3 Ways to Combat Bias in Higher Education, Starting with Admissions

Promoting equity in higher education admissions is a challenge that institutions are currently facing. In order to create a diverse and inclusive environment for student applicants, it is necessary to update admissions’ organizational processes to actively combat potential biases. Our part in developing the most diverse student population possible is by working closely with college admissions offices by identifying, measuring, and removing the impact of bias and how it occurs within the communication patterns of prospective students and their admissions counselors.

The student application process in higher education admissions is one of the most crucial areas for combating bias. In a survey we conducted in Q1 of 2023, college admission professionals shared their experience and thoughts regarding their school’s DEI objectives. The survey results show that a sizable percentage of respondents feel that DEI goals are not clearly defined for either their student body (27%) or school employees (38%).

Whether it is attracting, evaluating, and admitting new diverse students or retaining current diverse students, there are many ways institutions can implement an intentional focus to eliminate bias and develop the most diverse student populations possible. Here are some methods institutions can deploy to combat bias in college admissions to improve equity within higher education for more inclusive campus communities.

Strategies for Combating Bias in Admissions

1- Be aware that biases exist

To ensure that prospective students are treated with fairness in their application process, we must first realize that though conscious biases in the admissions process are easy to eliminate, unconscious biases may still be prevalent. Without this realization, it hinders diversity in institutions and gives an unfair advantage to prospective students in the application process. 

Our mission is to eliminate racial bias in admissions processes by providing institutions a valuable tool to establish better standards of communication with potential minority students. By doing so, we aim to improve equity within higher ed for a more diverse and inclusive future filled with leaders from varying backgrounds and ethnicities. The first step in achieving this is understanding the many different types of unconscious biases in the admissions. Below are a few common types of unconscious biases:

  • The Halo Effect
    • The halo effect is a type of cognitive bias whereby our perception of someone is positively influenced by our opinions of that person’s other related traits.
  • Confirmation Bias
    • Confirmation bias is the tendency of people to favor information that confirms their existing beliefs or hypotheses.
  • Correspondence Bias
    • Correspondence bias is the tendency for people to over-emphasize dispositional or personality-based explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing situational explanations.

Once you have an understanding of the types of biases that exist, build strategies dedicated to eliminating them such as implementing new standardized admissions criteria and understanding data from the use of technology to support those new standards. One of the most important insights received from the survey was that a whopping 88% of respondents indicated that there is a DEI champion in their admissions office, which is a great start. 

2 –  Use standardized admissions criteria

Using standardized criteria establishes a level playing field for all applicants. Multiple screening methods give you a more well-rounded view of candidates. Focusing on just one or two of these strategies can help, but biases can still slip through the cracks. The real strength comes from layering all of these practices on top of each other. By implementing best practices across the board, it creates an admissions process that fights against bias every step of the way. 

In the survey conducted, admission professionals were asked specifically what their admissions office leadership does for DEI efforts regarding the student body. The results seem to indicate that although the school may have clearly defined DEI goals, these are less clearly defined or communicated to the admissions counselors themselves and a possible lack of accountability for meeting said goals. 

61% stated that leadership provided encouragement

52% stated that leadership provided adequate funding to support diversity tactics

43% stated that leadership presented clear, defined goals

39% stated that leadership set informal target admissions numbers

A way to help standardize criteria is to establish better communication standards between enrollment managers and prospective students. But in order to do so, you must first understand your current communication process to discover potential gaps. Accessible data, such as reports on response time in email correspondences can help identify the root cause of admissions challenges.

3 – Implement helpful technology

While almost half of respondents in the survey feel that their school is meeting DEI goals (47%), the other half feel their organization is falling short. Technology can be a great resource for improving admissions equity because with help from the right software, admissions can get data to uncover unconscious biases starting with the application processes.

76% of respondents state that they would find value in a technology tool that promotes equitable communications with and improves the conversion of applicants of color. 

Software like Enroll Assist by Accelerated Equity Insights measures response time rates in correspondences between admissions and student applicants based on various criteria like gender, ethnicity, and location. Understanding this data enables admissions staff to measure communication patterns. This information can help enrollment leaders uncover and resolve biases that hinder reaching admissions’ diversity goals.

95% of respondents indicate that email communications with recruits occur at least 50% of the time, with the remaining 5% being used 30-50% of the time. Clearly, this is a frequent method of communication with potential students.

When asked what their admissions office’s expected frequency of email responses to recruits, what their actual average response rate is, and what they felt would be ideal, respondents replied:

 

The results above indicate that help is needed in reaching their expected and ideal goals for email responses. Survey respondents would clearly benefit from a tool or system that would help them beat the expected/attain the ideal frequency rates for applicant responses. 

Having analytics based on the applicants’ gender, race or ethnicity, and location by zip code readily available, can show discrepancies in delayed email response times. Identifying this potential unconscious bias overall or by counselor in a report can help pinpoint specific challenges which in turn can help admissions run a more inclusive admissions process. Enrollment managers are informed on their team’s performance with useful data points and admissions staff are empowered to deliver an equitable admissions experience for prospective students. 

Tips to Continue Combating Bias Even After Admissions

Promote open communication

Fostering a culture of open communication allows students to speak up when they recognize biases that others may have failed to notice. It’s also important to have various voices in decision-making roles. Building a diverse leadership team provides more perspectives and helps eliminate confirmation bias.

Build a culture of inclusion

Building an institutional culture that accepts all students as they are stifles discrimination and bias and helps retain underrepresented students. The two strategies above, promoting open communication and building a diverse leadership team, are vital components of fostering an inclusive culture. However, creating an inclusive institutional climate goes beyond management and communication.

Encourage students to feel comfortable about being themselves

Seek your institution’s feedback to ensure the culture you’re developing is truly inclusive and does not have any biases baked in. Develop programs that hear and invite all students’ ideas, recognize all students’ achievements, and support all students’ developments, regardless of ethnicity or gender. 

Combating bias in higher education admissions cannot be solved by a single initiative or strategy on its own. To build equity, schools must remain flexible and constantly seek ways to improve their equity programs while applying best practices with evidence from supporting data. With continued commitment and continuous review of your practices, you can minimize the role of bias in your institution.

Contact us to see how we can help your institution today.

References

 

Mcleod, S., PhD. (2023). Fundamental attribution error in psychology. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/fundamental-attribution.html

Perera, A. (2023). Halo Effect In Psychology: Definition and Examples. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/halo-effect.html

Simkus, J. (2023). Confirmation Bias In Psychology: Definition & Examples. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/confirmation-bias.html

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

SCOTUS Decision: What can higher education institutions do while we await a decision on affirmative action

Students, admissions professionals, and social justice advocates are standing by for a landmark Supreme Court decision that will determine if affirmative action will be upheld or overturned. The decision is expected by the end of June 2023 regarding Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard, and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina. Both cases argue against the current legal precedent upon which higher education admission practices, policies and goals are based. The Supreme Court has rejected the previous two arguments from Edward Blum who leads Student for Fair Admissions (SFFA), but removing affirmative action would be anything but fair to those who will be impacted the most, historically underrepresented students. Accelerated Equity Insights supports a decision to uphold the current laws, as the original tenants of affirmative action remain relevant today.

“Far too many students are left out of higher education. It’s imperative that leaders commit to holding colleges and universities accountable to admitting diverse student bodies. In order to do so, we need greater transparency in college admissions. By expanding the breadth of admissions data collected and disaggregating it by race, ethnicity, and socio-economic status, the Department of Education would shine a light on which schools are serving as gatekeepers to privilege and which schools are making a commitment to equity and social mobility,” said Shakira Petit, Interim CEO, Education Reform Now.

With this in mind, here are some actions Universities can take:

Action Steps

1- Create a cross-functional commission that is firmly rooted in your mission and vision and can participate in your intake process 

In this commission, you can identify the areas or programs that might be at risk as a result of their closeness to the admissions process. Involve your stakeholders to prepare responses through planning, impact, investment, and communication.

2- Examine your current recruitment process

Your current recruitment process may be impacted, so look for chances to expand or reimagine target regions and high school types as well as build relationships with external stakeholders.

3- Ensure that financial aid and scholarship policies are clearly outlined

These policies may also be impacted by the SCOTUS decision. Having them clearly outlined will allow your institution to quickly reference how these might be impacted.

4- Conduct an inventory of where race is used, or referenced, in your enrollment process

This inventory will allow a quick reference on which part of your enrollment process may be impacted.

5- Examine your application process 

While examining, see if the review criteria, application essays, personal statements, or supplemental questions need to be changed if race can no longer be used in admissions. 

6- Evaluate current admissions policies 

Utilize information, advice from internal and external stakeholders, and data to evaluate current admissions policies and practices in light of current law and to identify any potential changes that may be required.

Taking these steps will allow your university to be prepared for when the decision comes out. Now, let’s address some of the misconceptions that are present with affirmative action.

Misconceptions of Affirmative Action

There are two prominent misconceptions about affirmative action:

Misconception #1: Quotas are being utilized in affirmative action strategies

Reality: The truth is that quotas—established minimum or maximum numbers for people from a specific racial, gender, or religious category—have been illegal in the United States since 1978 and are not utilized in any of the current affirmative action strategies. Affirmative action programs seek equitable representation for people from many protected categories, including gender, ethnicity, and disability, rather than giving a particular or special preference or advantage to BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) people. In fact, over the last 50 years, white women have been the primary beneficiaries of affirmative action. Furthermore, race is only one of many factors that admissions officers take into account when creating an incoming class at colleges and universities; others include an applicant’s hometown, athleticism, socioeconomic status, or connections to alumni, donors, or university staff.

Misconception #2: Affirmative action discriminates against Asian Americans

Reality: “Right now, a common fallacy is that race-conscious admissions discriminate against Asian Americans by creating a cap on their admission. That argument is at the heart of the case Students for Fair Admissions has lodged against Harvard University, but it’s not born out by the facts. In fact, scholars of Asian American politics have noted that the percentage of Asian American applicants admitted to Harvard has increased 29 percent in the last ten years and that Asian Americans make up over 20 percent of Harvard’s student population.” said Literature professor Sara Clarke Kaplan, executive director of AU’s Antiracist Research and Policy Center. In addition, Asian Americans have been calling for affirmative action since the 1950s following the mass incarceration of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor. Since then, they have helped higher education open for excluded communities of color and benefited from affirmative action programs.

Conclusion

Taking action to review current policies will allow you to be more informed when a decision is made. Brainstorming potential ways to adjust will allow for much-needed conversations with your stakeholders and help you feel more prepared. Together we will get to the other side of this. Stay tuned for more information and resources from us here at Accelerated Equity Insights by signing up for our newsletter.

References

Chang, J. (2023, April 13). Asian Americans spent decades seeking fair education. Then the right stole the narrative. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/13/affirmative-action-asian-americans-us-universities

Housman, P. The Upcoming Supreme Court Ruling on Affirmative Action: Why It Matters. (2023, April 12). American University. https://www.american.edu/cas/news/the-upcoming-supreme-court-ruling-on-affirmative-action-why-it-matters.cfm

Jaschik, S. (2023, February, 5). Colleges start to prepare for losing Supreme Court case. Inside Higher Ed | Higher Education News, Events and Jobs. https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2023/02/06/colleges-start-prepare-losing-supreme-court-case

NEWS: Ahead of Two College Admissions Supreme Court Cases, Bowman, Merkley, Wilson Urge Department of Education to Address Racial and Ethnic Gaps in Higher Education. (2023, March 7). Congressman Jamaal Bowman. https://bowman.house.gov/2023/3/news-ahead-of-two-college-admissions-supreme-court-cases-bowman-merkley-wilson-urge-department-of-education-to-address-racial-and-ethnic-gaps-in-higher-education

The Access and Diversity Collaborative’s Action Guide for Higher Education. (2023). College Board. https://professionals.collegeboard.org/pdf/adc-key-action-guide.pdf

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Exit mobile version
%%footer%%
Exit mobile version