Affirmative Action

Question A: The Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard will decrease diversity in Ohio's colleges and universites.

Question B: The Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard will decrease the ability of Ohio's colleges and universities to promote economic mobility.

Question C: The Supreme Court's decision to reverse affirmative action will promote equality of opportunity in the admissions process.

Question A: The Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard will decrease diversity in Ohio's colleges and universites.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	8	Based on a recent NYT analysis, I'd estimate that less than 3% of underrepresented minority college students nationwide benefited from the banned system of affirmative action, so it probably won't affect over 97% of diversity because it basically affects enrollment in elite schools and less than 6% of minority students go to elite schools. Plus, nearly half of those students would get in on their own merits without affirmative action. So if Ohio is like the nation as a whole, I'd estimate that the main effect will be that about 3% of underrepresented students will attend less selective schools, but I'd love to see a more sophisticated analysis.
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Uncertain	8
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	7
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Agree	8
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Agree	7	Each of these statements really depends on how universities adjust their admissions process in response, and will likely differ by university depending on the degree of selectivity. Existing evidence from states that have already banned race-conscious admissions suggest shares of certain minority students decrease, however it is more difficult to predict the aggregate effect of a nationwide policy.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Disagree	8	If by 'diversity' you mean 'racial/ethnic diversity', then possibly; but to the extent that diversity writ large is still valuable to colleges and universities, those schools will find some other variable(s) to use in sculpting incoming classes. For the majority of schools (like mine) where there isn't a large surplus of applicants, there's likely to be essentially no effect. Also, diversity is still valued in the labor market, so selective schools will still want to cater to that. (I don't think any school wants to become known as 'that school that only whites go to'.)
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Agree	8
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Agree	8
Diane Monaco	Economics Professor	Strongly Agree	10	The US Supreme Court has delivered a landmark ruling that race can no longer be considered a factor in college admissions. This decision effectively prohibits the use of race-based affirmative action policies making it more difficult for colleges to achieve proportional representation of underrepresented students in admission processes. As an alternative to race-based admissions policies, some colleges are suggesting the use of socioeconomic status as a criterion for preference in college admissions. However, concentrating on socioeconomic status does not reprove the hurdles that affirmative action has attempted to ameliorate. A very significant shortcoming of a race-based approach is the potential “exclusion of deserving middle-class” black, brown, Native American, and other underrepresented students. These students may not have met the criterion for preferential treatment because of a low socioeconomic status, despite dealing with racial inequalities and other barriers that undoubtedly impeded their educational opportunities. Moreover, by overlooking the importance of race within admission processes, there is still a significant failure to recognize the need to augment marginalized racial groups who do not fit accurately into a standard socioeconomic admissions structure.
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Strongly Agree	9
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Uncertain	8	There is research based on states that removed affirmative action previously. That research generally show that on average there was not much change in college attendance except at the most selective schools, where minority enrollment decreased and White enrollment increased. So it could decrease diversity at the most selective schools, but will likely not have much effect at most institutions.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Uncertain	1
Kay Strong	Independent	Uncertain	8
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Uncertain	5
Andy Wekji	John Carroll University	Disagree	9
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Agree	7	While the effect may not be felt equally across all colleges and universities, experience of other states suggests it will decrease diversity at the best colleges and universities in Ohio.
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Disagree	7	Except for elite colleges, most colleges are desperate for any enrollment. Elite colleges should do more to matriculate students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Question B: The Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard will decrease the ability of Ohio's colleges and universities to promote economic mobility.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	5	Affirmative action is the preserve of elite schools whose main distinguishing characteristic is their ability to cream skim students who have brighter prospects than 95% of college students. Dale and Krueger (2002) showed that there is no difference in overall teaching at elite schools vs. ordinary schools, and although some studies do show an advantage, it isn't completely clear whether elite schools actually give their students a better education or whether they are just better at cream-skimming better students.
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Uncertain	8
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	7
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Agree	8
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Uncertain	7	Each of these statements really depends on how universities adjust their admissions process in response, and will likely differ by university depending on the degree of selectivity. Admissions processes that address economic disadvantage (without focusing on race) are explicitly allowed in the decision and universities may be able to continue to effectively promote economic mobility.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Disagree	8	Maybe a handful of Ohio students might end up going to OSU instead of an Ivy. They'll do just fine. For the majority, this will have no effect; universities that want to see black or Hispanic or Native American students in their classes will still find ways to get them there.
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Agree	9
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Agree	9
Diane Monaco	Economics Professor	Agree	9	The US Supreme Court has delivered a landmark ruling that race can no longer be considered a factor in college admissions. This decision effectively prohibits the use of race-based affirmative action policies making it more difficult for colleges to achieve proportional representation of underrepresented students in admission processes. As an alternative to race-based admissions policies, some colleges are suggesting the use of socioeconomic status as a criterion for preference in college admissions. However, concentrating on socioeconomic status does not reprove the hurdles that affirmative action has attempted to ameliorate. A very significant shortcoming of a race-based approach is the potential “exclusion of deserving middle-class” black, brown, Native American, and other underrepresented students. These students may not have met the criterion for preferential treatment because of a low socioeconomic status, despite dealing with racial inequalities and other barriers that undoubtedly impeded their educational opportunities. Moreover, by overlooking the importance of race within admission processes, there is still a significant failure to recognize the need to augment marginalized racial groups who do not fit accurately into a standard socioeconomic admissions structure.
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Strongly Agree	9
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Uncertain	5	It depends on how institutions change admissions policies and how much you think college selectivity is important for economic mobility. Again, the research shows that this will likely only affect the most selective institutions, which most students do not attend and the students who do attend tend to already have strong prospects and come from more advantaged backgrounds. So most, but not all, institutions should be able to promote economic mobility.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Agree	7
Kay Strong	Independent	Uncertain	8	Zip code is a powerful alternate to an applicant's use of a tick box.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Disagree	6
Andy Wekji	John Carroll University	Disagree	9
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Uncertain	5	Colleges and universities can still use other factors in admissions that directly impact economic mobility (such as first-generation student, family income, etc.).
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Disagree	7

Question C: The Supreme Court's decision to reverse affirmative action will promote equality of opportunity in the admissions process.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	5	I'd say that the decision will decrease racial equality among elite students, but the full answer depends upon how you define equality of opportunity. Almost half of African Americans did not approve of our old system of affirmative action so even many of the main beneficiaries are torn about whether it promoted equality of opportunity. I'd be cautious about answering this question given how divisive it is even among the intended beneficiaries. In a way, it is surprising that a slight majority of African Americans approved of the system which benefited less than 1% (since that less than a third of Americans have graduated from college and probably less than 3% of African-American college students benefited from affirmative action.)
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Disagree	8
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Agree	10
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	8
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Disagree	7	Each of these statements really depends on how universities adjust their admissions process in response, and will likely differ by university depending on the degree of selectivity. Students do not face equality of opportunity in preparation for college, so it is almost impossible to address, isolate, and assess "equality of opportunity" at the point of college admissions.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Disagree	8	Different people will think of 'equality of opportunity' in different ways. My politics suggest 'no', but others might measure it differently. I think we should all agree, though, that any effects are going to end up being small.
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Agree	7
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Agree	9	The decision will both reduce diversity and promote equality of opportunities. Universities will have to find new ways to get a diverse student body. Diversity is a foundational part of the learning experience.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Disagree	9
Diane Monaco	Economics Professor	Strongly Disagree	10	The US Supreme Court has delivered a landmark ruling that race can no longer be considered a factor in college admissions. This decision effectively prohibits the use of race-based affirmative action policies making it more difficult for colleges to achieve proportional representation of underrepresented students in admission processes. As an alternative to race-based admissions policies, some colleges are suggesting the use of socioeconomic status as a criterion for preference in college admissions. However, concentrating on socioeconomic status does not reprove the hurdles that affirmative action has attempted to ameliorate. A very significant shortcoming of a race-based approach is the potential “exclusion of deserving middle-class” black, brown, Native American, and other underrepresented students. These students may not have met the criterion for preferential treatment because of a low socioeconomic status, despite dealing with racial inequalities and other barriers that undoubtedly impeded their educational opportunities. Moreover, by overlooking the importance of race within admission processes, there is still a significant failure to recognize the need to augment marginalized racial groups who do not fit accurately into a standard socioeconomic admissions structure.
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Strongly Disagree	9
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Strongly Disagree	10	The key problem is that there are large differences in the life experiences and backgrounds across racial and ethnic groups prior to college. For example, there are gaps in parental education and household income that are due to both historical discrimination and current structural issues. The K-12 system in Ohio was found to unconstitutional in 1997 due to unequal resources across districts, and no fix has been made.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Strongly Disagree	8	opportunity should not construed as depending solely on academic preparation
Kay Strong	Independent	Disagree	8	Legacy admissions already exacerbate the quest for equality of opportunity.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Strongly Agree	8
Andy Wekji	John Carroll University	Agree	8
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Strongly Disagree	8	There is a lot of inequality of opportunity based on race that occur in the 18 years of a child's life prior to application to college. Eliminating the option of considering race in admissions means that these earlier inequalities will persist into college admissions.
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Disagree	6