A recent circuit court decision regarding affirmative action in college admissions policies at the University of Georgia may have some universities across the country re-examining their policies on the issue. However, the University of Oregon probably won’t be among them.
Last month, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the University of Georgia’s Total Student Index, or TSI, system was unconstitutional. The TSI considers factors such as race and socioeconomic backgrounds of students not automatically admitted on the basis of high school grades and standardized test scores and assigns extra points toward those students’ admission. While the decision has no direct impact on universities located outside the jurisdictions of the court, it does create concerns for admissions offices throughout the country.
According to Director of Admissions Martha Pitts, the University of Oregon uses a system similar to the University of Georgia for as much as 20 percent of new students admitted each year. The standards for automatic admission to the University for freshmen are graduation from a standard or accredited high school and completion of required coursework, a 3.0 cumulative high school GPA and submission of SAT I or ACT scores.
“About 80 to 85 percent of our applicants are qualified,” Pitts told the Emerald last week. “For those who don’t automatically qualify, we look at a number of factors, including grade trends, special talents, race and economic background.”
The major difference between the University of Oregon’s system and the one used by the University of Georgia, Pitts pointed out, is that the University of Oregon does not assign points based on those factors.
“Affirmative action often focuses on students of color who don’t qualify (for admission),” she said. “Frankly, that’s not the case here.”
That sentiment is echoed by Katherine Jernberg, director of admissions at the University’s Law School, who said that while the University does a good job ensuring ethnic diversity, it does not use the quota-type methods that often stir controversy at other universities.
“Ethnic diversity is big, but students have to be able to do the work,” she said. “That’s always our first priority in admitting students.”
The issue of affirmative action in university admissions has been a topic of heated debate ever since the 1978 Supreme Court ruling in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, which ruled that colleges could use an applicant’s race and identity as a factor in the admission process, but prohibited the use of quotas to remedy past discrimination. Recent rulings, such as the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to uphold the University of Washington Law School’s affirmative action policy — which ruled that universities could consider ethnic diversity in the recruitment and admission of students — have added weight to that ruling, but others have served to muddy the waters over the years.
Among the most controversial was the 1996 decision of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Hopwood v. Texas, which overturned a District Court decision allowing continued use of race as a factor in the admissions process at the University of Texas Law School, essentially contradicting the Bakke decision.
“I suspect that eventually the Supreme Court will have to make another judgment on the issue,” Jernberg said, explaining that affirmative action is an issue that inspires a great many “complex misconceptions” that need clarification.
But until the U.S. Supreme Court or the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — which have jurisdiction over the University of Oregon — make such a decision, it seems unlikely that the administration will make major changes to its admissions process.