Expanding Opportunity in Higher Education: Leveraging Promise

7. Reaping the Benefits of Grutter: College Admissions and Racial/Ethnic Diversity

The tool of affirmative action, while useful in its own right, has not succeeded in lifting the country’s higher education system out of crisis. As outlined in the introductory chapter of this volume, even with the use of race-conscious admissions policies, there continues to be enormous disparity between college admission rates of students of color—particularly Blacks and Latinos—and Whites. Despite the gaps it has not been able to fill, however, affirmative action continues to be an important tool for the higher education community in working toward increasing access to college for traditionally underserved students. In June 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two critically important decisions related to affirmative action and higher education and rekindled a broader discussion of how to work toward racial/ethnic diversity on college campuses. Specifically, the Supreme Court’s Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger decisions confirmed both the compelling governmental interest of racially/ethnically diverse college campuses and the legality of narrowly tailored race-conscious means by which to achieve that diversity. As stated in the majority opinion in Grutter, “In summary, the Equal Protection 167 CATHERINE L. HORN PATRICIA MARIN Chapter Seven Reaping the Benefits of Grutter: College Admissions and Racial/Ethnic Diversity Clause does not prohibit the Law School’s narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body” (p. 32). Within this legal framework, postsecondary institutions (where state law does not prohibit it) are now empowered to (re)consider the ways in which students are assessed and admitted to their campuses. In particular, colleges and universities can think broadly about how admission procedures might work to enhance both the institutional and broader social justice agenda of expanding access and, from that, reaping the benefits of racial/ethnic diversity. Even for those states unaffected by Grutter because of overriding state law, such as California, with a non-White student body majority and a population increasing in its diversity , the challenge of expanding access nonetheless remains. This chapter sets out to rethink how postsecondary institutions might consider proactively using their admission processes to promote racially/ethnically diverse campuses considering the broader goal of increasing access to higher education. It begins with a synopsis of the major historical, legal, and political events that have influenced access to higher education over the last half-century and led up to the University of Michigan affirmative action lawsuits . Within that context, the chapter next highlights the documented benefits of racial/ethnic diversity and discusses what the literature reveals about the effectiveness of various “race-neutral” admissions procedures at achieving such diversity on college campuses, particularly those tried within the last decade. Finally, it offers key considerations for reconceptualizing college admission procedures that might work toward achieving diverse student bodies rather than acting as additional barriers. This chapter will concentrate its discussion on the most selective campuses across the country because they are the institutions for which race-conscious admission policies are most relevant (Kane, 1998). HISTORICAL, LEGAL, AND POLITICAL BACKDROP During the first forty years of the twentieth century, the majority of students on college campuses mirrored the dominant society—primarily wealthy, White males. Shortly after World War II, however, a sea change began to occur. The GI Bill, implemented in 1944, afforded hundreds of thousands of less affluent individuals an opportunity to attend college, and the country responded with a large expansion of its higher education infrastructure (Orfield, 1998). Further, the courts began to endorse the rights of minorities to an “equal” education comparable to that received by Whites (Missouri ex Rel. Gaines v. Canada; Sweatt v. Painter; Brown v. Board of Education). Serious interest in creating access to higher education did not begin in earnest, however, until the 1960s. The broader civil rights movement, coupled with 168 Catherine L. Horn and Patricia Marin increasing local, state, and federal attempts to end segregation and discrimination in the workplace, acted as the catalyst for such higher education efforts. In particular, several executive orders and the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 reinforced a broad political desire to enhance minority opportunities in the United States. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act specifically furthered the desegregation of elementary, secondary, and postsecondary institutions by threatening to withhold federal funds from those programs that did not provide equal educational opportunity regardless of race...