Black enrollment at UNC drops after ruling. Group who sued now coming for Duke.

  • Thread starter Thread starter altmin
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 166
  • Views: 2K
  • Politics 
I think a decrease in black student enrollment should be expected when the courts tell schools they can include race as criteria.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
I saw the criticisms of the study but they seem pretty trite to me. We're not talking about blacks or Hispanics getting a percent or two bump that could be attributed to something else. I think blacks were something like 70 something percent more likely than a comparable white or Asian applicant to get admitted. I don't think we can attribute that to majors or enrollment management.
Click to expand...
It’s impossible to be sure, given the absence of data. I don’t think it’s going to wipe away any and all perceived advantage for URM applicants, particularly at Harvard, but for schools that admit by major, program, or college, it could have a significant effect. Even in those that don’t, there will always be some internal resistance to having one or two majors dominate campus at most colleges, more so if the interest in those majors has exploded in a way that outpaces the college’s ability to muster the resources necessary to support that growth. Even MIT has had some difficulty adjusting to the reality of more than 4 in 10 students majoring in CS.

Colleges invest a lot of time and money predicting which applicants would attend if admitted and admission is very much influenced by those predictions. It’s critical from a resource utilization (esp. dorms and FA) and revenue perspective. This is why admit rates for binding admission are so much higher than non-binding application options (despite what the colleges say publicly). A few years ago, the admit rates for ED at the Ivies that offer it were in the range of 15-30%. For RD, they were more like 2-4%. For some colleges binding decision accounts for 2/3 or more of the matriculating students. The schools are very reluctant to share the complete data (or in the case of UChicago, damn near any of the data - it’s been estimated their student body is as much as 80% binding admits) so we don’t know the demographic % of applicants applying/admitted during EA, EDI, EDII, and RD. It’s possible the effects of these two factors could explain a meaningful portion of the difference in admit rates for a given SAT/GPA range.
 
BlooVooDoo said:
It’s impossible to be sure, given the absence of data. I don’t think it’s going to wipe away any and all perceived advantage for URM applicants, particularly at Harvard, but for schools that admit by major, program, or college, it could have a significant effect. Even in those that don’t, there will always be some internal resistance to having one or two majors dominate campus at most colleges, more so if the interest in those majors has exploded in a way that outpaces the college’s ability to muster the resources necessary to support that growth. Even MIT has had some difficulty adjusting to the reality of more than 4 in 10 students majoring in CS.

Colleges invest a lot of time and money predicting which applicants would attend if admitted and admission is very much influenced by those predictions. It’s critical from a resource utilization (esp. dorms and FA) and revenue perspective. This is why admit rates for binding admission are so much higher than non-binding application options (despite what the colleges say publicly). A few years ago, the admit rates for ED at the Ivies that offer it were in the range of 15-30%. For RD, they were more like 2-4%. For some colleges binding decision accounts for 2/3 or more of the matriculating students. The schools are very reluctant to share the complete data (or in the case of UChicago, damn near any of the data - it’s been estimated their student body is as much as 80% binding admits) so we don’t know the demographic % of applicants applying/admitted during EA, EDI, EDII, and RD. It’s possible the effects of these two factors could explain a meaningful portion of the difference in admit rates for a given SAT/GPA range.
Click to expand...
It is stunning to me how often they predict who will come if offered a spot..Every once in while a few hundred more than predicted actually come It is something else what they manage to predict
 
wmheel1287 said:
That lines up with what I hear from the elementary teacher spouse. He says that his Asian and Indian parents are constantly stressing over EOGs even on the first day of school and continually asking for more work, more testing, more of everything. While he appreciates the involvement, he gets REALLY frustrated with them not letting these kids just be kids.
Click to expand...
There's a reason we are not in the top 10 in education among industrialized nations. My kids are just recently out of high school so I saw first hand why. I don't disagree with part of your premise and think the Asian and Indian cultures can push kids to far but we have gone to far the opposite way. We don't push hard enough.
 
Callatoroy said:
There's a reason we are not in the top 10 in education among industrialized nations. My kids are just recently out of high school so I saw first hand why. I don't disagree with part of your premise and think the Asian and Indian cultures can push kids to far but we have gone to far the opposite way. We don't push hard enough.
Click to expand...
I am not arguing with you But regarding Universities I think we are top of the heap?
 
Callatoroy said:
There's a reason we are not in the top 10 in education among industrialized nations. My kids are just recently out of high school so I saw first hand why. I don't disagree with part of your premise and think the Asian and Indian cultures can push kids to far but we have gone to far the opposite way. We don't push hard enough.
Click to expand...
Don't disagree, but not sure about the quality of life. When I was young I was in tennis clinics after school. Very intense clinics from 3:30-7:30. Everyone was ranked and we all played Southern and National tournaments in addition to NC tournaments. It was a huge time drag. I remember in 8th grade, after a long week of hitting, one our our buddies (the only Indian in the group), lamented to me while we were waiting for our parents to pick us up. He said, "I bet you get to go home and watch MTV or play Stratego/Risk/Whatever". I asked him if he didn't get to do that and he said, no, "he still had piano lessons in addition to practicing violin before supper." He told me non-tournament weekends his parents, both MDs, insisted he go to museums.

He went on to be a urologist. He told me at a class reunion he never plays tennis or any sports anymore that he's too busy.
 
mpaer said:
I am not arguing with you But regarding Universities I think we are top of the heap?
Click to expand...
Right, so it stands to reason that the cultures that prioritize education in K - 12 are going to have the greatest number of achievers who "out class" the others when applying to schools at the top of the heap. I think the answer is for UNC to market themselves to the highest achievers in the black and latino communities. If the numbers drop because it is now completely merit based then target those who qualify in the demographics you want to see increase. SC can't do shit about your marketing plan.
 
Harvard released demographics from their incoming class. Blacks dropped from 18% to 14%. Latino increased slightly. Asian held steady.

It seems Universities are all over the board. Some like Duke and UVA saw no significant changes while others like MIT saw some significant declines in blacks and Latinos.

We also saw a lot fewer people identifying a race at some schools. This is possibly because it is no longer likely to give them an advantage in admissions.

www.cbsnews.com

Harvard reports drop in Black enrollment after Supreme Court affirmative action ruling

Harvard University was at the center of the Supreme Court case that ended affirmative action.
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com
 
This would certainly make some of the HBUs more appealing. Different traditions but good reasons for both to have a strong appeal.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
Harvard released demographics from their incoming class. Blacks dropped from 18% to 14%. Latino increased slightly. Asian held steady.

It seems Universities are all over the board. Some like Duke and UVA saw no significant changes while others like MIT saw some significant declines in blacks and Latinos.

We also saw a lot fewer people identifying a race at some schools. This is possibly because it is no longer likely to give them an advantage in admissions.

www.cbsnews.com

Harvard reports drop in Black enrollment after Supreme Court affirmative action ruling

Harvard University was at the center of the Supreme Court case that ended affirmative action.
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com
Click to expand...
I think one of the reasons admissions demographics are “all over the board” is that colleges have adopted a variety of approaches to meet their desire for diversity while complying with the Court’s decision. I expect a lot of adjustments over the next few years, both from colleges and applicants. There are several mechanisms by which colleges can get very close to the enrollment distribution they had prior to SFFA, if they want.
 
finesse said:
This would certainly make some of the HBUs more appealing. Different traditions but good reasons for both to have a strong appeal.
Click to expand...
There is definitely an uptick in HBCU enrollment. The causes of the surge are unclear but its likely a lot of different factors possibly including the ruling.

www.highereddive.com

Some HBCUs are seeing enrollment surge. Here’s why.

Leaders experiencing head count increases attribute them to a racial awakening, student success efforts and new funding.
www.highereddive.com www.highereddive.com
 
BlooVooDoo said:
I think one of the reasons admissions demographics are “all over the board” is that colleges have adopted a variety of approaches to meet their desire for diversity while complying with the Court’s decision. I expect a lot of adjustments over the next few years, both from colleges and applicants. There are several mechanisms by which colleges can get very close to the enrollment distribution they had prior to SFFA, if they want.
Click to expand...
The Daily did an interesting episode about this a week or two ago- I'll link the transcript below. A couple of points I thought were interesting:
1. Colleges seem to be using class as a proxy for race, which has led to an increase in economic diversity across the board and has contributed to some of the mixed results in maintaining current levels of racial diversity.
2. Colleges are looking to both increase fundraising for scholarship (knowing that they might have fewer students paying full boat than before) as we've seen increases in Pell students at places like Duke and UVA partially due to this use of class as a proxy for race.
3. Colleges are- as some have suggested- trying to increase their marketing efforts in racially diverse areas to increase applications from those areas.
4. Interesting to see that this was already illegal in places like California and Texas before the Supreme Court ruling and to see that some schools (UCLA) were able to get back to their levels of diversity from before it became illegal while others (Cal) were not. Suggests that the burden will be on the schools to find other ways to make diversity happen.
 
DurhamK said:
The Daily did an interesting episode about this a week or two ago- I'll link the transcript below. A couple of points I thought were interesting:
1. Colleges seem to be using class as a proxy for race, which has led to an increase in economic diversity across the board and has contributed to some of the mixed results in maintaining current levels of racial diversity.
2. Colleges are looking to both increase fundraising for scholarship (knowing that they might have fewer students paying full boat than before) as we've seen increases in Pell students at places like Duke and UVA partially due to this use of class as a proxy for race.
3. Colleges are- as some have suggested- trying to increase their marketing efforts in racially diverse areas to increase applications from those areas.
4. Interesting to see that this was already illegal in places like California and Texas before the Supreme Court ruling and to see that some schools (UCLA) were able to get back to their levels of diversity from before it became illegal while others (Cal) were not. Suggests that the burden will be on the schools to find other ways to make diversity happen.
Click to expand...
Thanks so much for the information Sounds like smart Universities are still focuse on diversity I think CFORd said in a past post that something 20% of incoming kids at UNC are on the full scholarship aimed at lower income kids/first generation College kids .I saw where that major Univ in Durham gives no cost to NC Residents from families with incomes under $150,00
 
DurhamK said:
The Daily did an interesting episode about this a week or two ago- I'll link the transcript below. A couple of points I thought were interesting:
1. Colleges seem to be using class as a proxy for race, which has led to an increase in economic diversity across the board and has contributed to some of the mixed results in maintaining current levels of racial diversity.
2. Colleges are looking to both increase fundraising for scholarship (knowing that they might have fewer students paying full boat than before) as we've seen increases in Pell students at places like Duke and UVA partially due to this use of class as a proxy for race.
3. Colleges are- as some have suggested- trying to increase their marketing efforts in racially diverse areas to increase applications from those areas.
4. Interesting to see that this was already illegal in places like California and Texas before the Supreme Court ruling and to see that some schools (UCLA) were able to get back to their levels of diversity from before it became illegal while others (Cal) were not. Suggests that the burden will be on the schools to find other ways to make diversity happen.
Click to expand...

I really think this is the right idea. Take race out of the equation and if seeking economic diversity leads to racial diversity, that's fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top