BUILDING A DIVERSE PIPELINE

October 24, 2005

Jonathan R. Alger

Rutgers, The StateUniversity of New Jersey

Introduction

When the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in the University of Michigan cases in 2003, it noted that diversity is a compelling interest in higher education, and that access and opportunity must be available at every level:

Effective participation by members of all racial and ethnic groups in the civic life of our Nation is essential if the dream of one Nation, indivisible, is to be realized. …

In order to cultivate a set of leaders with legitimacy in the eyes of the citizenry, it is necessary that the path to leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity. All members of our heterogeneous society must have confidence in the openness and integrity of the educational institutions that provide this training.

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306, 123 S. Ct. 2325, 2340-41 (2003) (law school admissions). See also Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S.244, 123 S. Ct. 2411 (2003) (undergraduate admissions).

The educational interest in having a diverse student body, and the larger public interest in having access and opportunity available at all levels of society, are essentially ongoing interests. As our society becomes increasingly diverse and the global community becomes a more and more important part of our everyday lives, it is hard to envision a time at any point in the near future when those interests will no longer be important. The Court was concerned, however, that race-conscious programs themselves should not be permanent. Accordingly, Justice O’Connor concluded her opinion by expressing an expectation that the consideration of race would no longer be necessary within 25 years:

It has been 25 years since Justice Powell first approved the use of race to further an interest in student body diversity in the context of public higher education. Since that time, the number of minority applicants with high grades and test scores has indeed increased. . . .We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.

Grutter, 123 S. Ct. at 2346-47.

Now, over two years after the Supreme Court issued its decisions, the clock is clearly ticking. Even though the 25-year expectation articulated by Justice O’Connor is not an actual “holding” of the Court, it has become clear that the organizations opposed to race-conscious measures will keep up the pressure on institutions to justify their programs and policies—and to demonstrate why they continue to be necessary. Furthermore, as part of the “narrow tailoring” analysis applicable to race-conscious measures, periodic review or sunset provisions are also required. See id.

On the one hand, therefore, the Supreme Court’s decisions and its emphasis on some time limitation on race-conscious programs could be interpreted as a warning that such measures will be scrutinized with increasing intensity in the months and years ahead. On the other hand, Justice O’Connor’s 25-year expectation can also be seen as a prod for greater action to meet the inequities that continue to exist in the educational pipeline. In 2003, the Supreme Court was presented with a great deal of research and evidence documenting the continuing disparities in access and opportunity in education based on race, leading it to conclude that “race unfortunately still matters” in society. Id. at 2341. In order to reach a point where a level playing field has been created for all races at all educational levels -- so that it will no longer be necessary to consider race as a factor in policies and programs – a lot of hard work will need to be done.

As a first step, institutions must identify and address those barriers to equal access and opportunity. In doing so, institutions must also keep in mind the differences in the missions, needs, and circumstances of their various schools and programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels. These challenges take on additional urgency in light of the fact that enrollment at the nation’s colleges and universities is continuing to rise, and that minority students are expected to constitute a large percentage of the increase in the next decade and beyond. See, e.g., Crossing the Great Divide: Can We Achieve Equity Within Generation Y? (Educational Testing Service Leadership 2000 Series). Projections indicate that half of all school children will be non-Anglo American by 2025, and half of all Americans will be non-Anglo American by 2050. See Harold Hodgkinson, Secondary Schools in a New Millennium (2000).

The pipeline problem is one that no single college or university can possibly tackle alone, of course. In its decision acknowledging the importance of the pathway to leadership to society, the need for diversity at every level, and the role of higher education, the Supreme Court relied heavily upon arguments and perspectives from a wide variety of institutions. Having been given an important victory and reprieve by the Supreme Court, the great coalition that appeared before the Supreme Court must now find ways to address the underlying pipeline challenges outside the courtroom:

[T]he spectrum of organizations represented by the amici (including but not limited to federal, state, and local governments, K-12 schools, the business community, and military leaders) must find ways to work together across institutional lines to meet those challenges.

The ways in which amici combine to contribute unique perspectives and arguments to the Court may be translated into action in other venues once the litigation is concluded. In the long run, this sort of continuing inter-institutional cooperation can help to address legal issues that are too large and multi-faceted to be resolved by any single entity or in any single piece of litigation. (citation omitted)

Alger, Jonathan, & Krislov, Marvin, You’ve Got to Have Friends: Lessons Learned from the Role of Amici in the University of Michigan Cases, 30 J. College & Univ. Law 503, 529 (2004).

This outline will touch upon some of the many ways in which colleges and universities can work with institutions in and outside of higher education to build the pipeline so that more students from historically underrepresented groups (based not just on race, incidentally, but also other factors such as socioeconomic or educational disadvantage) are able and ready to compete and perform successfully in higher education – and beyond. Institutions should now be looking for ways in which to expand the dialogue beyond the confines of higher education, and take a multi-faceted and holistic approach to meeting this challenge. No institution can go it alone and be successful, but each institution can figure out how to play a part.

Research

One of the things that we do best in higher education is research. Accordingly, institutions of higher education can contribute to the national dialogue on these issues by conducting research on the nature and causes of inequities in elementary and secondary education, creating opportunities to discuss and share research issues and results, and providing incentives and rewards for faculty members who engage in this kind of research. RutgersUniversity, for example, is launching the Rutgers Institute for Improving Student Achievementto conduct research and foster dialogue on these issues. Many of the organizations listed at the end of this outline are actively engaging in research on access and equity issues, and organizations such as the Ford and Mellon Foundations are continuing to support such efforts.

Some of the areas in which research might be useful include the following:

  • Early intervention techniques – what are states and other institutions doing to ensure that inequities are addressed at an early age so that all young children are ready and able to start and succeed in school? (e.g., theRutgers Graduate School of Education/National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers (NIEER) does a state report card on public funding for preschools. See
  • Funding and administrative practices – What are states and other institutions doing to provide adequate funding for school districts that serve students from groups that are historically underrepresented in higher education? Litigation on this subject has been ongoing, and various states have reexamined their constitutions and laws with an eye toward moving away from systems that rely solely on local property taxes to fund schools.
  • “Grading” states and school districts on efforts to provide equitable education services and financing
  • Models and best practices – what are some models and best practices of schools or projects that work well to provide equal access to educational resources?
  • Impact of existing programs – How well are existing programs and policies working to achieve goals of increased access and equity?

-Ex.: The National Research Council recently issued a report on National Institutes of Health programs designed to train members of minority groups as researchers. See“Assessment of NIH Minority Research Training Programs: Phase 3” (2005). The NIH had 79 such programs in 2001 scattered over 17 institutes and centers, making it difficult to evaluate their success comprehensively. The report suggested that NIH should centralize management of the programs, track the career outcomes of participants, and better define the programs’ goals. The report also noted that students have found the programs valuable for obtaining laboratory skills, learning how to make research presentations, and networking with other scientists.

  • Teaching and learning styles, to help teachers and students in an increasingly diverse environment: Research on these issues would help to identify skills and experience that faculty members will need to teach in increasingly diverse settings -- and that might be considered in the criteria for hiring, promotions and tenure.

Informational Outreach

As part of a more comprehensive strategy for recruitment and admissions, more and more institutions are recognizing that recruitment needs to incorporate a wide variety of forms of outreach to reach students at an early enough age so that the institutions can make a real impact on the choices the students make in their elementary and secondary school studies. Institutions are also realizing that they need to reach students where they are, in addition to bringing students to campus to expose them to higher education.

  • Programs for students, parents, guidance counselors, and teachersregarding various fields of study, the course requirements needed for pre-college preparation for such fields, etc. Current students (as well as faculty and staff) can be an excellent resource and role model for the next generation.
  • Ex.: Rutgers-Newark Campus Ambassadors Program— The campus provost selects undergraduates to visit high schools in that city to talk about the importance of college and the value of a Rutgers education. It is considered an honor to be selected to represent the institution in this fashion, and the program has been highly successful. See
  • Providing information in other languages for families of students for whomEnglish is not the first language—such outreach can send a welcoming signal to various communities and reassure parents and others that a particular college or university will provide a positive environment
  • Ex.: As part of a comprehensive approach to undergraduate admissions, theUniversity of Michigan translated part of its admissions website and related materials into Spanish. See

On-Campus Educational Programs

Many schools offer summer programs in various fields in which students from traditionally disadvantaged groups are brought to campus to learn aboutpossible fields of study and careers to which they might not otherwise be exposed. Such programs can be particularly effective if they reach students at an early enough age (as well as guidance counselors, teachers, and parents) so that the students can take the right academic preparatory curriculum to qualify for admissions into particular higher education programs.

Ex.: The Rutgers Summer Institute for Diversity in Philosophy is a prestigious program that brings together sophomores and juniors from diverse backgrounds and colleges throughout the country for a week of programs and social activities. Participating students learn about job options in and beyond academia, and receive living and travel expenses as well as a small stipend. Eligible students must demonstrate how their experiences and backgrounds foster greater diversity in the discipline of philosophy.

See

Ex.: Rutgers also has a Summer Institute for undergraduate students from around the nation in graduate and professional mathematics and computer science research, sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF). Students work one-on-one with math and computer science professors to learn the research process and understand how it helps advance social issues and solve technological challenges.

To the extent that such programs consider race as a factor, they are increasingly being challenged by organizations opposed to all such considerations of race such as the Center for Equal Opportunity ( and Center for Individual Rights (

In many instances, these programs are highly localized (i.e., they are operated by individual academic units or departments), and there is not necessarily an institution-wide commitment to providing this sort of outreach. An institution might consider, for example, providing financial incentives or rewards to units and faculty members who agree to undertake or participate in such programs.

Teacher Preparation Programs

Colleges and universities can look for ways to provide incentives for promising students to pursue P-12 teaching careers (e.g., loan forgiveness), especially in underserved areas.

Mentoring and Tutoring Programs

Many schools are now exploring “service learning” and community service requirements and programs. In some of these programs, interestedundergraduate or graduate students may work as teachers and mentors for students in districts that serve students from historically underrepresented groups. For example, the Douglass Project for Rutgers Women in Math, Science, and Engineering sends students to urban schools to teach science and help children achieve core standards. See

Financial Aid and Incentives

Some popular forms of financial aid (e.g., merit scholarships) have also been called regressive by some civil rights advocates because they tend to go disproportionately to students from affluent (and primarily non-minority) districts. Pitting merit against other forms of financial aid (such as need-based aid) may lessen public support for these other forms of aid. Finding ways to combine notions of merit and need (e.g., programs that look at the extent to which students have achieved relative to their respective starting points/resources) may be helpful to consider.

The private sector should not be overlooked as a source of financial aid to assist in pipeline development efforts. For example, the “I Have a Dream” Foundation model ( which students who graduate from high schools that are traditionally underrepresented in higher education are guaranteed college tuition if they graduate from high school—has been quite successful and has spawned a number of similar efforts. This program provides long-term mentoring, tutoring, and enrichment and tuition assistance support.

Corporations can also be involved in discussions about building the pipeline so that they have a diverse pool of qualified job applicants when students graduate.

State Budgets

In many states, higher education and P-12 education are essentially pitted against one another within the state budget. Public colleges and universities may want to explore collective methods to work together with their P-12 counterparts in the budget process to avoid creating this sort of competition.

Bridging the Gap Between K-12 and PSE

Programs that are designed to ease the sometimes-jarring transition from P-12 to postsecondary education may also be an effective tool in building and sustaining the pipeline. Some examples include:

  • Dual-enrollment programs are arrangements by which high school students take college courses during the junior and senior year, giving students a postsecondary credential, and creating the potential to save money for families and taxpayers and to shorten the time to degree. They have been called a “next best thing” for states wishing to increase the number of underrepresented students gaining a postsecondary credential. See, e.g., “Add and Subtract: Dual Enrollment as a State Strategy to Increase Postsecondary Success for Underrepresented Students” (April 2005), Jobs for the Future (a policy primer for states wishing to bring the benefits of dual enrollment to a wide range of students).
  • Transfer agreements between four-year schools andcommunity colleges

Identifying Possible Barriers in Admissions Practices and Processes

The timing and paperwork involved in higher education admissions can also put students from less affluent school districts at a significant disadvantage (e.g., because they do not have the same level of guidance counseling services as wealthier schools). The recent trend toward electronic, online applications may also favor students with high-speed Internet access from more affluent schools. Institutions that recognize these possible side effects of their admissions policies and practices may be able to address the possible inequities they create.