Have Adopted Affirmative Action

wrong. Higher-education experts say a select few institutions consider race when enrolling.

According to one report, out of 1,364 four-year colleges in the country, only 17 (including Stanford, Harvard, and Yale) have less than 10% of applicants, and 29 have less than 10% of applicants. % to less than 20% (USC, UCLA, University of California, Berkeley, etc.). 2019 Pew Research Survey.

These elite schools do not represent higher education as a whole, only 3.4% of colleges and 4.1% of students. They use affirmative action to advance their mission by valuing diversity and opportunity for students of all backgrounds.

In fact, experts say most institutions accept most students who apply. That means you don’t have to use race as a factor when allocating seats. Rather, they mostly look to grades and transcripts to assess whether an applicant is likely to be accepted, experts say.

Affirmative action is a major competitive advantage and a college admissions ‘hook’

wrong. Academic achievements such as grades, test scores, and high school transcript rigor are the most important criteria for college admissions.above all In 2020, according to one study, 787 colleges reported offering such aspirations to their applicants, and solicitations for “legacy” (children of graduates) are widely used. Fall 2022 Report To Now is the time for education reform, is a non-partisan non-profit think tank. The practice was found to be most common at private universities in the Northeast, according to the report.

In anticipation of the Supreme Court banning affirmative action, such birth-right incentives have come under increasing scrutiny as an unfair advantage that primarily benefits white applicants. . Experts predict that universities will have a harder time defending conventional admissions after the affirmative action ban.

of Pew research showed Nearly three-quarters of Americans believe that whether a relative attended the school should not be considered in admissions decisions.

In California, the California Institute of Technology and Pomona College abolished traditional incentives. The University of California does not consider familial relationships in its admissions tests.

Without affirmative action, black and Latino student numbers would plummet

It can be, but it doesn’t have to be.

Universities have spent a long time preparing for the Supreme Court ruling. In preparation for this outcome, many campus leaders say strong recruitment and academic readiness programs in underserved communities of color could help increase enrollment. Such efforts are costly and it is unclear whether there is the financial and political will to sustain such an admissions program.

Experience in California is beneficial.

In the first year of admission under Prop. 209, UCLA and UC Berkeley saw the number of Black and Latino freshmen drop nearly in half.

Since then, the University of California campus has made progress. Black and Latino students in her freshman class in California, who enrolled in the fall of 2022, increased from about 20% before Proposition 209 to more than 43% he. For the third year in a row, Latinx students were the largest ethnic group of enrolled students at about 37. %, followed by an Asian American at 35% of him, a white student at about 19%, and a black student at just under 6%.

The University of California spent $500 million over 20 years to increase diversity using race-neutral measures, such as helping communities with lower incomes and lower parental education. Although we have not been entirely successful in enrolling students who perfectly reflect the ethnic and racial makeup of the state, we have made meaningful progress towards that goal.

California Voters Support Affirmative Action

Even in blue California, the majority of voters said no to affirmative action as of November 2020. Proposition 16, put to the ballot by the Democratic-majority California legislature, would have repealed Proposition 209. But Proposition 16 he was defeated by more than one million votes.

Proposition 16 was criticized by the University of California Regents, presidents of all 10 campuses, and major student organizations for the 27-year statewide ban on affirmative action that has had a particularly negative impact on enrollment for blacks and Latinos. Supported.

But polls by the Institute of Government Research at the University of California, Berkeley and the California Institute of Public Policy showed that Latino voters in California, who make up about a quarter of voters, were 50-50. While white voters were adamantly opposed to the bill, black voters strongly supported it.

Supreme Court ruling will bring big changes to California

Race-based admission incentives are already outlawed at public California universities. So nothing changes there, except that future efforts to restore these preferences at the ballot box are not possible.

But more than 80 private educational institutions in the state were free to consider race in admissions decisions before the Supreme Court’s ruling. It is no longer possible.

Times staff writer Phil Willon contributed to this report.