affirmative action essay questions

How to Talk About Race on College Applications, According to Admissions Experts

R afael Figueroa, dean of college guidance at Albuquerque Academy, was in the middle of tutoring Native American and Native Hawaiian students on how to write college application essays when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the race-conscious college admissions processes at Harvard and the University of North Carolina are unconstitutional .

Earlier in the week, he told the students that they shouldn’t feel like they need to talk about their ethnicity in their essays. But after the June 29 Supreme Court ruling , he backtracked. “If I told you that you didn’t have to write about your native or cultural identity, you need to get ready to do another supplemental essay” on it or prepare a story that can fit into short answer questions, he says he told them.

For high school seniors of color applying to colleges in the coming years, the essay and short answer sections will take on newfound importance. Chief Justice John Roberts suggested as much when he wrote in his majority opinion, “Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration or otherwise.” That “discussion” is usually in an essay, and many colleges have additional short-answer questions that allow students to expand more on their background and where they grew up.

“The essay is going to take up a lot more space than maybe it has in the past because people are going to be really trying to understand who this person is that is going to come into our community,” says Timothy Fields, senior associate dean of undergraduate admission at Emory University.

Now, college admissions officers are trying to figure out how to advise high schoolers on their application materials to give them the best chance to showcase their background under the new rules, which will no longer allow colleges or universities to use race as an explicit factor in admissions decisions .

Shereem Herndon-Brown, who co-wrote The Black Family’s Guide to College Admissions with Fields, says students of color can convey their racial and ethnic backgrounds by writing about their families and their upbringing. “I’ve worked with students for years who have written amazing essays about how they spend Yom Kippur with their family, which clearly signals to a college that they are Jewish—how they listened to the conversations from their grandfather about escaping parts of Europe… Their international or immigrant story comes through whether it’s from the Holocaust or Croatia or the Ukraine. These are stories that kind of smack colleges in the face about culture.”

“Right now, we’re asking Black and brown kids to smack colleges in the face about being Black and brown,” he continues. “And, admittedly, I am mixed about the necessity to do it. But I think the only way to do it is through writing.”

Read More: The ‘Infamous 96’ Know Firsthand What Happens When Affirmative Action Is Banned

Students of color who are involved in extracurriculars that are related to diversity efforts should talk about those prominently in their college essays, other experts say. Maude Bond, director of college counseling at Cate School in Santa Barbara County, California, cites one recent applicant she counseled who wrote her college essay about an internship with an anti-racism group and how it helped her highlight the experiences of Asian American Pacific Islanders in the area.

Bond also says there are plenty of ways for people of color to emphasize their resilience and describe the character traits they learned from overcoming adversity: “Living in a society where you’re navigating racism every day makes you very compassionate.” she says. “It gives you a different sense of empathy and understanding. Not having the same resources as people that you grow up with makes you more creative and innovative.” These, she argues, are characteristics students should highlight in their personal essays.

Adam Nguyen, a former Columbia University admissions officer who now counsels college applicants via his firm Ivy Link, will also encourage students of color to ask their teachers and college guidance counselors to hint at their race or ethnicity in their recommendation letters. “That’s where they could talk about your racial background,” Nguyen says. “Just because you can’t see what’s written doesn’t mean you can’t influence how or what is said about you.”

Yet as the essay portions of college applications gain more importance, the process of reading applications will take a lot longer, raising the question of whether college admissions offices have enough staffers to get through the applications. “There are not enough admission officers in the industry to read that way,” says Michael Pina, director of admission at the University of Richmond.

That could make it even more difficult for students to get the individual attention required to gain acceptance to the most elite colleges. Multiple college admissions experts say college-bound students will need to apply to a broader range of schools. “You should still apply to those 1% of colleges…but you should think about the places that are producing high-quality graduates that are less selective,” says Pina.

One thing more Black students should consider, Fields argues, is applying to historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs). (In fact, Fields, a graduate of Morehouse College, claims that may now be “necessary” for some students.) “There’s something to be said, for a Black person to be in a majority environment someplace that they are celebrated, not tolerated,” Fields says. “There’s something to be said about being in an environment where you don’t have to justify why you’re here.”

More Must-Reads From TIME

• Jane Fonda Champions Climate Action for Every Generation
• Passengers Are Flying up to 30 Hours to See Four Minutes of the Eclipse
• Biden’s Campaign Is In Trouble. Will the Turnaround Plan Work?
• Essay: The Complicated Dread of Early Spring
• Why Walking Isn’t Enough When It Comes to Exercise
• The Financial Influencers Women Actually Want to Listen To
• The Best TV Shows to Watch on Peacock
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Write to Olivia B. Waxman at [email protected]

You May Also Like

Harvard reworks essay requirements after affirmative action ban, emphasizes life experiences

Harvard College is changing its essay requirements for high school seniors applying for admission, nodding to the recent Supreme Court  ruling  that struck down affirmative action in college admissions.

Under the new guidelines, applicants will be required to answer five questions instead of the previous single optional essay. Students will be asked to share how their life experiences, academic achievements and extracurricular activities have shaped them, and describe their aspirations for the future, according to Harvard spokesman Jonathan Palumbo.

US college admissions offices face a challenging task as the application period begins this month. School officials will need to juggle the Supreme Court’s ban on race-based admissions with still finding ways to promote diversity in the student population.

The Supreme Court’s June ruling, delivered by Chief Justice John Roberts, said that universities could still take into account an applicant’s views of how race affected their life, as long as it was directly tied to a quality of character or unique ability that the applicant can contribute to the university’s community. Roberts cautioned that “universities may not simply establish through the application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today.”

Harvard and the University of North Carolina were named defendants in the case.

The Harvard Crimson previously  reported  the changes to the school’s essay requirements. Versions of Harvard’s new format existed in previous applications. Now, all applicants will have to answer the same set of questions.

Other US colleges are also adapting their approach to admissions. The University of Virginia is offering applicants a chance to explain their backgrounds and how those experiences will contribute to the school.

A revised application offers an optional essay opportunity that gives “all students – not only, for example, the children of our graduates, but also the descendants of ancestors who labored at the university, as well as those with other relationships – the chance to tell their unique stories,” President Jim Ryan and Provost Ian Baucom wrote in a  letter  this week.

Sarah Lawrence, a liberal arts college in Bronxville, New York, has even incorporated Roberts’s words into an essay  prompt , requesting applicants to reflect on how they believe the court’s decision might impact or influence their goals for a college education.

Latest in Success

• 0 minutes ago

Return to office (romance): The real reason Gen Z and millennials are ditching dating apps

Elon Musk’s leadership beginning to splinter Tesla loyalists as car sales drop: ‘He needs to focus and not be complaining or ranting about borders’

Mark Zuckerberg tops Elon Musk to become world’s 3rd-richest person after Meta stock hits new highs while Tesla continues slump as worst on S&P 500

More people are taking on second jobs because they literally can’t afford not to

California’s new $20 minimum wage could leave the state with higher unemployment for years to come, economist says

30-year-old banker quit $100,000 job to start a healthy fast food chain because he had no work-life balance—but being his own boss was more work and he even cut short his honeymoon

Most popular.

Nearly a quarter of baby boomer and late Gen X men are ‘unretiring’ or planning to because they can’t afford to kick up their feet in the current climate

Hedge funder famous for his ‘black swan’ strategy says there’s ‘something immoral’ about America’s reliance on debt—and future generations ‘will bear the burden for this’

Elon Musk might not be leading a hyper-growth EV maker, after all, and analysts are taking note: ‘We caution Tesla shares could fall much further still’

Barry Diller proposes a four-day workweek only a billionaire could love: Go to the office every day except Friday, when you can work from home

Judge slashes Bayer’s $1.5 billion Roundup verdict by more than 60% after Supreme Court decision on limiting punishments

Honorable Mention

April 05, 2024, ap offers all-formats look at the affirmative action ruling’s impact on college essays.

Collin Binkley, Annie Ma and Noreen Nasir

Hillary Amofa listens to others member of the Lincoln Park High School step team after school, March 8, 2024, in Chicago. When she started writing her college essay, Amofa told the story she thought admissions offices wanted to hear. She wrote about being the daughter of immigrants from Ghana, about growing up in a small apartment in Chicago. She described hardship and struggle. Then she deleted it all. “I would just find myself kind of trauma-dumping,” said the 18 year-old senior, “And I'm just like, this doesn't really say anything about me as a person.”

AP Photo / Charles Rex Arbogast

The Supreme Court ruling that ended affirmative action left the college essay as one of the few places where race can play a role in admissions decisions. To capture the impact on the ruling for students applying to college, Collin Binkley, Annie Ma and Noreen Nasir interviewed several students who spoke of how much was riding on the writing assignment.

Some changed their essays to emphasize race even if other experiences felt more central to their lives, and some described feeling pressure to exploit their hardships. Most powerfully, the students read their final essays on camera. In video shot and produced by Nasir, they shared intimate details about their relationship with their natural hair or the feeling of finding solidarity in a leadership group of students that look like them.

The story ran on front pages of newspapers in Decatur, Ill.; Mattoon, Ill.; Westerly, R.I.; and Chattanooga, Tenn., and AP member newsrooms accessed the story over 500 times.

Link to story

• CRLT Consultation Services
• Teaching Consultation
• Midterm Student Feedback
• Classroom Observation
• Teaching Philosophy
• Upcoming Events and Seminars
• CRLT Calendar
• Orientations
• Teaching Academies
• Provost's Seminars
• Past Events
• For Faculty
• For Grad Students & Postdocs
• For Chairs, Deans & Directors
• Customized Workshops & Retreats
• CRLT in Engineering
• CRLT Players
• Foundational Course Initiative
• CRLT Grants
• Other U-M Grants
• Provost's Teaching Innovation Prize
• U-M Teaching Awards
• Retired Grants
• Staff Directory
• Faculty Advisory Board
• Annual Report
• Equity-Focused Teaching
• Preparing to Teach
• Teaching Strategies
• Testing and Grading
• Teaching with Technology
• Teaching Philosophy & Statements
• Training GSIs
• Evaluation of Teaching
• Occasional Papers

Guidelines for Discussion of Affirmative Action

The Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT) developed the following guidelines to help instructors facilitate classroom discussions about affirmative action. When there are classroom discussions about this topic, it is best that they be carefully planned and informed, not simply unstructured expressions of opinion. Ideally, discussions should provide an opportunity to extend the discourse about affirmative action beyond polarized debates.

Spontaneous Discussions: Dealing with the Unanticipated

Affirmative action is a contentious topic, in part because the media often present oversimplified information and opinions about affirmative action. Also, both students and instructors at the University of Michigan feel personally involved in the national debate because affirmative action is a current practice here. For these reasons and many others, it is better not to have unplanned discussions. If a student raises the issue of affirmative action during class, consider the following strategies:

1. Acknowledge the student who raised the issue while noting that students may vary in their responses and concerns.

2. Quickly assess whether the class would like to spend time sharing views about the topic. If students want to have a dialogue, schedule a discussion for a later class and suggest ways that students could prepare. Consider the strategies outlined in the “Planned Discussions” section below.

3. If a discussion seems inappropriate or undesirable, encourage students to attend campus forums and events related to affirmative action, rather than discussing the matter in class.

Planned Discussions

1. Identify an objective for the discussion. A clearly articulated objective will shape the nature of the discussion. In Improving Discussion Leadership (1980), Ronald Hyman describes five main types of discussions:

• Policy discussion - The purpose is to examine and develop positions on a policy question.
• Problem-solving discussion – The goal is to find answers to a problem or conflict.
• Explaining discussion - The objective of this past-oriented discussion is to analyze the causes or reasons for a situation.
• Predicting discussion - In this future-oriented dialogue, discussants explore possible consequences of a situation.
• Debriefing discussion – In this activity, discussants reflect on information and impressions gained from a shared activity.

2. Other objectives for a discussion about affirmative action might include:

• connecting the topic with course material
• increasing awareness about the topic by providing information that is not generally addressed in informal discussions
• promoting critical thinking by helping students to understand the complexity of the issues

3. Provide a common base for understanding. For example, assign readings on affirmative action, instruct students to select their own readings to bring to class, or show a video clip to prompt discussion. An instructor may also have students read short materials during class.

4. Establish ground rules for the discussion. An instructor should work with students to develop guidelines for conduct during the discussion. Some suggestions include the following:

• Listen respectfully, without interrupting.
• Respect each other’s views.
• Criticize ideas, not individuals.
• Commit to learning, not debating.
• Avoid blame and speculation.
• Avoid inflammatory language.

For more information about ground rules, refer to “ Discussion Groundrules ” by the Intergroup Relations Center, Arizona State University.

5. Because affirmative action is a complex topic, it is important to establish a framework for the discussion.

• Focus the discussion on a particular issue or set of issues (e.g., the admissions lawsuits, the value of diversity in higher education, affirmative action in society, alternatives to race-conscious policies).
• Prepare a list of questions to guide the discussion. The wording of questions often determines their effectiveness.

Maintaining a Focused and Flowing Discussion: Some Suggestions Begin the discussion with clear, open-ended questions.    • Queries should be short, simple, and easily understood by students.    • Avoid “double-barreled questions” which pose two problems simultaneously. Ask questions that prompt multiple answers rather than short factual responses or simple “yes” or “no” replies. Prepare specific questions to use if the class is silent or hesitant about speaking. Some examples include: “What makes this hard to discuss?” and “What needs to be clarified at this point?” Be prepared to probe. With probing questions, an instructor can prompt students to share more specific information, clarify an idea, elaborate on a point, or provide further explanation. Be prepared to re-direct the discussion if students go beyond the intended focus. Drawing attention to the readings or reminding the class about the discussion objectives are useful management techniques. Be prepared to recapitulate and organize key points with the use of a blackboard, overhead, or flip chart.

6. In order to keep a discussion focused and purposeful, be an active facilitator rather than a passive observer. On the other hand, be careful not to over-control. A facilitator intervenes throughout the discussion to reword questions posed by students, correct misinformation, make reference to relevant reading materials or course content, and review the main points.

7. Encourage broad class participation . Do not allow the most talkative or most opinionated students to dominate the discussion. Some methods for increasing the number of discussants include:

• The Round : Give each student an opportunity to respond to a guiding question without interruption or comments. Provide students with the option to pass. After the round, discuss the responses.
• Think-Pair-Shar e: Give students a few minutes to respond to a question individually in writing. Divide the class into pairs or trios. Instruct the students to share their responses with group members. Provide students with explicit directions, such as “Tell each other why you chose the answer you did.” After a specified time period, have the class reconvene in order to debrief.
• Sharing Reflection Memos : Prior to the discussion, have students write a reflection memo in response to a question or set of questions that you pose. As part of the discussion, ask students to read their memos.

With each of these methods, the instructor needs to summarize the various responses and relate them to the discussion objectives.

For information about other techniques that can be used to structure discussions, refer to “ Active Learning in the College Classroom ” by Jennifer L. Faust & Donald R. Paulson.

8. Encourage students to examine the issues from a variety of possible viewpoints.

Students should express viewpoints in a manner that will provide greater insight about affirmative action, rather than provoke defensiveness in classmates. Remind students that the learning process involves both articulating different perspectives and actively listening to those with divergent views. Ask students to tolerate opposition. Note that reaching a consensus is not the goal of the discussion.

9. To respect the diversity of opinions and the varying knowledge levels among students, strive for balance in the dialogue. When addressing the practices, impact, implications, and intentions of affirmative action

strive for a balanced discussion of both historical and contemporary issues strive for a balanced discussion of issues for individuals as well as issues for institutions or society

10. One key issue in discussions about university diversity is the opportunity for students from different backgrounds to interact and to talk in settings that are conducive to thoughtful exchange about differences. Agree to discuss this topic in a way that does not make assumptions about any members of the class (including the instructor). Some individuals have a special and complicated relationship to this issue, some impacted more than others, and somy may be perceived to have special knowledge. Make sure no one is put on the spot, and recognize that students may have strong feelings and perspectives on the topic, and these feelings and perspectives may be unpredictable and complicated.

11. An instructor can utilize various techniques to diffuse growing tension in the class or between particular students by:

• involving additional discussants who have different perspectives
• dividing the class into subgroups for a few minutes to closely examine a specific point
• instructing students to spend some time writing about a specified issue

For additional suggestions, refer to “ Managing Hot Moments in the Classroom ” by Lee Warren.

10. Conclude by summarizing the main points of the discussion. Students are more likely to feel that a discussion was valuable if the instructor, with the help of the class, synthesizes what has been shared.

12. It is useful to obtain student feedback about the quality of the discussion and to identify issues that may need follow-up. The Minute Paper is one strategy for obtaining feedback:

Immediately following the discussion, give students a few minutes to write answers to the following questions: “What is the most important point you learned today?”; and, "What important question about affirmative action remains unanswered for you?"

Review the student responses before your next meeting with the class. During the next class, briefly summarize the student feedback and thank the students for their participation.

To discuss additional strategies or concerns, contact CRLT consultants by phone (764-0505), by email ( [email protected] ), or in person (1071 Palmer Commons).

back to top

Contact CRLT

location_on University of Michigan 1071 Palmer Commons 100 Washtenaw Ave. Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2218

phone Phone: (734) 764-0505

description Fax: (734) 647-3600

email Email: [email protected]

Connect with CRLT

directions Directions to CRLT

group Staff Directory

markunread_mailbox Subscribe to our Blog

The Case for Affirmative Action

• Posted July 11, 2018
• By Leah Shafer

For decades, affirmative action has been a deeply integral — and deeply debated — aspect of college admissions in the United States. The idea that colleges can (and in some cases, should) consider race as a factor in whom they decide to admit has been welcomed by many as a solution to racial inequities and divides. But others have dismissed the policy as outdated in our current climate, and at times scorned it as a form of reverse racial discrimination.

That latter stance gained a much stronger footing last week when the Departments of Education and Justice officially withdrew Obama-era guidance on affirmative action, signaling that the Trump administration stands behind race-blind admissions practices.

We spoke with Natasha Warikoo , an expert on the connection between college admissions and racial diversity, about what affirmative action has accomplished in the past 50 years, and whether this shift in guidance will severely affect admissions policies in the years to come. We share her perspectives here.

The purpose of affirmative action:

Affirmative action was developed in the 1960s to address racial inequality and racial exclusion in American society. Colleges and universities wanted to be seen as forward-thinking on issues of race.

Then, in the late 1970s, affirmative action went to the United States Supreme Court. There, the only justification accepted, by Justice Powell, was the compelling state interest in a diverse student body in which everyone benefits from a range of perspectives in the classroom.

Today, when colleges talk about affirmative action, they rarely mention the issue of inequality, or even of a diverse leadership. Instead, they focus on the need for a diverse student body in which everyone benefits from a range of perspectives in the classroom.

Colleges have fully taken on this justification — to the point that, today, they rarely mention the issue of inequality, or even of a diverse leadership, perhaps because they’re worried about getting sued. But this justification leads to what I call in my book a “ diversity bargain ,” in that many white students see the purpose of affirmative action as to benefit them , through a diverse learning environment. This justification, which ignored equity, leads to some unexpected, troubling expectations on the part of white students.

What affirmative action has accomplished in terms of diversity on college campuses:

William Bowen and Derek Bok’s classic book The Shape of the River systematically looks at the impact of affirmative action by exploring decades of data from a group of selective colleges. They find that black students who probably benefited from affirmative action — because their achievement data is lower than the average student at their colleges — do better in the long-run than their peers who went to lower-status universities and probably did not benefit from affirmative action. The ones who benefited are more likely to graduate college and to earn professional degrees, and they have higher incomes.

So affirmative action acts as an engine for social mobility for its direct beneficiaries. This in turn leads to a more diverse leadership, which you can see steadily growing in the United States.

But what about other students — whites and those from a higher economic background? Decades of research in higher education show that classmates of the direct beneficiaries also benefit. These students have more positive racial attitudes toward racial minorities, they report greater cognitive capacities, they even seem to participate more civically when they leave college.

None of these changes would have happened without affirmative action. States that have banned affirmative action can show us that. California, for example, banned affirmative action in the late 1990s, and at the University of California, Berkeley, the percentage of black undergraduates has fallen from 6 percent in 1980 to only 3 percent in 2017 . 

Decades of research in higher education show that classmates of the direct beneficiaries of affirmative also benefit. They have more positive racial attitudes toward racial minorities, they report greater cognitive capacities, they even seem to participate more civically when they leave college.

What the Trump administration's reversal of guidance on affirmative action means for admissions practices:

The guidance is simply guidance — it’s not legally binding. It indicates what the administration thinks, and how it might act. In that sense, this guidance is not surprising — many would have guessed that Trump and his team believe universities should avoid taking race into consideration in admissions. Indeed, the Department of Justice under Trump last summer already reopened a case filed under the Obama administration claiming racial discrimination in college admissions.

I hope that colleges and universities will stand behind affirmative action, given its many benefits. The U.S. Supreme Court has decided in favor of affirmative action multiple times — it is settled law.

However — the decision in Fisher v. Texas made clear that colleges would no longer be afforded good faith understanding that they have tried all other race-neutral alternatives before turning to affirmative action. In other words, if asked in court, colleges need to be able to show that they tried all other race-neutral alternatives to creating a diverse student body, and those alternatives failed. This means that affirmative action has already been “narrowly tailored” to the “compelling state interest” of a diverse student body — required by anti-discrimination laws. Ironically, race-based decisions come under scrutiny because of anti-discrimination laws designed to protect racial minorities; these laws are now being used to make claims about supposed anti-white discrimination when policies attempt to address racial inequality.

Additional Resources

• Read our 2016 Q+A with Warikoo following the Fisher v. Texas decision
• Listen to Warikoo discuss the Trump administration's reversal on a recent WBUR interview
• More background on the Trump administration's policy shift on affirmative action.

Usable Knowledge

Connecting education research to practice — with timely insights for educators, families, and communities

Related Articles

Putting Merit into Context

The Unique Obstacles Faced By Young Black Men

Doctoral students brief supreme court.

Should college essays touch on race? Some say affirmative action ruling leaves them no choice

• Show more sharing options
• Copy Link URL Copied!

When she started writing her college essay, Hillary Amofa told the story she thought admissions offices wanted to hear. About being the daughter of immigrants from Ghana and growing up in a small apartment in Chicago. About hardship and struggle.

Then she deleted it all.

“I would just find myself kind of trauma-dumping,” said the 18-year-old senior at Lincoln Park High School in Chicago. “And I’m just like, this doesn’t really say anything about me as a person.”

When the Supreme Court ended affirmative action in higher education , it left the college essay as one of few places where race can play a role in admissions decisions. For many students of color, instantly more was riding on the already high-stakes writing assignment. Some say they felt pressure to exploit their hardships as they competed for a spot on campus.

Supreme Court strikes down race-based affirmative action in college admissions

In another major reversal, the Supreme Court forbids the use of race as an admissions factor at colleges and universities.

June 29, 2023

Amofa was just starting to think about her essay when the court issued its decision, and it left her with a wave of questions. Could she still write about her race? Could she be penalized for it? She wanted to tell colleges about her heritage but she didn’t want to be defined by it.

In English class, Amofa and her classmates read sample essays that all seemed to focus on some trauma or hardship. It left her with the impression she had to write about her life’s hardest moments to show how far she’d come. But she and some classmates wondered if their lives had been hard enough to catch the attention of admissions offices.

This year’s senior class is the first in decades to navigate college admissions without affirmative action. The Supreme Court upheld the practice in decisions going back to the 1970s, but this court’s conservative supermajority found it is unconstitutional for colleges to give students extra weight because of their race alone.

Still, the decision left room for race to play an indirect role: Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote that universities can still consider how an applicant’s life was shaped by their race, “so long as that discussion is concretely tied to a quality of character or unique ability.”

Scores of colleges responded with new essay prompts asking about students’ backgrounds.

Post-affirmative action, Asian American families are more stressed than ever about college admissions

Parents who didn’t grow up in the American system, and who may have moved to the U.S. in large part for their children’s education, feel desperate and in-the-dark. Some shell out tens of thousands of dollars for consultants as early as junior high.

Nov. 26, 2023

When Darrian Merritt started writing his essay, his first instinct was to write about events that led to him going to live with his grandmother as a child. Those were painful memories, but he thought they might play well at schools like Yale, Stanford and Vanderbilt.

“I feel like the admissions committee might expect a sob story or a tragic story,” said Merritt, a senior in Cleveland. “I wrestled with that a lot.”

Eventually he abandoned the idea and aimed for an essay that would stand out for its positivity.

Merritt wrote about a summer camp where he started to feel more comfortable in his own skin. He described embracing his personality and defying his tendency to please others. But the essay also reflects on his feelings of not being “Black enough” and being made fun of for listening to “white people music.”

Like many students, Max Decker of Portland, Ore., had drafted a college essay on one topic, only to change direction after the Supreme Court ruling in June.

Decker initially wrote about his love for video games. In a childhood surrounded by constant change, navigating his parents’ divorce, the games he took from place to place on his Nintendo DS were a source of comfort.

‘We’re really worried’: What do colleges do now after affirmative action ruling?

The Supreme Court’s ban on affirmative action has triggered angst on campuses about how to promote diversity without considering race in admissions decisions.

But the essay he submitted to colleges focused on the community he found through Word Is Bond, a leadership group for young Black men in Portland.

As the only biracial, Jewish kid with divorced parents in a predominantly white, Christian community, Decker wrote he felt like the odd one out. On a trip with Word Is Bond to Capitol Hill, he and friends who looked just like him shook hands with lawmakers. The experience, he wrote, changed how he saw himself.

“It’s because I’m different that I provide something precious to the world, not the other way around,” wrote Decker, whose top college choice is Tulane in New Orleans because of the region’s diversity.

Amofa used to think affirmative action was only a factor at schools like Harvard and Yale. After the court’s ruling, she was surprised to find that race was taken into account even at public universities she was applying to.

Now, without affirmative action, she wondered if mostly white schools will become even whiter.

A lot of what you’ve heard about affirmative action is wrong

Debate leading up to the Supreme Court’s decision has stirred up plenty of misconceptions. We break down the myths and explain the reality.

It’s been on her mind as she chooses between Indiana University and the University of Dayton, both of which have relatively few Black students. When she was one of the only Black students in her grade school, she could fall back on her family and Ghanaian friends at church. At college, she worries about loneliness.

“That’s what I’m nervous about,” she said. “Going and just feeling so isolated, even though I’m constantly around people.”

The first drafts of her essay didn’t tell colleges about who she is now, she said. Her final essay describes how she came to embrace her natural hair. She wrote about going to a mostly white grade school where classmates made jokes about her afro.

Over time, she ignored their insults and found beauty in the styles worn by women in her life. She now runs a business doing braids and other hairstyles in her neighborhood.

“Criticism will persist,” she wrote “but it loses its power when you know there’s a crown on your head!”

Collin Binkley, Annie Ma and Noreen Nasir write for the Associated Press. Binkley and Nasir reported from Chicago and Ma from Portland, Ore.

More to Read

Editorial: Early decision admissions for college unfairly favor wealthy students

Jan. 4, 2024

HBCUs brace for flood of applications after Supreme Court affirmative action decision

Sept. 22, 2023

Opinion: In a post-affirmative action world, employers should learn from California’s experience

Sept. 16, 2023

Start your day right

Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

More From the Los Angeles Times

A Black couple defied racism by renting to a Chinese family. Now comes $5 million in thanks

April 5, 2024

Stanford names Jonathan Levin, business school dean, new president after leadership crisis

April 4, 2024

Opinion: Struggling to get help with college through the FAFSA? Here’s why you shouldn’t give up

April 3, 2024

Abcarian: I wanted to hate what UC Berkeley parents are doing in the name of safety, but I can’t

Harvard, UMass, Tufts update college applications after Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action

Newly barred from considering race in admission decisions, Harvard University and other selective universities have revamped the essay portion of their application process to allow applicants to show how culture, experiences, and community have influenced their identities, world views, and ambitions.

Because the Supreme Court left the door open for prospective students to talk about how race has affected their life experiences through essay questions and interviews, colleges are tweaking what they ask students to better understand how each applicant got to where they are. The new essay prompts were crafted by college administrators as part of their new efforts to achieve diversity goals within the bounds of the Supreme Court prohibitions.

Advertisement

Harvard replaced an optional essay prompt on its supplemental application with a required set of five short questions that include: what they would want a roommate to know about them and how they hope to use a Harvard education. The questions also ask students to reflect on an intellectual experience, as well as about extracurricular activities, employment experience, travel, or family responsibilities.

The supplemental application accompanies the Common Application, which went live Aug. 1 and will be first used by the class of 2028.

“This shift impacts everyone, not just Black and brown students,” said Tiffany Blessing, a counselor with the college counseling service IvyWise.

The changes follow the Supreme Court’s decision in June ending the use of race-based affirmative action in college admissions. The ruling, in two cases involving Harvard and the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, did not end so-called holistic admissions policies, in which colleges consider such factors as applicants’ life experiences and the challenges they’ve overcome.

Selective colleges had been preparing for months for the court to end race-based preferences in the admissions process. That preparation, aimed at maintaining diverse student populations, included revisiting essay questions, said Rob Bielby, managing director at the higher education practice of consulting firm Huron.

“Many institutions are working on crafting essays that allow students to speak to the role that [their backgrounds played in their lives,]” Bielby said. “Whether it be racial and ethnic diversity, whether it be coming from a rural background, whether it be growing up in an urban center, being an immigrant, bringing that to the fore and letting that be a core component of how they evaluate a student’s criteria.”

Dozens of schools across the country have unveiled new essay prompts in recent weeks. Tufts University added a new short answer prompt to its application in June, which asks students to write about “a way that you contributed to building a collaborative or inclusive community.” Likewise, Stanford University added an essay question asking about life experiences, interests, and character that would allow applicants to make a “distinctive contribution as an undergraduate.”

Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania is now asking applicants to write about how they would use a superpower to eradicate “a social inequity overnight.”

The University of Massachusetts Amherst will now ask students to reflect on a community or group that has defined or shaped their world and how being a product of that community would enrich the campus. Ed Blaguszewski, a spokesperson for the university, said the new essay prompt is a direct result of the Supreme Court ruling.

“We believe the responses by students to this new prompt can certainly broaden the scope of information we have as it relates to the holistic review process that UMass Amherst has been using very effectively in admissions for about the past 10 years,” Blaguszewski said.

Likewise, Babson College in Wellesley now asks students to “ share something about your background, lived experiences, or viewpoint(s) that speaks to how you will contribute to and learn from Babson’s collaborative community.”

Blessing, the counselor with IvyWise, is following the changes to college applications and said she is advising students to remember that most colleges value diversity and they want to know how applicants interact with people of different backgrounds and perspectives.

“You have to understand what note your voice plays in this chorus,” Blessing said. “You have a voice to add. Who am I? What’s my voice? What do I value and how do I feel when I encounter someone who doesn’t feel that way? That’s a lesson that all students can participate in, no matter their background.”

The updated applications, which add nuanced questions, could take some colleges more time to assess. Small colleges with ample resources have the advantage of being able to spend more time evaluating individual applications and reading carefully through essay questions than large universities. But, it’s likely many schools will need to add employees to their admissions offices because of the additional time involved in reviewing each application, higher education experts said.

Michael Roth, president of Wesleyan University in Middletown, Conn., recently said in an interview that carefully crafted essay questions will help colleges see how students took “advantage of the opportunities that were presented to them in their context.”

“We’re going to have to do that in a nuanced way. … We hope the result will be that we still have a diverse student body.”

Law firms and advocacy groups, meanwhile, are monitoring how colleges are adapting to the post-affirmative action landscape. Sarah Hinger, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Racial Justice Program, said that she will be “keeping an eye” on colleges to make sure that they are taking additional steps to prioritize diversity.

“What we’re looking to see is that those schools are taking serious efforts to make sure that they can continue to promote diversity on campus and be welcoming and open to students of all races,” Hinger said. “We’ll be looking to see more, not less, action from institutions now.”

Hilary Burns can be reached at [email protected] . Follow her @Hilarysburns .

• Share full article

Affirmative Action Is Over. Should Applicants Still Mention Their Race?

The first high school seniors to apply to college since the Supreme Court’s landmark decision are trying to sort through a morass of conflicting guidance.

Natorrance Lymon at a college-application workshop. Credit... Victor Llorente for The New York Times

Supported by

By Jessica Cheung

• Sept. 4, 2023

On a Friday afternoon in July, 87 teenagers with name tags swinging around their necks converged in the dining hall at Nazareth University in Rochester, N.Y. They whizzed between the pizza counter and soda machines before setting their plates on tables, the chorus of the lunchroom growing louder by the minute. The students — rising high school seniors, nearly all Black or Latino — had come for a five-day workshop hosted by PeerForward, a nonprofit organization that helps promising students from low-income communities prepare to apply to college. But this year’s workshop was taking place in something of a changed world: Two weeks earlier, in a pair of high-profile cases challenging Harvard’s and the University of North Carolina’s use of affirmative action, the Supreme Court declared all race-conscious admission programs across the United States to be unlawful, and no one knew what that would mean for students like the ones sitting now in the Nazareth dining hall — least of all them.

Listen to This Article

Open this article in the New York Times Audio app on iOS.

Near the back of the room, two boys, Jordan Williams and Francesco Macias, both from the Bronx, occupied a table laden with pizza crusts. They were enjoying some down time after spending all morning working on their college essays. Jordan, an aspiring lawyer, said he was writing his about one of his favorite movies, “Training Day,” which follows Denzel Washington and Ethan Hawke, who play a pair of L.A.P.D. officers. The movie had taught him to question conventional wisdom and to “do the right thing under pressure.” But he was concerned that nothing in his application conveyed that he was Black. This year, in response to the court’s decision, many colleges will hide the box on the Common App that indicates the applicant’s race, so Jordan was thinking about adding something about it to his essay. “I probably have to say that I’m a Black kid from the Bronx, I guess,” he said. “I think a quick phrase will be enough.”

Francesco, who was shyer and wore thick-rimmed glasses and a baseball cap, had been hunched over his phone before I came over and was contemplating that same question. “I’m a bit hesitant about showing my race,” he said. He wasn’t sure whether it would now count against him to talk about being Latino. Instead, he was writing about a leather briefcase he bought for $10 at a thrift store, which helped him feel more professional, get better grades and make friends at school. He was sure that his story of transformation from quiet, lonely kid to straight-A student would leave a bigger impression on admissions officers than writing, as he put it, “I’m from this neighborhood, or I’m this ethnicity.” But the more he talked about it, the more he started to doubt himself. “I guess I could if I really wanted to, I could put one thing,” he said, “but then it really doesn’t — ’cause my story is like — I want them to read something about me that lets them remember me.”

Francesco’s family is from Ecuador. His grandparents immigrated to the Corona neighborhood in Queens in the 1960s. His grandfather worked a job doing laundry at a hospital and sent money back to his family in his home country. Francesco’s mother took out loans to put herself through Baruch College and is now an executive assistant for the chief financial officer of Peloton. His father, who didn’t go to college, joined the Navy; he is now a building technician. Francesco is a rising senior at All Hallows High School, an all-boys private Catholic school in the South Bronx. It was not his parents’ plan to enroll him in private school, but Francesco was recruited by a scout who, on one fateful day, came across his submission at a middle-school science fair: a Tesla coil he built after watching a documentary about its inventor on the History Channel. “I saw the wiring diagram,” he said, “and I thought, Hmm, maybe I could build this.”

Francesco told me he had fantasized about attending the Massachusetts Institute of Technology since he was about 12. As a kid, he watched YouTube videos of engineers building “awesome contraptions” that involved exploding Coke bottles and roving hoverboards, and it would come up time and again that many of these engineers had gone to M.I.T. Francesco had done everything in his power to make himself an attractive applicant. He had more extracurriculars to list than the Common App had space for: A third-degree black belt in taekwondo, community service, student government, engineering club, woodworking, a computer-science program with Google and a school production of Lin-Manuel Miranda’s “In the Heights,” in which he was an understudy for the role of Kevin Rosario, Nina’s overprotective father, were just a few of them. But his test scores were below M.I.T.’s average, and he feared his chances of getting in had been hurt further by the recent ban on affirmative action. “I guess I’m kind of at a disadvantage because I kind of lost that,” he said.

M.I.T., which admitted just 4.8 percent of its applicants last year, was one of many highly selective American universities that practiced race-conscious admissions until the court’s decision this summer. Though these elite colleges represent only a sliver of American higher-education institutions, they are known for their outsize ability to help students who grew up in low-income households become high earners after graduation. But now that explicitly weighing race in admissions is unlawful, enrollment of Black and Latino students at these top-tier schools is likely to fall immediately — in part because colleges’ fears of legal retribution and court scrutiny may outweigh their interests in maintaining racial diversity. An amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court by top liberal arts colleges including Amherst, Williams and Middlebury projects that “the percentage of Black students matriculating would drop from roughly 7.1 percent of the student body to 2.1 percent” on their campuses. There’s also precedent to look at: When the University of California became subject to an affirmative-action ban in 1998, Black and Latino enrollment fell as much as 40 percent at Berkeley and U.C.L.A. within a single year. Even if colleges manage to maintain their diversity goals, they are wary of legal action from determined anti-affirmative-action opponents that are on the lookout for, as one admissions dean put it, “any institution that doesn’t see a dip.”

Colleges and universities across the country are scrambling to find legal means of maintaining the levels of diversity they would like to see. Though barred from actively using race as a factor, they will still “see” race in signifiers such as name, ZIP code and, perhaps most notable, what students say about themselves in their essays. But this also means that this year’s class of high school seniors — the first to apply under the affirmative-action ban — must read the signals sent by colleges about how to articulate their case for admission correctly and effectively. They are living in a swirl of uncertainty, confusion and misinformation about an admissions process that has suddenly been made more opaque and bewildering. Rather than clarifying the role of race in the application process, the court has instead created a new burden for students: They must now decide whether, and how, to make race a part of their pitch for admission.

In charting their new course, colleges and universities are looking to a key passage in Chief Justice John Roberts’s opinion , in which he explains how to treat race when it inevitably comes up in students’ applications. “Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration or otherwise,” he wrote. But “universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today.” He continued: “A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination. Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual — not on the basis of race.”

“I think people are scratching their heads wondering, well, what did Justice Roberts mean by that exactly, and how is it going to be tested?” Jeff Brenzel, a former dean of undergraduate admissions at Yale, told me. Brenzel is currently a trustee at Morehouse College, where he is helping its board work through how the ruling will affect admissions. “How is it going to be interpreted at the individual school level? I think that’s a matter of tremendous uncertainty.” The Biden administration, which finds itself in the position of enforcing a decision it dislikes, recently released a letter trying to help parse Roberts’s position: Schools cannot give an automatic boost to students of a particular race , it read, but they “remain free to consider any quality or characteristic of a student” even if that quality or characteristic is tied to a life experience shaped by the student’s race.

Two and a half weeks after the ruling, I asked Matthew McGann, the head of admissions at Amherst College, how he would apply Roberts’s reasoning to a particular example: If an applicant’s extracurriculars include the Black Student Union, how would that have been considered before and after the ruling? “That cannot be put in the context of” — he stopped himself, pausing for 10 seconds. “I think the — so understanding a student’s participation in an activity through a lens of racial status is something that at the very least cannot be as easily done anymore. We are still working on our training and guideline language on how the admissions staff should approach these questions.” McGann told me he is confident that his staff will be able to sort this out before reading applications this fall.

Even as colleges are still figuring out what is legal or illegal, they are taking steps toward compliance. As of August, at least 20 selective schools, including several in the Ivy League, had introduced new supplemental-essay prompt language for this application cycle that adheres closely to the ruling and seems to guide students along the tightrope that Roberts has laid out for them. These new essay questions direct students to talk about their identity in terms of their lived “experiences” and ask them to tie it to “unique contributions” to their campus — all language drawn from Roberts’s passage. In essence, the colleges are asking students to respond indirectly to Roberts and provide the kind of answers that Roberts himself would deem permissible considerations of racial identity. These supplemental prompts represent a new kind of diversity essay question, replacing the old kind that relied on a previous Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action.

In previous years, Brown University asked students to write about “a time you were challenged by a perspective that differed from your own.” That prompt invited stories that fit into the older rationale for affirmative action, established in the 1978 Bakke case, which held that by belonging to a minority group, an applicant contributed something meaningful to a school’s educational diversity. “A farm boy from Idaho can bring something to Harvard College that a Bostonian cannot offer,” Justice Lewis Powell wrote in the majority opinion, quoting from an earlier brief written by Archibald Cox. “Similarly, a Black student can usually bring something that a white person cannot offer.” But today’s court no longer finds that rationale compelling. Brown’s new essay prompt asks students to reflect “on where they came from” and “share how an aspect of your growing up has inspired or challenged you,” which nudges students toward responses that the school may be able to consider safely by asking them to reflect on a part of their identity and — if they choose to talk about their race — to link it to an inspiration or challenge, as Roberts suggests.

“It’s a fine gradation, but the distinction would be between adversity and diversity,” says Richard Kahlenberg, a scholar who favors class-conscious admissions and testified against Harvard and University of North Carolina in the twin cases that led to the court’s affirmative-action decision this summer. His view is that an essay about race as a lived experience, such as the overcoming of racial discrimination, could be counted as “an adversity” and therefore is a fairer justification of admission — one that could apply to Asian Americans, “the group most disadvantaged by the current system.” On the other hand, an essay that talks about “how race is central to their identity” and how a student therefore could “contribute something” to the learning environment is a weaker justification of admission in light of this new ruling.

In a world where every student of color will need a race-neutral justification for admission, that justification may increasingly have to do with a show of grit or resilience or an overcoming of adversity. But Art Rodriguez, dean of admissions at Carleton College, made clear that to say someone has overcome adversity could not simply become a back channel to boost exclusively Black or Latino students. “If we’re giving students credit for saying that they’ve demonstrated resilience somehow and they conveyed that based on their identity and racial background by overcoming some challenge, then we have to give that same credit to a student overcoming some adversity — maybe it was a parent died and they overcame that adversity and the challenge that they dealt with in the loss of a parent,” he says. “There is no racial dimension. But they’ve demonstrated some resilience. We just have to be fair and give that other student credit for that resilience.”

I asked McGann how a student of color who is applying to college this year should make sense of all these changes. “I would hope that that student would know that nothing about this changes who they are,” he said. “And it’s incumbent upon the colleges to do the lawful work that allows them to best identify those students who will fit in with their missions. It’s not the student’s job. The student should present themselves as wholly and fully and as best they can, and it’s on the colleges to lawfully consider and have an admissions process that allows them to live up to their mission.”

After lunch, Francesco and the rest of the students filed back into classrooms, where they would continue workshopping their college essays in various small groups, with PeerForward’s volunteer coaches. As I visited different groups, I happened upon one classroom where a debate about affirmative action had just broken out. I came in right as a student named Jaslaudi Ramirez, who had long braids and was sitting with her back against a window, was saying she didn’t understand the negative reaction to the Supreme Court ruling.

“Why is it bad?” she asked. If a college wanted to accept her just because she’s Black, she said, then she wouldn’t want to go there anyway.

The room fell silent. Derry Oliver, a student from Brooklyn wearing her hair high in a ponytail, flashed her braces and raised her hand to respond. “I agree to a certain extent,” she said. Like Jaslaudi, she thought it was insulting to imagine that a school would accept her just because she was Black. But, she continued, “race should be considered.” Doing away with it entirely would mean “getting rid of that one part that made up a whole of your merit, your activities and who you are as a person.”

Before Jaslaudi could respond, the writing coach, Patrice Edwards, gently tried to redirect the class’s attention to their essays. “So how do we feel about our second drafts?” she asked.

In the aftermath of the ruling, PeerForward had decided not to change the way it coaches students, partly because colleges themselves are still figuring out the new admissions process, and also because it doesn’t want students to fixate on things out of their control. “They don’t need yet another thing on their plate,” Gary Linnen, the chief executive of PeerForward, told me. The priority is to keep them on track toward applying to college. PeerForward is one of hundreds of community-based organizations in the country working to close the college-access gap: It encourages ambitious students in low-income communities to inspire academic achievement in their peers, and also lobbies directly with admissions offices on behalf of its students. But just how much of a leg up the kind of personalized coaching in its workshops can give in the post-ruling world, neither the students nor the organization can say for sure.

Edwards invited each student to read aloud his or her second draft, while the other students took notes on what stood out. “Infinity has the potential to be everything and nothing, just like people,” Jaslaudi wrote. “I am expected to be everything they are and more,” another student wrote, referring to a number of outside social pressures. “Old me gives up quick,” a third student wrote. “New me gives up quick but goes right back after it.” On poster paper at the front of the class, Edwards jotted down key phrases, using Crayola markers each student had chosen. By the end of the session, each student had a piece of poster paper with the phrases and ideas that the student’s peers found most interesting, which would help them narrow down the topics of their essays. The personal essay on a college application is crucial because it “shows their why ,” Linnen told me. “A number can’t describe your resiliency and your connection to community.”

Down the hall, another group of PeerForward students had just finished their first drafts when I came in. I was curious to know if the teenagers had been following the court cases, so their writing coach, Tyree Bell, took a poll: “Has anyone heard about the Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action?” About half raised their hands. One of them, Rayne Rivera-Forbes, told me she learned about the ruling on her Instagram story feed — something I also heard from several other students. Rayne identifies as Afro-Latina and was raised by a single mother, a military veteran, who has been the primary inspiration in her life. She is a student representative on her county school board in Maryland and wants to run for Congress one day.

“I just feel a bit lost,” she said. She didn’t want to write her essay about race, but now that the race box is gone, she feels she should at least mention it. “I’m a strong applicant academically, but I don’t have the highest G.P.A. or test scores in the world,” she said. “I have so much more to me, especially the community I come from. If that’s not taken into consideration, I don’t feel like I’ll be properly recognized.”

Rayne saw the court’s ruling as taking away opportunities from students of color; she pulled out her phone from her back pocket to show me an article she found through Instagram about the University of Missouri system’s dropping all race-based scholarships at the order of the state’s attorney general, a move that went beyond the wording of the ruling. She read aloud a line from the article about the president of the University of Kentucky targeting similar scholarships. “Some of my peers said, ‘Now I can’t apply to these schools,’” she said.

Misinformation was common among the PeerForward students I spoke with. Derry Oliver told me her understanding is that being Black could have been “a plus” under affirmative action (which is true), but now being Black is a “minus” (which is not true). It was easy to see why the students could have that wrong impression. For Derry, affirmative action was a kind of protection that ensured campuses cared about diversity — and so the loss of that protection might now mean campuses can freely discriminate. She told me she knew some students who were planning not to list extracurriculars that signal their race, like being active in the youth arm of the N.A.A.C.P., out of fear that it would count against them. “So now you’re hiding that side of yourself to make others feel better in a way,” she said.

That impulse is familiar to many Asian teenagers, who have sometimes tried to hide their race by “de-Asianizing” their applications. One Asian student I talked to, who applied last year, said he deliberately decided not to check the race box on his college application after seeing YouTube videos and news articles about peers trying to appear less Asian. While students like Rayne are considering leaning more into race, other Black and Latino applicants may, like the Asian student, hide their race over concerns that admissions officers may pigeonhole or stereotype them. These students have mostly been left to their own devices, patching together information drawn from a variety of sources about what they ought to do with their race for their best chance at admission. “There are going to be a lot of unintended consequences,” Brenzel, the former Yale admissions dean, said. “Admissions officers are going to be in a very challenging position this coming year. I certainly see that students are going to be facing equally challenging guessing games about what’s going to enhance or detract from their applications.”

A week after I met Francesco in Rochester, he was back in his room in the Bronx. He had been researching schools on a computer that he and his father built together. Before the Supreme Court ruling, he had decided on a list of 10 to 12 schools, but he now plans to apply to 20, especially because he realized he can have many of the application fees waived. “Twenty is a bit outlandish, but who knows,” he had told me at the workshop. “Maybe I don’t get into 19, and the 20th is my dream school. The more, the better.”

He had also thought about applying to the engineering schools at Columbia and Cornell, but then he hesitated. “They’re more legacy, if I’m not mistaken,” he said, referring to the Ivy League schools. “This is what I heard from other students — they’re saying 50 percent are legacy.” Then again, he remembered, a student in the grade above got a full ride to Dartmouth College. “So it is possible,” he said. “But I’m not trying to get my hopes up too high.” He will apply after all — and also add to the list SUNY Maritime College, which offers an engineering program a 30-minute walk from his house. As a way to ease the financial burden for his parents, he is planning to apply for the Navy Reserve Officers Training Corps, a scholarship program that would offer him a full ride to an affiliated school as long as he serves at least three years active duty in the Navy.

He recalled the night the Supreme Court ruling came down. He was having dinner with his mother, who made them garlic-and-olive-oil pasta. She asked Francesco if he had heard of affirmative action. Neither of them really knew what it was, but they no doubt intuited the boundless downside of the court’s decision. “She was telling me, even though this happened, you can’t let this stop you from your ambitions. There’s always going to be setbacks in life, and you just have to overcome them.”

Victor Llorente is a portrait, documentary and fashion photographer based in Queens who was born and raised in Spain.

Jessica Cheung is a senior producer at “The Daily,” focusing on politics and education. More about Jessica Cheung

Advertisement

Affirmative Action: Frequently Asked Questions

• May 21, 2020
• The Education Trust–West

For over 25 years, Proposition 209 has prevented the state from taking active measures to prevent discrimination and ensure equality of opportunity. California legislators have a real opportunity to prioritize racial equity in policymaking, prevent discrimination, and ensure equality of opportunity with Assembly Constitutional Amendment 5 (ACA 5).

ACA 5 led by Assemblymember Shirley Weber places an initiative on the November 2020 ballot to repeal Proposition 209 and reinstate affirmative action.

See below for a list of frequently asked questions about affirmative action:

Affirmative Action programs are designed to increase access to employment and education opportunities for systemically disadvantaged and/or underrepresented populations–including women and people of color. Affirmative Action permits the use of gender and race-conscious strategies for the purpose of ensuring equal opportunity in our public education system and workforce. In 1996, California voters approved Proposition 209, a ban on considering race or ethnicity in higher education, public employment and contracting.

In the workforce: Affirmative Action practices include public employment and contracting practices that aim to mitigate bias by considering gender or race in employment practices. Some examples include: setting specific goals for the participation of women-owned and person of color-owned businesses on work involved with state contracts, targeted recruitment and advertising to populations not represented in certain fields; and selection for training and apprenticeship opportunities.

At Colleges & Universities: A series of Supreme Court cases have outlined guidelines for both permissible and outdated affirmative action practices that university leaders carry out in higher education admissions, recruitment and retention processes. Colleges and universities are not permitted to use racial quotas in admissions, (Regents of the University of California v. Bakke) or point-based systems where race determines points for admission (Gratz v. Bollinger) because these approaches are unconstitutional. However, as decided by the Supreme Court in 2003 (Grutter v. Bollinger), colleges can consider race as one of many qualifications when it will help to build or maintain a diverse student body. This policy encourages a fair and holistic review of applicants. Yet, in California, Prop 209 prohibits colleges from engaging in targeted outreach and extra efforts to enroll high-performing students of color. Colleges in California cannot use the following strategies: recruitment, tutoring, scholarships and resources targeted specifically toward students of color or women students.

No, Prop 16 is not a form of discrimination. Affirmative action combats the effects of structural racism and discrimination by allowing public entities to be more intentional in increasing diversity. Affirmative action is a tool to ensure opportunity for all Californians who have historically been shut out in the sectors of education, contracting, hiring and employment. Removing the prohibition of affirmative action policies would allow for the use of race-conscious and gender-conscious strategies to meet the academic needs of underserved students in order to close achievement gaps and to expand economic opportunities for all Californians.

Education experts understand that there’s much more work to be done to support students of color across the pre-k through higher education systems. That’s why the California Teachers Association, the California PTA, California Student Aid Commission, UC Board of Regents, the California Community College Board of Governors, the California Faculty Association, the California Federation of Teachers have all endorsed Prop 16, among many others.

First, if affirmative action is reinstated it will merely allow universities to take race and gender into account as one of several factors in recruitment and admissions. Notably, after Prop 209 banned affirmative action, 1998 admission rates for Asian American/Pacific Islander (AAPI) students decreased at 5 of the 8 UC campuses, especially at UC Berkeley and UCLA. A 2016 study also found that eliminating Black and Latinx students from the application pool minimally improves chances of admissions for Asian American applicants.

Second, Asian Americans are not a monolithic group. Despite opposition from a small faction, over two-thirds support affirmative action as academic outcomes for AAPI students are vastly different depending on ethnicity. For example, approximately 51 percent of all Asian Americans over the age of 25 have a bachelor’s degree or greater; yet, for the Cambodian and Hmong community, only 18 percent and 17 percent have a Bachelor’s degree, respectively.

The importance of disaggregating AAPI data has been a topic of discussion for some time now. Some educational entities in California such as the California Department of Education already collect and disaggregate APPI data, but do not release it publicly. While not required if affirmative action is reinstated in California, it will be important that AAPI data is disaggregated in order to fully understand the disparate experiences of the AAPI population — especially as the state develops the  State Longitudinal Data System . 

In addition to ensuring fair opportunities, affirmative action policies also support a strong economy. Employment trends consistently show that it is more challenging to secure a job without a college degree. In 2018, the employment rate for young adults with at least a Bachelor’s degree was 86 percent, compared to 72 percent for those with only a high school diploma. By relying primarily on admissions criteria, such as test scores and grades, colleges overlook highly skilled students of color experiencing educational disparities in K-12. Affirmative action strategies help broaden college access for these students, thereby increasing access to employment opportunities and social mobility. Additionally, research finds that a diverse student population better prepares all students for work and leadership in a global economy and will ultimately benefit the state as a whole.

No. The purpose of ACA 5 is not to benefit one specific group of people. It is about having the tools to actively address racial disparities. Disparities begin early in the educational pipeline, with students of color accessing preschool at a lower rate than their white and more affluent counterparts. Disparate opportunities for high quality education continue through K-12 and into postsecondary education. Repealing Prop 209 is a significant step in addressing the systemic inequalities that exist for some communities. While affirmative action strategies cannot solve these issues alone, repealing Prop 209 is a significant step forward in helping to open the doors of opportunity for students of color and future generations to come.

No. Repealing Prop 209 is not about admitting unqualified students of color into the UC and CSU systems, but rather, it is intended to address outcomes resulting from the historic and systemic inequities that impact educational opportunities for these student groups. In fact, national data indicate a high prevalence of undermatching–a student’s attendance at a less selective college for which they are overqualified–for students of color. A recent study found “undermatching was highest for black students (49 percent), followed by white students (45 percent), Hispanic students (41 percent), and Asian students (31 percent).” Affirmative Action programs enable colleges to better target outreach to ensure that all eligible and qualified students apply to and enroll in institutions that are resourced and best positioned to support their success. They do not eliminate the minimum eligibility requirements needed to be met for whichever system Black and Latinx students are admitted to.

Merit is often connected to the belief that metrics such as grades and test scores reflect innate ability and “smarts”. Unfortunately, a student’s GPA and test scores are also impacted by inequitable policies and practices that limit a student’s academic competitiveness, disproportionately impacting Black and Latinx students. For example, in 2019, a California-based study found otherwise competitive Black and Latinx students are less likely to be placed in advanced science courses. This is often due to inadequate counseling, misaligned grading policies, and scheduling conflicts rather than due to academic preparedness. Similarly, Black and Latinx high school students are underrepresented in rigorous STEM and college preparatory courses (i.e., a-g) required for UC admissions. Latinx and Black students often lack access to these courses because they tend to attend schools with fewer course offerings. Affirmative Action programs aim to mitigate these differences in opportunity and evaluate merit in more comprehensive ways.

No. Quotas are an outdated and unconstitutional affirmative action strategy. In fact, quotas were found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1978 (Regents of the University of California v. Bakke). A 2015 study found that some of the most widely used diversity strategies are:1) targeted recruitment and outreach to students of color, 2) enhanced recruitment and additional consideration for community college transfer, and 3) targeted recruitment to first-generation and low-income students. Importantly, these strategies tend to be outreach and recruitment strategies not quota-like strategies that determine outright whether a student will be admitted primarily or solely on the basis of race. For universities that take race and gender into account in admissions processes, these identity markers are just a few of several factors taken into account along with GPA, test scores, leadership, etc. in a holistic approach to evaluating each applicant’s fitness for university admission.

No, this would actually significantly benefit students of color in two major ways. One, it would provide increased opportunities for capable students to access higher education. Two, it would decrease the isolation students of color can experience when they are underrepresented among the campus student body. Research has shown students of color have a more negative experience when they are the lone member of their racial group in an otherwise homogeneous group. Further, campus diversity is associated with experiencing lower levels of bias and discrimation and higher levels of feeling a sense of belonging and retention for Black and Latinx students.

The state has made significant investments in race-neutral policies that have failed to level the playing field and facilitate equitable opportunities to all Californians. Despite over 20 years of income-focused programming and diversity initiatives, such as creation of the Early Academic Outreach Program (EAOP), the Math, Engineering and Science Achievement (MESA) program, and the Puente Project, the UC system still has work to do to improve diversity and representation. Proposition 16 would enable education institutions to move away from race-blind strategies that have not worked and move toward race-conscious strategies that could bolster educational equity.

In public college admissions, no. This was outlawed by Prop 209 in 1996. However, private colleges and employers are free to exercise affirmative action because Prop 209 does not apply to private entities. There is also an exception in Prop 209 that allows colleges and universities to use race-conscious practices, particularly in employment, if required by federal law or to maintain federal funding. This is the case for the CSU and UC systems. Each campus develops an annual affirmative action plan detailing several factors, including workforce and job placement analysis, problem areas and targets to improve diversity in employment.

Prop 209 has not been overturned because it is very challenging to do so. Overturning  Prop 209 requires a state constitutional amendment. This means:

• It needs either a two-thirds vote in the legislature, or signatures of 8% of California voters to put it on the ballot, AND
• A majority of California voters to vote in favor of the change.

Overturning Prop 209 is well overdue. After Prop 209 went into effect, UC Berkeley and UCLA enrollment of underrepresented students of color dropped by over 50 percent and has not returned to pre-Prop 209 levels of diversity since the law was implemented. The UC system’s student enrollment does not reflect the diversity of the state. In California, Latinx residents make up almost 40 percent of California’s population while Black residents make up 6.5 percent of Californians. Yet, the UC’s fall 2019 Latinx and Black enrollment was 25 percent and 4 percent, respectively.

Repealing Prop 209 is especially important to help mitigate the disproportionate harm experienced by communities of color during the pandemic. People of color have borne the brunt of both the economic and public health effects of COVID-19. California is going to need every tool in its toolbox to restore the economy in ways that support all Californians. Employment trends consistently show college degrees protect against unemployment, when compared to holding a high school diploma. As California’s unemployment rates continue to skyrocket, growing an educated workforce will be essential to future recovery and resiliency. Further diversifying who can access and succeed in higher education, will position California to remain the 5th largest economy in the world.

There are myriad benefits to reinstating race-conscious strategies in education. The US Supreme Court has consistently reiterated that affirmative action provides the benefit of a diverse student body, which enhances the educational experience of all college students, regardless of race or gender.

Colleges and universities – and California as a whole – will benefit from developing leaders across several fields that reflect the racial makeup of our society. The US Supreme Court affirmed that a critical role of higher education institutions is to train the nation’s leaders of tomorrow, and for these leaders to have credibility among the electorate and to effectively identify and address society’s problems, these leaders must reflect society at-large. Repealing Prop 209 will give colleges and universities the ability to cultivate the leaders that reflect the diversity of all of California’s communities.

The most prevalent form of affirmative action in college admissions in California is legacy admissions, or giving preference to relatives of alumni. In fact, several of California’s private universities include legacy status as a factor in admissions including the University of Southern California, which admitted nearly 20 percent of its first-year students as legacy admits just last year. This form of affirmative action, which is legal in California, reinforces systemic inequities because it provides a leg up for applicants who already benefit from systemic advantages, like wealth and parental education. Californians should repeal Prop 209 because it will enable the government, colleges, and universities to address the types of structural inequities that legacy admissions perpetuate.

News that the University of California just admitted the largest group of Latino students is certainly a step in the right direction. While the systemwide admission of more Latinx students is definitely a noteworthy accomplishment, this is just one-piece of the puzzle. State and university leaders should also prioritize Latinx student representation across the UC system through increased student enrollment and completion, not just admissions. This includes providing the necessary academic and social support for these students to persist and succeed in completing their degree in order to eliminate the graduation gap. Removing the ban on affirmative action would allow the UC to better address the unique needs of Latinx students to ensure they persist and graduate at the same rates as their peers.

In addition, Prop 16 will support k-12 schools in addressing inequities in college and career preparation.  In particular,California’s Latinx students —  who attend the nation’s most segregated schools — are often tracked away from college-preparatory coursework and have insufficient access to early childhood education.

While California colleges and universities have made much progress in recent decades, students of color still remain largely underrepresented on college campuses, particularly at our most well resourced-institutions. Prioritizing racial diversity is critical for promoting access and equity in higher education. As tax-exempt, taxpayer-supported entities, public colleges and universities should advance the public interest by ensuring all residents — regardless of race or ethnicity — have an opportunity to access and succeed in obtaining their college degree. Permitting race-conscious recruitment efforts can move us closer to reflecting the ethnic make-up of the state by implementing targeted outreach and college preparation of underserved students. To eliminate inequities, college enrollment at our flagship universities should be representative of the statewide college-aged population (18-24 year olds) for each student group. In 2018, Black and Latinx individuals were 6% and 48% of California’s statewide college-aged population, respectively. However, Black and Latinx students made up only 4% and 24% of the total UC student undergraduate population, respectively. As our economy becomes more reliant on a college-educated workforce, providing opportunity for all will bolster the state’s economic security and competitiveness for the betterment of each Californian.

Reinstating affirmative action would strengthen how the state funds school districts and how districts support their students. The Local Control Funding Formula, or LCFF, provides much needed additional funding (i.e., supplemental and concentration grants) to serve English learners, foster youth, and low-income students. However, California’s inability to implement race-conscious funding leaves Local Education Agencies (LEAs) without the resources needed to support students facing some of the most severe opportunity and achievement gaps. For example, in California, performance outcomes on standardized assessments are lowest for Black students. Yet approximately 90,000 Black students do not generate additional funds that could be used to meet their unique needs.

The legislature did not designate students of color to generate or receive these funds due to Pop 209’s limitations. Repealing Proposition 209 would give the legislature the ability to make the LCFF formula race-conscious and provide clarity to districts that race-conscious solutions, such as targeted mentoring and support initiatives, may be used to support students of color and close racial equity gaps.

Having a diverse teaching force benefits all students, since students of all races report forming stronger connections and learning better when they have teachers of color. They perceive Black teachers (more so than white teachers) as holding them to higher academic standards, supporting their efforts, clearly explaining ideas and concepts and providing useful feedback. Importantly, students of color with same-race teachers earn higher GPAs, spend more time on homework, and have higher expectations for themselves attending college. Low-income Black students in elementary school experience some of the greatest benefits: after having a single Black teacher in grades K-3rd, Black students are more likely to graduate from high school and aspire to attend college. Approximately 77 percent of the students in California public schools are students of color, while 65 percent of teachers are white. Affirmative action would support broader recruitment and retention of teachers of color, allowing California’s K-12 students to reap the benefits of a diverse teacher workforce.

Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Affirmative action. In  Merriam-Webster.com dictionary . Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/affirmative%20action

California Senate Office of Research. (2002) Proposition 209 and the Courts: A Legal History.  Retrieved from  https://sor.senate.ca.gov/sites/sor.senate.ca.gov/files/%7B9B228323-7833-4431-91F0-1617AFA60A8E%7D.PDF .

Legislative Analyst’s Office. (1996).  Proposition 209 Prohibition Against Discrimination or Preferential Treatment by State and Other Public Entities . Retrieved from  https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/1996/prop209_11_1996.html .

Oyez . Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.  Retrieved from  https://www.oyez.org/cases/1979/76-811?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_= .

Legal Information Institute.  Gratz V. Bollinger (02-516)  539 U.S. 244 (2003).  Retrieved from  https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-516.ZS.html .

 Oyez . Grutter v. Bollinger.  Retrieved from  https://www.oyez.org/cases/2002/02-241 .

Poon, O. A.  Do Asian Americans Benefit From Race-Blind College Admissions Policies.  Retrieved from The National Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islander Research in Education (CARE):  http://care.gseis.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/care-brief-raceblind.pdf .

Hughes, S., Thompson Dorsey, D. N., & Carrillo, J. F. (2016).  Causation fallacy 2.0: Revisiting the myth and math of affirmative action . Educational Policy, 30(1), 63-93. Retrieved from  https://www.academia.edu/20102203/Causation_Fallacy_2.0_Revisiting_the_myth_and_math_of_affirmative_action .

Advancing Justice.  Inclusion Not Exclusion, Spring 2016 Asian American Voter Survey.  Retrieved at  https://advancingjustice-aajc.org/sites/default/files/2016-09/Inclusion%20Not%20Exclusion%20voter%20survey.pdf

López , G., Ruiz,  N. G.,   Patte n, E. (2017).  Key facts about Asian Americans, a diverse and growing population.  Retrieved from PEW Research Center:  https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/ .

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019).  Employment Projections Unemployment rates and earnings by educational attainment . Retrieved from  https://www.bls.gov/emp/chart-unemployment-earnings-education.htm .

National Center for Education Statistics.  Fast Facts  Employment rates of college graduates . Retrieved from  https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=561 .

The Century Foundation. (2019).  The Benefits of Socioeconomically and Racially Integrated Schools and Classrooms.  Retrieved from  https://tcf.org/content/facts/the-benefits-of-socioeconomically-and-racially-integrated-schools-and-classrooms/?session=1&agreed=1 .

Thorman, T., Danielson, C. (2019).  Just the Facts Public Preschools in California . Retrieved from Public Policy Institute of California:  https://www.ppic.org/publication/public-preschools-in-california/ .

  The Education Trust-West. (2015).  Black Minds Matter: Supporting the Educational Success of Black Children in California.  Retrieved from  https://edtrustwstag.wpengine.com/resource/black-minds-matter-supporting-the-educational-success-of-black-children-in-california/ . & see: The Education Trust-West. (2017).  The Majority Report: Supporting the Success of Latino Students in California.  Retrieved from  https://edtrustwstag.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ETW_TMR_FINAL.pdf .

 American Educational Research Association. (2019).  Study Snapshot: College Undermatching, Degree Attainment, and Minority Students.  Retrieved from  http://www.aera.net/Study-Snapshot-College-Undermatching-Degree-Attainment-and-Minority-Students .

  Gao, N., Johnson,H., Lafortune, J., Dalton, A. (2019).  New Eligibility Rules for the University of California?  The Effects of New Science Requirements.  Retrieved from Public Policy Institute of California:  https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/new-eligibility-rules-for-university-of-california-the-effects-of-new-science-requirements.pdf .

 The Education Trust-West. (2015).  Black Minds Matter: Supporting the Educational Success of Black Children in California.  Retrieved from  https://edtrustwstag.wpengine.com/resource/black-minds-matter-supporting-the-educational-success-of-black-children-in-california/ .

Espinosa,L. L., Gaertner, M. N., Orfield, G. (2015).  Race, Class, and College Access: Achieving Diversity in a Shifting Legal Landscape.  Retrieved from American Council on Education:  https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Race-Class-and-College-Access-Achieving-Diversity-in-a-Shifting-Legal-Landscape.pdf .

Zisk, N. L. (2017)  Embracing Race-Conscious College Admissions Programs: How Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin Redefines “Affirmative Action” as a Holistic Approach to Admissions that Ensures Equal, Not Preferential, Treatment.  Marquette Law Review, 100(3), 835 .  Retrieved from  https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5321&context=mulr .

Garces, L. M., & Jayakumar, U. M. (2014).  Dynamic diversity: Toward a contextual understanding of critical mass.  Educational Researcher ,  43 (3), 115-124. Retrieved from  https://www.sci-hub.tw/10.3102/0013189X14529814 .

Hurtado, S., & Ruiz Alvarado, A. (2015).  Discrimination and bias, underrepresentation, and sense of belonging on campus . Retrieved from The Higher Education Research Institute (HERI):  https://www.heri.ucla.edu/PDFs/Discriminination-and-Bias-Underrepresentation-and-Sense-of-Belonging-on-Campus.pdf .

 Legislative Analyst’s Office. (1996).  Proposition 209 Prohibition Against Discrimination or Preferential Treatment by State and Other Public Entities . Retrieved from  https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/1996/prop209_11_1996.html .

The California State University.  Affirmative Action . Retrieved from  https://www2.calstate.edu/csu-system/administration/systemwide-human-resources/your-rights/Pages/affirmative-action.aspx .

University of California Office of the President. (2015).  Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action.  Retrieved from  https://www.ucop.edu/human-resources/staff/employee-relations-staff/eeo-affirmative-action.html .

Government Publishing Office. (2020).  Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. Retrieved from  https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=3b71cb5b215c393fe910604d33c9fed1&rgn=div5&view=text&node=41:1.2.3.1.2&idno=41 .

Kidder, W. C., & Gándara, P. (2016).  Two decades after the affirmative action ban: Evaluating the University of California’s race-neutral efforts.  Retrieved from the Civil Rights Project:  https://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/college-access/affirmative-action/two-decades-after-the-affirmative-action-ban-evaluating-the-university-of-california2019s-race-neutral-efforts/Kidder_PIC_paper.pdf .

 The United States Census Bureau.  Quick Facts California.  Retrieved from  https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/CA .

University of California.  U C Fall Enrollment Headcount by Level and Ethnicity for fall 2019.  Retrieved from  https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/infocenter/fall-enrollment-glance .

 National Center for Education Statistics.  Fast Facts  Employment rates of college graduates . Retrieved from  https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=561 .

  Gurin, P.  The Compelling Need for Diversity in Higher Education.  Retrieved from University of Michigan:  https://diversity.umich.edu/admissions/research/expert/gurintoc.html .

 Kidder, W. C., & Gándara, P. (2016).  Two decades after the affirmative action ban: Evaluating the University of California’s race-neutral efforts.  Retrieved from the Civil Rights Project:  https://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/college-access/affirmative-action/two-decades-after-the-affirmative-action-ban-evaluating-the-university-of-california2019s-race-neutral-efforts/Kidder_PIC_paper.pdf .

 Bouziane, R. (2017).  The Trojan Family: Legacy Students Applying to USC.  Retrieved from University of Southern California:  https://admissionblog.usc.edu/the-trojan-family-legacy-students-applying-to-usc/ .

 California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress.  2018-19 English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments.  Retrieved at:  https://caaspp-elpac.cde.ca.gov/caaspp/DashViewReport?ps=true&lstTestYear=2019&lstTestType=B&lstGroup=1&lstSubGroup=1&lstGrade=13&lstSchoolType=A&lstCounty=00&lstDistrict=00000&lstSchool=0000000

California Charter Schools Association. (2020).  AB 2635 Education Equity Now . Retrieved from  https://info.ccsa.org/education-equity-now .

Cherng, H. Y. S., & Halpin, P. F. (2016). The importance of minority teachers: Student perceptions of minority versus White teachers.  Educational Researcher ,  45 (7), 407-420. Retrieved from  https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.3102/0013189X16671718 .

Mittleman, J. (2016).  What’s in a Match? Disentangling the Significance of Teacher Race/Ethnicity . Retrieved from  https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2796150 .

Gershenson, S., Hart, C., Hyman, J., Lindsay, C., & Papageorge, N. W. (2018).  The long-run impacts of same-race teachers . National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from  https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/161253/1/dp10630.pdf .

The Education Trust-West.(2019). Seen, Heard, Reflected: Look At California’s Teacher of Color Shortage. Retrieved from:  https://edtrustwstag.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ETW-Seen-Heard-Reflected-TOC-Infographic-Nov-19.pdf .

Legislative Analyst’s Office. (2012).  A Review of the Teacher Layoff Process in California.  Retrieved from  https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2012/edu/teacher-layoffs/teacher-layoffs-032212.aspx .

Prado, V., Ojeda, E.J., Rabin, E., Rembert, K., Washington, D., Winchester, C. (2019). Equity and Diversity by Design: Recommendations on Recruiting and Retaining Teachers of Color in Illinois. Retrieved from Teach Plus: https://teachplus.org/sites/default/files/publication/pdf/teach_plus_diversity_and_equity_by_design_final.pdf .

Redefining Teacher Quality to Recruit and Retain the #TeachersWeNeed

As California’s students and families of color grapple with the aftermath of remote learning and their disproportionately negative learning outcomes attributed to lost instructional time and

Money Matters: Prioritizing Equity and Opportunity for Students of Color in the 2023-24 California Budget

At The Education Trust—West, we’re dedicated to a more equitable California for the students who have been systematically shut out from opportunity. To make our educational

Send Us A Message

At The Education Trust—West, we believe a different California is possible: a California that ensures that Black, Latinx, Asian, Pacific Islander and Native American students’ futures are as bright as their dreams are big. We believe that our state’s schools, colleges, and universities can form the bedrock of a more just California.

Committed to advancing policies and practices to dismantle the racial and economic barriers embedded in California’s education system.

California Offices: Oakland , Los Angeles , Sacramento

National Office: EdTrust

State Offices: EdTrust-New York , EdTrust-Tennessee , EdTrust-Midwest

Tel: 510.465.6444 | Fax: 510.465.0859

Help Us Improve: Quick 3-Question Survey Read our Accessibility Statement

Karla Fernandez

Communications Manager

Karla Fernandez (she/her/hers) joins Ed Trust–West as a Communications Manager with over 11 years of experience advancing social impact initiatives.

Karla started her career as a teacher at Chicago Public Schools and UIC College Prep. After teaching, Karla joined United Friends of the Children to support LA County’s youth in foster care as a college counselor. Through Leadership for Educational Equity, Karla also served as a Policy Advisor Fellow for the office of a Los Angeles Unified School Board Member. She solidified her interests in policy analysis and quantitative research during her time with the Price Center for Social Innovation, the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, and the USC Presidential Working Group on Sustainability. Before joining The Education Trust–West, Karla was the Associate Director for the Southeast Los Angeles (SELA) Collaborative, a network of nonprofits advocating for communities in SELA.

Karla holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Anthropology from the University of Chicago, a Master of Public Policy from the USC Price School of Public Policy, and a Graduate Certificate in Policy Advocacy from the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. Karla is based out of southern California and is passionate about using data analysis, communications, and digital strategies for policy advocacy and social justice efforts.

Monday, April 8

Previous issues, submit a tip.

Princeton to change essay question, study further admissions changes for future years

Kaylee Kasper / The Daily Princetonian

The University announced changes to its admissions program on Tuesday, almost two months after the June Supreme Court ruling that prohibited colleges from considering race, ethnicity, and national origin when considering students for admission. The changes for the Class of 2028 application cycle will be limited to new essay prompts in the undergraduate application and measures to make the ethnicity and nationality of applicants unavailable to admissions officers, according to an announcement posted to the University website on Tuesday.

In addition, the University announced the Board of Trustees has developed an ad hoc committee charged with evaluating new admission policies to go into effect in future application cycles.

The long-anticipated announcement comes as many groups on campus have suggested much more widespread reform such as the elimination of legacy admissions and the introduction of class-based affirmative action .

In recent weeks, Harvard University has made a similar move to Princeton by changing essay questions to emphasize an applicants backgrounds . Wesleyan University college gained attention after eliminating legacy admissions in the wake of the ruling.

The announcement shares the ad hoc committee’s two guiding principles: “merit-driven admissions” and a commitment to admitting talented students from diverse backgrounds. The committee is also charged with reviewing the impact of the pandemic and of campus expansion on “the University’s achievement of its admissions policies.

The committee will evaluate the changes featured in this year’s admission cycle aimed at upholding these principles, including new essay prompts. The group of trustees will also be tasked with considering long-term changes to the admissions process as well as reviewing admission data and trends. 

These efforts represent the University’s commitment to “work vigorously to preserve — and, indeed, grow — the diversity of our community while fully respecting the law” as shared by  President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 immediately following the ruling. 

“This ruling also comes after a global pandemic and amid a significant expansion of the undergraduate student body. It is a good time to take a broader look and ensure our admissions policies in general are optimally serving the University’s mission,” the Aug. 22 announcement reads. 

The release of Princeton’s Common Application questions last week already saw a shift in language aimed at gleaning students’ experiences without explicit mention of race. Specifically, the question asks applicants to “reflect on how your lived experiences will impact the conversations you will have in the classroom, the dining hall or other campus spaces.” 

The announcement states that modifications in the application process for the coming year will make race, ethnicity, and national origin unavailable to all University personnel involved in the evaluation of prospective students in compliance with the Supreme Court’s decision. All such personnel will also receive education on what practices facilitate full compliance.

The  ad hoc committee, led by José Alvarez ’85, is expected to share its findings and recommendations by the end of the 2023-2024 school year before the board of trustees’ May 2024 meeting, though it is expected to regularly share reports with the Board of Trustees about its deliberations. One Young Alumni Trustee, Jackson Artis ’20, will serve on on the committee.

Bridget O’Neill is an assistant News editor for the ‘Prince.’

Please send any corrections to corrections[at]dailyprincetonian.com.

Reimagining writing seminar for all writers

However, while writing seminars teach helpful research and argumentation tactics, they often ultimately fall short of helping students with their titular skill: writing.

While writing seminars teach helpful research and argumentation tactics, they often ultimately fall short of providing students with the very skill that their name suggests.

U. under federal investigation for antisemitism after complaint by conservative activist

The U.S. Department of Education launched an investigation into the University on Wednesday, April 3 regarding antisemitism on campus following a January complaint. Princeton joins other universities, including Harvard and Yale, who are also facing antisemitism investigations in recent months by the Department’s Office of Civil Rights.

The U.S. Department of Education launched an investigation into the University on Wednesday, April 3 regarding antisemitism on campus following a January complaint. Princeton joins other universities, including Harvard and Yale, who are also facing antisemitism investigations in recent months by the Department’s Office of Civil Rights.

Eight multi-goal scorers propel No. 18 Princeton past Columbia, 24–12

The Tigers’ 24 goals is a new season-high, as the Tigers ran out to a 10–2 lead in the first quarter and never took their foot off the gas.

Most Popular

Charter club changed guest policy after conservative professor’s lunch. after headlines, the policy was reversed., hitch yourself to service, not just a man, fall 2024 courses offering an international travel opportunity, sophomore standout xaivian lee declares for nba draft, maintaining college eligibility, room draw for students with housing accommodations is actually unaccommodating.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Here's what happened when affirmative action ended at California public colleges

Emma Bowman

University at California Los Angeles is just starting to catch up to the diversity numbers it saw before an affirmative action ban took effect in 1998, according to a university official. Students walk past Royce Hall at the UCLA campus. Jae C. Hong/AP hide caption

University at California Los Angeles is just starting to catch up to the diversity numbers it saw before an affirmative action ban took effect in 1998, according to a university official. Students walk past Royce Hall at the UCLA campus.

For decades, the question of affirmative action — whether colleges should consider race when deciding which students to admit — has been the subject of national debate.

And as the nation's highest court has grown more conservative in recent years, court-watchers wondered if it would reverse decades-old precedents allowing affirmative action.

This week, it happened: The Supreme Court struck down race-based admissions practices at public and private universities and colleges.

Supreme Court justices ruled that the admissions policies at the University of North Carolina, one of the country's oldest public universities, and Harvard University, the country's oldest private university, violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

As college admissions offices prepare to tailor their policies to the Supreme Court ruling, California offers lessons on what may be in store for the rest of the country.

Here's the upshot: A quarter-century after California banned race-based admissions at public universities, school officials say they haven't been able to meet their diversity and equity goals — despite more than a half billion dollars spent on outreach and alternative admissions standards.

In an amicus brief sent to the Supreme Court in support of Harvard and UNC's race-based admissions programs, University of California chancellors said that years of crafting alternative race-neutral policies have fallen short.

"Those programs have enabled UC to make significant gains in its system-wide diversity," the brief said. "Yet despite its extensive efforts, UC struggles to enroll a student body that is sufficiently racially diverse to attain the educational benefits of diversity."

The shortfall is especially apparent at the system's most selective schools, the university leaders said.

An affirmative action ban first caused a huge drop in diversity at top California universities

In 1996, California voters approved Proposition 209, an affirmative action ban at public universities in the state. Before the ban, UC Berkeley and UCLA were roughly representative of the California high school graduate population who were eligible for enrollment at universities, according to Zachary Bleemer, an economist at Princeton University.

The ban first took effect with the incoming class of '98. Subsequently, diversity plummeted at UC's most competitive campuses. That year, enrollment among Black and Latino students at UCLA and UC Berkeley fell by 40% , according to a 2020 study by Bleemer. As a result of the ban, Bleemer found that Black and Latino students who might have gotten into those two top schools enrolled at less competitive campuses.

"Black and Hispanic students saw substantially poorer long-run labor market prospects as a result of losing access to these very selective universities," Bleemer told NPR . "But there was no commensurate gain in long-run outcomes for the white and Asian students who took their place."

Black and Latino students were also less likely to earn graduate degrees or enter lucrative STEM fields.

"If you follow them into the labor market, for the subsequent 15 or 20 years, they're earning about 5% lower wages than they would have earned if they'd had access to more selective universities under affirmative action," Bleemer said.

The ban has in fact acted as a deterrent to prospective Black and Latino students, Bleemer said. His study found that high-performing minority students were subsequently discouraged from applying to schools where minority students were underrepresented.

"Most do not want to attend a university where there's not a critical mass of same race peers," said Mitchell Chang, the associate vice chancellor of equity, diversity and inclusion at UCLA. That's because attending a school made less diverse by an affirmative action ban, "puts them at greater risk of being stereotyped and being isolated," he said.

These findings "provide the first causal evidence that banning affirmative action exacerbates socioeconomic inequities," Bleemer's study said.

A learning curve

Faced with plummeting minority enrollment, admissions offices began a years-long effort to figure out ways to get their numbers back up.

Admissions offices pivoted to a more holistic approach, looking beyond grades and test scores. Starting in the early 2000s, the UC system implemented a couple of initiatives to increase diversity: The top-performing students graduating most high schools in the state were guaranteed admission to most of the eight UC undergraduate campuses. It also introduced a comprehensive review process to "evaluate students' academic achievements in light of the opportunities available to them" — using an array of criteria including a student's special skills and achievements, special circumstances and location of high school.

In 2020, the UC system eliminated standardized test scores as an admission requirement, nixing a factor that advocates say disadvantages underserved students .

Study: Colleges That Ditch The SAT And ACT Can Enhance Diversity

However, the effort to boost diversity has come with a heavy price tag. Since Prop 209 took effect, UC has spent more than a half-billion dollars on outreach programs and application reviews to draw in a more diverse student body.

It's taken 25 years of experimentation through race-neutral policies, but UC schools have begun to catch up to the racial diversity numbers lost in the wake of the affirmative action ban, says UCLA vice chancellor Chang.

"There was no magic bullet. Some things worked better than other things. And this is also work that doesn't happen overnight," Chang said.

Still, the California schools are unable to meet their diversity goals systemwide. Chang says his school is not where it wants to be. It still enrolls far fewer Black and Latino students than their share of California high school graduates — a problem it didn't have before the affirmative action ban.

As with the UC system, experts think that across the country, similarly competitive universities will be most affected by the Supreme Court's ruling.

Gabrielle Starr, president of Pomona College, a small Southern California school that wasn't subject to the state ban, fears the selective, private university will lose its racial diversity under the nationwide affirmative action ban.

Starr says that being able to consider race has allowed her school to ensure its ability to put together a diverse class.

"Having a campus that looks like the world in which our students will go onto live is really important just as a bedrock value," she said.

NPR's Adrian Florido contributed to this report.

In a post-affirmative action world, Harvard admits its first class — discounting race

• KirkCarapezza

For the first time since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down more than 40 years of legal precedent that had said colleges can consider applicants’ race, Harvard on Thursday released admissions data for the accepted class of 2028. Remarkably, recent legal and political events do not appear to have affected the demand for a Harvard degree or the economic makeup of those students offered a seat.

According to data provided by the College, Harvard admitted 1,937 applicants from a pool of more than 54,000 students, so its acceptance rate is now 3.6%. That’s up, nominally, from 3.4% last year.

These figures give the public its first glimpse behind the ivy of how this country’s oldest college plans to build a class in a post-affirmative action world. Still, Harvard is not releasing racial or ethnic demographic data of students to whom it has offered admissions, citing potential litigation.

“Based on advice from counsel, admissions readers will not be accessing applicants’ self-reported race or ethnicity data or aggregated data about applicants’ self-reported race or ethnicity at any time until the admissions process has concluded,” Harvard spokesperson Jonathan Palumbo said in a statement.

Since the Supreme Court’s decision in June 2023, Harvard said it reworked its holistic, widely replicated admissions process, making sure that officers do not have access to applicants’ race or even their application essay answers about race and ethnicity.

In his majority decision, Chief Justice John Roberts, a graduate of Harvard and Harvard Law, wrote that nothing in the ruling prohibits universities from considering “an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.”

That means the Court allows applicants to mention their racial identity and experiences in admissions essays or interviews and that colleges may take those narratives it into account when making decisions.

This application season Harvard included new essay questions asking students to talk about, for example, how their life experiences have influenced who they are and how they might contribute to the campus community.

Related Stories

Supreme court rules against harvard's use of race in admissions: here's how we got here, gbh news' new podcast, college uncovered, pulls back the ivy on higher education, colleges are filling more spots with students applying early. who benefits the rich., diversity advocates concerned new federal ruling will affect minority-focused business efforts.

The admitted class come from all 50 states and 94 countries. Fifty-three percent of admitted students are women; 47% are men.

First-generation students make up 20% of the class, mirroring previous years.

That disappointed Natasha Warikoo, a sociologist at Tufts University and author of the book “Is Affirmative Action Fair?”.

Warikoo said she’d like to see Harvard’s incoming class better reflect the U.S. population’s racial and economic composition.

Warikoo, who has long studied and researched race in admissions, said it is “disconcerting” but “not surprising” to see this fresh data without racial demographic breakdowns.

“I assumed that we wouldn’t find out until the recruiting season is over so that there’s no worry about getting sued by saying, ‘Well, you recruited these groups harder than these groups,’” Warikoo said. “But I am waiting with bated breath to see what the outcome of admissions this year looks like at Harvard and all selective colleges that used to practice race-conscious admissions and can’t anymore.”

Anthony Jack, a sociologist at Boston University and author of the book “The Privileged Poor,” said it’s troubling not to have access to racial and ethnic data.

“A lot of the inequalities that we were starting to pay attention to are now hidden,” Jack said. “We never really knew how many students [were] Black from Caribbean or African descent versus Black who can trace their legacy back to slavery.”

Jack said he’s encouraged that Harvard has continued to recruit low-income, underrepresented students. To build this class, Harvard said its admissions officers traveled to 150 cities in the United States and around the world to recruit applicants, joining a new consortium of 30 public and private colleges working to raise awareness in rural communities.

Jack suggested Harvard and other selective colleges “double down” on first-generation and rural students through geographically targeted outreach.

“Place-based initiatives will allow us to recruit not just economically disadvantaged students but also those who come from racially segregated communities because of the history of exclusion and housing in America,” Jack said. “We know how segregated America’s cities are. We know which schools support students from minority groups.”

Before Thursday’s data release, experts had openly questioned whether Harvard’s reputation and brand would be undermined by the Court’s decision and the way administrators, including former president Claudine Gay, handled the University’s response to the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel.

For now, recent events don’t appear to have affected the decisions of high school seniors to seek an education at a certain college in Cambridge.

“High-school seniors are much more likely paying attention to financial aid,” Warikoo said.

According to Harvard, nearly a quarter of students attend without paying anything and the average parent contribution for students who received financial aid this academic year was $13,000.

For students who don’t receive need-based aid, the total cost of attendance is set to increase 4.3% to $82,866 in the fall.

Explore Topics:

More education.

Teaching disability history in schools is 'long overdue,' advocates say

On campus, Jewish and Muslim students fear for their safety

BPS investigating allegation that school staff tied 3-year-old student to a chair

Parents' questions remain after O'Bryant exam school move halted

Essay on Affirmative Action

The affirmative action emerged in response to the persisting inequality in the US society and attempted to close gaps between people that would help to prevent tension and confrontation between the privileged mainstream social group and discriminated groups, which consisted of low-income employees, minorities, and female employees.

Historically, the affirmative action in the US was started by the US government and legislators and the growing public pressure and emerging social problems. The National Labor Relations Act also known as Wagner Act of 1935 was the first major legal act that has launched the affirmative action in the US. The Wagner Act aimed at low-income groups mainly and provided employees with the right to unionize without fear of being discriminated by employers. The development of FDR New Deal programs contained equal opportunity clauses that also contributed to the enhancement of the affirmative action policies in the US.

Truman issued the Executive Order 9808 that established the President’s Committee on Civil Rights, which examined cases of violence and provided legal recommendations to prevent violence and discrimination.

At the same time, the affirmative action policies aimed at specific industries. At this point, it is possible to refer to Nixon’s Philadelphia Order of 1969, which was the most forceful plan to guarantee fair employment practices in construction jobs.

The affirmative action has a considerable social influence since it focuses on the inclusion of minority or discriminated groups and provides them with equal rights and opportunities facilitating their inclusion and integration into the workplace environment. The creation of equal employment opportunities contributes to the elimination of social differences and the society becomes less diverse and socioeconomic disparities become less striking.

The group dynamics was, to a certain extent, one of the drivers of the affirmative action because different social and racial groups have a different group dynamics. What is meant here is the fact that some social groups progressed faster and enhanced their socioeconomic standing, while others stumbled and lived in poverty. The affirmative action aimed at closing the gap not only between these groups but also and mainly between the groups’ dynamics. In such a way, the affirmative action sped up the development of low-income or discriminated groups to help them to catch up with the mainstream group dynamics.

The affirmative action has influenced substantially interpersonal relations between employees because employees from minority groups, for instance, African Americans, suffered discrimination in the workplace environment and had worse job opportunities compared to employees representing the mainstream culture. As a result, interpersonal relations between employees representing minority and mainstream groups were quite tensed. The affirmative action has eased the tension because it has contributed to the decrease of the difference and provided them with equal rights and opportunities. The equal position of all employees contributes to the improvement of their interpersonal relations because, having equal rights and opportunities, they view each other as equals.

However, the implementation of the affirmative action faced several challenges, among which deep-rooted biases and prejudices have proved to be the most significant challenges. In this regard, it is worth mentioning the fact that white employees often opposed to the affirmative action which granted non-white employees new job opportunities, thus, enhancing the competition between white and non-white employees.

The affirmative action was also viewed as the violation of human rights and contradicted to the traditional American culture and lifestyle because Americans traditionally believed the career of an individual to be a private matter and the government should not interfere into the regulation of the labor relations creating better employment opportunities for certain groups to close gaps between those groups and other employees, for example.

Law enforcement agencies also confronted substantial challenges since regulatory functions also required professionals working in law enforcement agencies to overcome their biases and prejudices. As a result, they faced the problem of the adequate execution of legal norms that enhance the affirmative action.

In addition, the affirmative action still failed to close the gap between the rich and the poor because of the historical difference in the development of the mainstream group and discriminated groups. For instance, representatives of African American and other non-white communities historically had the limited access to education that deprived them of better job opportunities even after the introduction of legal acts in terms of the affirmative action policies.  As a result, in spite of the affirmative action the inequality between employees persisted.

At the same time, researchers (Greenberg, 2003) state that the affirmative action was an essential step to close gaps and prevent the further aggravation of the situation in the US. If the problem of persisting inequality has remained unresolved and the affirmative action has never been introduced, the US could have confronted the large scale social conflict and riots that could have outgrown into a new civil war. Furthermore, researchers (Hastings, 2006) are reasonable in their arguments that the affirmative action confronted the opposition from the large part of the US society because the majority viewed the affirmative action as the threat to their position. In addition, researchers (Hamby, 2001) point out that the affirmative action contributed to the enhancement of the employment legislation and tighter regulation of the employment relations which protected employees from discrimination.

On the other hand, some researchers (Hastings, 2006) argue that the affirmative action created the ground for protectionist policies conducted by the state. However, such argument is questionable in light of the long-lasting discrimination of minority groups. Also, researchers (Greenberg, 2003) argue that the affirmative action contradicts to the US democratic norms. But the discrimination of certain groups also contradicts to democratic norms and principles. Therefore, the affirmative action is fair practice. In addition, researchers (Hastings, 2006) argue that the affirmative action led to the overregulation of the employment relations. However, the affirmative action also contributed to the better self-organization of employees and their unionization that does not involve the excessive regulation from the part of the state.

The affirmative action should not be just the matter of the government policy but it is also the matter of each individual. People should accept the affirmative action as the essential step to prevent social injustice. In addition, people should support the affirmative action maintaining fair practices in the field of employment. Such policies should be supported by the criminal justice system which should prosecute organizations and individuals violating principles of equality. Moreover, the criminal justice system should implement the principle of affirmative action within law enforcement agencies and courts to prevent further cases of discrimination.

Thus, the affirmative action was and still is an essential policy to eliminate inequality and prejudiced attitude to certain social groups from the part of the mainstream group.

Do you like this essay?

Our writers can write a paper like this for you!

Order your paper here .

I was just accepted into Princeton University after the repeal of affirmative action. As a person of color, I'm feeling conflicted.

• I'm a person of color who was just accepted into Princeton after the repeal of affirmative action.
• When applying, I made sure to prove I was a person, not just a grade. 
• I'm happy I got in, but I can't stop thinking about the other POC who weren't so lucky.

The college admissions process is a game. Unlike other games, though, you don't necessarily have the chance to fail, to practice, to test-drive, or to get good; you just have to win. You just have to play the game that has been impending since you set foot in high school.

I played the game. As a recently accepted student to Princeton University, it might've been the best I ever played.

But I had to because I was in the first class to apply to college post-affirmative action . As a person of color, I was the guinea pig round of the increasingly unpredictable admissions process. I wondered what would merit admission, how I could talk about my experiences, and what the "holistic" application took into account.

Luckily, I gained admission to my dream school , but I can't help but think about the other disadvantaged peers who didn't.

I tried to show the admissions officers I'm a person — not a score

I went test-optional. I didn't want to be quantifiable. Even though I am number one in my class, have a high GPA, and took 21 AP courses throughout high school, removing the SAT put a larger weight on my essays.

I figured it would be harder to reject a person than a number, so I gave them a person. I spent my essays talking about ideas I was passionate about and went in depth about my activities and why I did them. The "why" was a large part of my application — from my involvement in local and national journalism to my work at a local farm.

Related stories

I took any chance I had to write in the margins of the application, describing my circumstances, from the small notes about being in the first generation of my family to attend college in the US to how being a low-income student prevented me from acquiring specialized academic tools. The additional information section was my solace. I didn't pay for a single summer program, extracurricular, or club. Everything I did, I wanted to do — and a good measure of that is my hope to continue many of my high school activities in college.

Of course, I had always been doing these activities, but after the repeal of affirmative action, intentionally emphasizing them was one way I felt I could add dimension to myself. I wanted to show the admissions office that I was an actual person with actual interests beyond school.

But I have bittersweet feelings about getting into an Ivy League school

I'd be lying if I said the feeling after getting into Princeton was all sunshine and roses. I often think about other students like myself, who struggled to share their circumstances or lost a spot after affirmative action. Somehow, I survived the game when others didn't.

But the truth is I didn't have to beat out other poor kids, other POCs, or other minorities. I had to beat the majority. My competition was never the people from my background or tax bracket . I had to beat out the system that went against me, the larger injustice — even though some of my peers couldn't.

I remind myself I didn't steal anyone's spot, and the bittersweet feeling associated with getting in is actually a good thing. It means I still have my humanity in a world where "climbing the ladder" is the norm. But also, it means I survived; I didn't succumb. I played the game instead of taking the back door, which was offered to many affluent students and legacy applicants . For that, I am glad.

Ironically, this same feeling was verbalized best by playwright Finegan Kruckemeyer, whom I wrote about in my Princeton essay, when he says:

"This was a good thing, this was a bad. Of this, I feel guilty; of this, I feel glad…Some things I can change and some I can't fix. I'm alone, but as well, I'm part of a mix."

I do think I belong among the Ivy League mix, but like any good thing, I also feel like I have to answer for the flawed system.

Watch: Rikers Island is one of the world's most notorious jails — here's what it's actually like

• Main content