Seeking to avoid litigation or a legal threat, many postsecondary institutions are responding to a legal and policy environment that seeks to end the consideration of race in education policies by adopting race-neutral policies and practices in admissions, even when not explicitly required to do so by law. Yet, such responses may introduce new barriers and challenges for administrators seeking to promote inclusive campus environments and support students of color, not only within admissions but in other areas of campus life after students enroll. Understanding the consequences of these institutional responses is critical for those addressing the potential limitations a race-neutral approach puts on diversity-related policies and practices.
Purpose/Objective
In this study, we examine how key players charged with implementing diversity-related policies and practices understand legal developments around affirmative action and the institutional responses to these developments, in particular, how they influence their efforts to support racial and ethnic diversity. To explore the wide-ranging influence of the current race-neutral policy climate, we focus our study on a public flagship university that has opted to employ race-neutral admissions policies and practices as a matter of institutional policy—not by law.
Participants
Informed by a bottom-up policy implementation framework, we examine the influence of the legal environment from the perspective of administrators who are tasked with carrying out the institution's mission as it relates to diversity. We particularly target administrators who are engaged in outreach and recruitment efforts and who help support students after they enroll.
Research Design
In this qualitative study, we draw from document analysis and semi-structured interviews of 13 administrators charged with implementing diversity policy at a public flagship institution to investigate how this legal and policy climate has shaped racial diversity work in areas outside admissions.
Findings
Our findings illustrate how a colorblind approach in policy-making takes hold through seemingly innocuous practices and responses that are called race neutral. These practices, which start in admissions, spill over into other areas of university policy, and shift the nature of diversity-work.
Conclusions
Findings point to the importance of intentional efforts to implement diversity policy through a race- and racism-conscious lens, develop narratives that counter distorted narratives about racial discrimination, and address legal terms and definitions that do not reflect a realistic understanding of inequality or discrimination.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams v. Richardson, 356 F. Supp. 92 (D.D.C., 1973).
AhmedS. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Durham, N.C: Duke University Press.
4.
AlgerJ. R. (2013). A supreme challenge: Achieving the educational and societal benefits of diversity after the Supreme Court's Fisher decision. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 6(3), 147—154.
5.
BaberL. D. (2015). Examining post-racial ideology in higher education. Teachers College Record, 117(14), 5—26.
6.
BackesB. (2012). Do affirmative action bans lower minority college enrollment and attainment? Evidence from statewide bans. Journal of Human Resources, 47(2), 435—455.
7.
BellD. (2004). Silent covenants: Brown v. Board of Education and the unfulfilled hopes for racial reform. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
8.
BermanP. (1977). The study of macro-and micro-implementation. Public Policy, 26(2), 157—184.
9.
BermanP. (1980). Thinking about programmed and adaptive implementation: Matching strategies to situations. In IngramH., and MannD. (Eds.). Why policies succeed or fail. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10.
BerreyE. (2015). The enigma of diversity: The language of race and the limits of racial justice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11.
Bonilla-SilvaE. (2014). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. 4th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
12.
BowenW. G., & BokD. (1998). The shape of the river: Long-term consequences of considering race in college and university admissions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
13.
CarterR. T., ForsythJ. M., MazzulaS. L., & WilliamsB. (2005). Racial discrimination and race-based traumatic stress: An exploratory investigation. Handbook of racial-cultural psychology and counseling: Training and practice, 2, 447—476.
14.
Carter AndrewsD. J., & TuittF. (Eds.). (2013). Contesting the myth of a “post racial era”: The continued significance of race in U.S. education. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
15.
ChemerinskyE. (2014). Making schools more separate and unequal: Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1. Michigan State Law Review, 633.
16.
ColemanA. L., PalmerS. R., & WinnickS. Y. (2008). Race-neutral policies in higher education: From theory to action. Washington, DC: The College Board.
17.
CrenshawK. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241—1299.
18.
CreswellJ. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
DensonN. (2009). Do curricular and cocurricular diversity activities influence racial bias? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 805—838.
20.
DiamondJ. B., RandolphA., & SpillaneJ. P. (2004). Teachers' expectations and sense of responsibility for student learning: The importance of race, class, and organizational habitus. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 35(1), 75—98.
21.
DiTomasoN. (2013). The American non-dilemma: Racial inequality without racism. New York, NY: The Russell Sage Foundation.
22.
DovidioJ. F., & GaertnerS. L. (1999). Reducing prejudice combating intergroup biases. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(4), 101—105.
23.
DovidioJ. F., KawakamiK., & GaertnerS. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 62—68.
24.
EspinosaL. L., ChessmanH. M., & WaytL. (2016, March 8). Racial climate on campus: A survey of college presidents. Retrieved from https://higheredtoday.org/2016/03/08/
25.
EspinosaL. L., GaertnerM., & OrfieldG. (2015). Race, class and college access: Achieving diversity in a shifting legal landscape. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
26.
FinniganK. S., & ScarbroughB. (2013). Defining (and denying) diversity through interdistrict choice. Journal of School Choice, 7(2), 142—162.
27.
Fisher v. University of Texas (Fisher I), 570 U.S. 297 (2013).
28.
Fisher v. University of Texas (Fisher II), 136 S. Ct. 2198 (2016)
29.
FloresS. M., & HornC. L. (2015). Texas top ten percent plan: How it works, what are its limits, and recommendations to consider. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
30.
GarcesL. M. (2012a). Racial diversity, legitimacy and the citizenry: The impact of affirmative action bans on graduate school enrollment. Review of Higher Education, 36(1), 93—132.
31.
GarcesL. M. (2012b). Necessary but not sufficient: The impact of Grutter v. Bollinger on student of color enrollment in graduate and professional schools in Texas. The Journal of Higher Education, 83(4), 497—534.
32.
GarcesL. M. (2013). Understanding the impact of affirmative action bans in different graduate fields of study. American Educational Research Journal, 50(2), 251—284.
33.
GarcesL. M. (2014). Aligning diversity, quality, and equity: The implications of legal and public policy developments for promoting racial diversity in graduate studies. American Journal of Education, 120(4), 457—480.
34.
GarcesL. M., & CogburnC. D. (2015). Beyond declines in student body diversity: How campus-level administrators understand a prohibition on race-conscious postsecondary admissions policies. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 828—860.
35.
GarcesL. M., & CogburnC. D. (2016). Navigating legal barriers while promoting racial diversity in higher education. In FrankenbergE., GarcesL. M., & HopkinsM. (Eds.), Advancing integration for equity across the educational pipeline (pp. 189–203). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
36.
GarcesL. M., & Gordon da CruzC. (2017). A strategic racial equity framework. Peabody Journal of Education, 92(3), 322—342.
37.
GarcesL. M., & JayakumarU. M. (2014). Dynamic diversity toward a contextual understanding of critical mass. Educational Researcher, 43(3), 115—124.
38.
GarcesL. M., & Mickey-PabelloD. (2015). Racial diversity in the medical profession: The impact of affirmative action bans on underrepresented student of color matriculation in medical schools. The Journal of Higher Education, 86(2), 264—294.
39.
GarcesL. M., & PoonO. (2018). Asian Americans and race-conscious policies: Understanding the conservative opposition's strategy of misinformation, intimidation, and racial division. Los Angeles, CA: Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles.
40.
GlasenerK. M., MartellC. A., & PosseltJ. R. (2018). Framing diversity: Examining the place of race in institutional policy and practice post-affirmative action. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000086
41.
GlasenerK. M., MartellC. A., & PosseltJ. R. (2016, November). Keeping race on the radar? Administrators' diversity framing and awareness of admissions policy in a post-affirmative action context. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. Columbus, OH.
HarrellS. P. (2000). A multidimensional conceptualization of racism-related stress: Implications for the well-being of people of color. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 70(1), 42—57.
46.
HjernB. (1982). Implementation research: The link gone missing. Journal of Public Policy, 2(3), 301—308.
47.
HjernB., & PorterD. O. (1981). Implementation structures: A new unit of administrative analysis. Organization studies, 2(3), 211—227.
48.
HinrichsP. (2012). The effects of affirmative action bans on college enrollment, educational attainment, and the demographic composition of universities. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(3), 712—722.
49.
HirschmanD., & BerreyE. (2017). The partial deinstitutionalization of affirmative action in U.S. higher education, 1988–2014. Preprint retrieved from https://osf.io/2cruk/
50.
HurtadoS., MilemJ., Clayton-PedersenA., & AllenW. (1999). Enacting diverse learning environments: Improving the climate for racial/ethnic diversity in higher education. ASHEERIC Higher Education Report, 26(8). ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education. Washington, DC.
51.
JayakumarU. M., & AdamianA. S. (2015). Toward a critical race praxis for educational research: Lessons from affirmative action and social science advocacy. Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity, 1(1), 21—58.
52.
JayakumarU. M., GarcesL. M., & ParkJ. (2018). Reclaiming diversity: Advancing the next generation of diversity research toward racial equity. Handbook of Theory and Research, 33, 11—79.
53.
JohnsonB., & ChristensenL. B. (2017). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54.
JonesS. M. (2014). Diversity leadership under race-neutral policies in higher education. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 33(8), 708—720.
55.
KidderW. C., & GándaraP. (2017). Two decades after the affirmative action ban: Evaluating the University of California's race-neutral efforts. In G. Orfield (Ed.), Alternative paths to diversity: Exploring and implementing effective college admissions policies (Research Report No. RR-17-40, pp. 25—48). doi:10.1002/ets2.12121.
56.
KohliR. (2016). Behind school doors: The impact of hostile racial climates on urban teachers of color. Urban Education, 1—27
57.
KurasakiK. S. (2000). Intercoder reliability for validating conclusions drawn from open-ended interview data. Field methods, 12(3), 179—194.
58.
LedesmaM. C. (2016). Complicating the binary: Towards a discussion of campus climate health. Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity, 2(1), 6—35.
59.
LewisA. E., & DiamondJ. B. (2015). Despite the best intentions: How racial inequality thrives in good schools. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
60.
LipskyM. (1971). Street-level bureaucracy and the analysis of urban reform. Urban Affairs Quarterly, (June), 391—409.
61.
LipskyM. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
62.
LipskyM. (2010). Street-Level Bureaucracy, 30th Ann. Ed.: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services (30th ed.). New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation.
63.
LongM. C., & TiendaM. (2008). Winners and losers: Changes in Texas university admissions post-Hopwood. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 255—280.
64.
LopezI. H. (2007). “A nation of minorities”: Race, ethnicity, and reactionary colorblindness. Stanford Law Review, 59(4), 985—1064.
65.
LykeS. B. (2013). Catch twenty-wu? The oral argument in Fisher v. University of Texas and the obfuscation of critical mass. Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, 107, 209—223.
66.
MatlandR. E. (1995). Synthesizing the implementation literature: The ambiguity-conflict model of policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 5(2), 145—174.
67.
MaxwellJ. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (applied social research methods). Washington, DC: SAGE.
68.
MilemJ. F., ChangM. J., & AntonioA. L. (2005). Making diversity work on campus: A research-based perspective. Washington, DC: Association American Colleges and Universities.
69.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
70.
MinowM. (2010). In Brown's wake: Legacies of America's educational landmark. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
71.
NuñezA. M. (2014). Employing multilevel intersectionality in educational research: Latino identities, contexts, and college access. Educational Researcher, 43(2), 85—92.
PollockM. (2009). Colormute: Race talk dilemmas in an American school. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
77.
PosseltJ. R. (2016). Inside graduate admissions: Merit, diversity, and faculty gatekeeping. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
78.
PülzlH., & TreibO. (2006). Implementing public policy. In FischerF., GeraldG. J., MillerJ., and SidneyM. S. (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics, and methods (pp. 89—107). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
79.
ReardonS. F., BakerR., KasmanM., KlasikD., & TownsendJ. B. (2015). Can socioeconomic status substitute for race in affirmative action college admissions policies? Evidence from a simulation model. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/reardon_white_paper.pdf
80.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978).
81.
SaldañaJ. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
82.
SlayK. (2016, November). Undergraduate recruitment, post-Proposal 2: Race, climate, and the distraction of diversity. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. Columbus, OH.
83.
SmithW. A., AllenW. R., & DanleyL. L. (2007). “Assume the position … you fit the description”: Psychosocial experiences and racial battle fatigue among African American male college students. American Behavioral Scientist, 51(4), 551—578.
84.
SolórzanoD. (1998) Critical race theory, racial and gender microaggressions, and the experiences of Chicana and Chicano scholars. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 121—136.
85.
SolórzanoD., CejaM., & YossoT. (2001). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of African American college students. Journal of Negro Education, 69(1/2), 60—73.
86.
SteeleC. (2010). Whistling Vivaldi: And other clues to how stereotypes affect us. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
87.
TempletonE., LoveB., DavisB. H., & DavisM.Jr. (2016). Illusion of inclusion: University policies that perpetuate exclusion of student of color. Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity, 2(1), 88—115.
The Pennsylvania State University. (2003). 20th anniversary report of the Equal Opportunity Planning Committee. Retrieved from http://equity.psu.edu/eopc/docs/report.pdf
90.
The Pennsylvania State University. (2014). Analysis and recommendations: Fall 2014 review of A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State: 2010–15 and 2014–15 through 2018–19 diversity initiatives. Retrieved from http://equity.psu.edu/updates/pdf/analysis-2014-review
WarikooN. K. (2016). The diversity bargain and other dilemmas of race, admissions, and meritocracy at elite universities. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
95.
WelchS., & GruhlJ. (1998). Does Bakke matter? Affirmative action and minority enrollments in medical and law schools. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
96.
Welcome to Educational Equity: Fostering diversity and inclusion at Penn State (n.d.). Retrieved from http://equity.psu.edu/about
97.
WightmanL. F. (1997). Threat to diversity in legal education: An empirical analysis of the consequences of abandoning race as a factor in law school admission decisions. New York University Law Review, 72(1), 1—53.
98.
WilliamsD. R. (1999). Race, socioeconomic status, and health: The added effects of racism and discrimination. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 896, 173—88.
