We are living in interesting times, which means we are once again returning to the ongoing legal saga between the federal government and top universities. In the latest news, two Ivy League Schools (Columbia and Brown, as our title implies), have agreed to share admissions data directly with the federal government as part of a settlement on anti-discrimination.
As this is admissions related, this has a chance to directly impact students who are going to be applying to these schools in the coming months. In this article, then, we’re going to unpack what this agreement actually was, what data is being shared, and how this might impact your own application to one of these universities. Let’s jump right in!
Columbia and Brown’s Settlements
Reported in the New York Times, this is a newly revealed aspect of the settlements these schools reached with the federal government to resolve anti-discrimination suits. These suits alleged that these schools (amongst many others) failed to combat anti-semitism on campus, and threatened millions of dollars in grant funding. Harvard is fighting these in court, other schools have opted to settle, hoping to weather the storm.
The White House itself is quite pleased with these deals, which include both various capitulations on points of contention, and significant financial payments; $50 million for Brown and $200 million for Columbia. While many of these capitulations will have a limited impact on applicants, one will focus squarely on them: a sharing of admissions data.
The other thing to note is that while Brown and Columbia are the first to agree to this, this is likely to impact many more institutions. As Inside Higher Ed reports a new federal memo would require most colleges who practice selective admissions to share detailed data with the government. What data? Specifically, they want:
- GPAs
- Standardized Test Scores
- Race
- Gender
- Application period (early, regular, etc.)
- Financial Aid Status
This is a lot of data, and goes far beyond what the government requested from universities previously, especially broken down to this degree. Columbia and Brown have already agreed to share it; it is not yet required of other schools, but it may be soon, well ahead of application deadlines, even as many colleges are already pushing back against these demands.
Why is This Happening?
The government’s stated goal is to ensure that schools are abiding by the Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action, which banned schools from considering race in admissions. Several politicians have alleged that schools are continuing to do so illegally; universities deny this of course, though many are using proxy metrics to promote diversity on other bases, such as economic or geographic.
Note that which institutions will be required to share this data has not yet been determined; the public has been invited to comment. It is probable that schools the administration has had legal disputes with will be required to do so, but how broad a net this will cast remains to be seen.
How Will This Impact You?
This is the big question, as any change to admissions automatically has a big impact on students who are applying. There are several different options; we will go through each in turn, and explain the implications for you.
Delayed Onset
Now, the current administration has rolled out many new policies which may end up impacting how universities operate, from funding cancellations to threats of lawsuits to investigating Harvard’s accreditation. Almost all of these have immediately been challenged in court. The US legal system is many things, but it is not known for being a breakneck solver of problems.
We anticipate that no matter what the official government policy ends up being, universities impacted by it (other than Brown and Columbia who have already agreed), will immediately sue in court. The way courts normally deal with a question whether or not a policy is legal is to put the whole thing on hold (or rather, maintain the current status quo), until they’re done arguing. Thus, this whole thing may be announced, and then immediately delayed for an extended period, meaning students need to do nothing at all.
Enaction and Compliance With No Immediate Ramifications
There is a possibility that schools willingly turn over this data, or courts rule they should while the argument continues. This then leads to two secondary problems: the collection of this data by colleges, and the processing of this data by the government. As anyone who has ever opened an excel table knows, data can grow overwhelming very quickly. With millions of applications submitted each year, this is a massive demand by the government for this data.
Colleges will have to scramble, and any reports submitted will come out next spring at the earliest, since colleges won’t have the data until all applications are processed. Once this is done, the government must review it, something that will be very difficult since the office that reviews institutional data at the Department of Education has been severely curtailed.
Thus, colleges may look at this impending mess, and decide not to implement changes, counting on the slow pace of bureaucracy and data analysis to cause the problem to be forgotten before any change needs to be implemented. This is unlikely, but laziness does occasionally win out.
Colleges Take Preemptive Measures
What may happen, and what we believe the administration is counting on, is that colleges will take preemptive measures with how they review and process applications to make sure they do not run afoul of government mandates and risk losing funding. This is the course we believe Columbia and Brown will take.
Other colleges, the most risk averse, are likely to follow suit; not every school has the vast endowment of Harvard with which to pay lawyers. What this looks like will of course depend on each school’s own personal decisions; as we say often, colleges are not a monolith. That said, here are some of the things we expect to see, based on the stated aims of the policy, should colleges try to comply with it:
- A stronger emphasis on test scores and GPA, the hard academic factors that are directly measurable and which must be reported in the data.
- A reduction in programs to increase geographic or economic diversity, which some have alleged are used as a proxy for race.
- New “anti-discrimination” policies by universities, which are likely to simply be performative.
The full ramifications of this are uncertain, but students from poor or rural backgrounds are the most likely to be negatively impacted here. Colleges currently consider your achievements in light of your circumstances, but this push seems designed to discourage that approach specifically.
If colleges take this approach, then you may find your path to a top school either easier or harder, based on your own circumstances. The better you perform academically, grades and test scores, the more insulated you will be from this. Colleges will still be looking at soft factors, though some may change how they weight them.
Final Thoughts
This is a dramatic change in the admissions landscape, though just how broad of a shift it is remains to be seen. Our prediction is that this will be felt the most at elite schools; the top private universities and flagship state schools, as these are the colleges the public and media pay the most mind to, and who much of the government’s attention has been focused on already.
No matter how things play out, we’ll be here every step of the way, keeping you in the loop and helping you track how the latest changes may impact your own admissions journey. If you have specific concerns on how this may impact your candidacy, or want expert advice navigating a frequently shifting admissions landscape, then schedule a free consultation with us today, we’re always happy to hear from you.
