This summer’s landmark Supreme Court of the United Staes ruling banning race-conscious affirmative action admission practices in higher education across the U.S. has already begun to usher in a new era of college admissions.
On the day of the ruling, Chancellor Mnookin reassured the University of Wisconsin community that even in the face of the Supreme Court verdict, diversity — including racial diversity — will continue to remain a “bedrock value” at the university. But, Wisconsin Republicans have a different vision for the future of UW-Madison and have already moved to upend the admissions practices, though it might not have the effect Democrats in opposition fear.
Earlier this month, state Republicans held a public hearing to advance a proposal that would drastically change the criteria that the Office of Admissions and Recruitment uses to admit or deny students to the university. This measure would move beyond the current system of “holistic review” that officers use when making admissions decisions to adopting class rank as a one-size-fits-all ticket for admission among in-state applicants — a policy without much foresight but with the potential to reform admission to the UW System for the better.
Hailed as an “anti-DEI” measure, the new bill would extend an offer of admission to all state public colleges and universities, including UW, to Wisconsin high school students graduating within the top 5% of their respective class. Republicans hope the bill would help retain talented youth in the state who might otherwise attend colleges outside of Wisconsin.
Democrats and school administrators quickly identified potential flaws and contradictions within the assembly bill. For one, there exists no uniform system of grade point average and class rank across high schools in Wisconsin. Without any standardization, school administrators — not UW admissions officers — would have the power to regulate the parameters of which students will ultimately graduate within the top 5% of their class.
While simultaneously proposing massive changes to UW-Madison’s admissions system, the State Legislature is also making it increasingly difficult for the university to operate through budget cuts to the UW System — including a $7 million hit directly shouldered by UW-Madison. The Guaranteed Admission Bill would likely cause further financial concerns as the university would be required to extend an even larger number of admission offers to in-state students, who pay much less in tuition fees than their out-of-state peers, placing more strain on university budgets.
Sister Cindy must face social consequences for harmful speech
Budget cuts do pose an existential threat to many of UW System campuses, yet if Republicans in the State Legislature can put their feud with the UW Board of Regents (admittedly, a big if) to adequately finance UW campuses, this overhaul of admissions practices could serve as a tool that the UW System uses to promote racial and socioeconomic diversity across campuses in a post-affirmative action era.
Wisconsin would not be alone in adopting a guaranteed admissions bill like this one. In 1997, a Texas judicial ruling struck down affirmative action in the state. Democrats in the Texas Legislature advocated for Texas House Bill 588, otherwise known as the Texas Top 10% Plan in response with the express intent of boosting Latinx and Black enrollment at public colleges in Texas. Ironically, the aims of Wisconsin Republicans are not as socially conscious as those of the Texas Democrats, but similar outcomes can be achieved.
According to enrollment figures, the Top 10% Plan has been largely successful in expanding access to the state’s public flagship university, UT-Austin, for underrepresented and low-income students — especially among Latinx students. In large urban Texas school districts with high proportions of non-white students, the 10% plan increased the likelihood that students enroll at flagship campuses by 60% compared to students just outside the class rank cutoff.
Not everything about the Texas Top 10% Plan has been quite the success that policymakers had hoped. According to one study, the plan’s effectiveness diminished because well-resourced feeder high schools before the legislative changes continued to be feeder schools after, dwarfing diverse enrollment at flagship campuses. Yet, the rise in diversity resulting from the plan has caught the attention and criticism of Republican lawmakers, which should serve as a clear indicator of the overall achievement of the program.
During the State Assembly’s hearing on Wisconsin’s version of a similar bill, representatives spoke with admission officers at UW and found the criteria used to evaluate applicants maddeningly opaque. University representatives refused to give committee members anything short of heavily redacted files, obscuring insight into how the university chooses applicants. UW’s “holistic” admissions system is confusing but designed to give weight to many factors in each application. But, in a post-affirmative action landscape, evidence suggests that holistic admissions disproportionately favors white students.
The Republican-proposed bill will need a lot of revision to clear up standards and uniformity. In addition, it is critical to address disparities between resourced and under-resourced high schools. UW must help prospective Black students overcome barriers to application and enrollment through targeted recruiting and other forms of aid.
The plan to guarantee admission for the top 5% of Wisconsin students should not be a standalone policy, but ultimately, the UW System and state Democrats should embrace the opportunity to expand access to underserved communities. It is time to reshape admissions at UW.
