Ethical Leadership in Higher Education Admission: Equality vs. Equity

Journal of College Admission, Spring 2007 by Caldwell, Corrinne, Shapiro, Joan Poliner, Gross, Steven Jay

This paper was presented, in part, at the University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA) Convention 2004 in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 14, 2004.

There is no shortage of places in higher education-most noncompetitive colleges could admit more students, but institutions often struggle to get the class that they want. Professionals consider the admission process successful when they are able to configure a class that meets the institution's many missions and notions, rather than just attracting a general group of students who want to team. Therefore, admission actions and policies to some extent, create a mismatch in supply and demand leading to an artificial shortage.1

This shortage leads to admission decisions becoming ethical paradoxes of equity and equality, as admission officers are ethically bound to strive for both. The following case illustrates an ethical dilemma in admission and serves as a springboard for discussion.

A Merit-Based Scholarship

By Mary Beth Kurilko

The applications in question were from two top-achieving students competing for a unique scholarship offered to a single high school senior from the town. Each one had attended strong schools, taken challenging courses, led clubs, started organizations, and were in the top 10 percent of their graduating classes. Despite their similarities, their family situations, genders, races, and ethnic backgrounds were different. The Hispanic male candidate, Juan, came from a single-parent home; that single parent, a father, was a lawyer. The white female student, Courtney, came from an intact home, with both parents having blue-collar hourly wage jobs and neither having attended college.

Academically, while these students were both strong candidates, there was one key difference: their ACT scores. The Hispanic male student's score was four points-a substantial difference on the composite ACT scale-below that of the white student. Jessica, director of admission, knew that if she followed the college's written guidelines for this scholarship, Courtney, with the higher ACT score would get the award.

The decision was exacerbated by the fact that Jessica's college had been enjoying record enrollment numbers during her tenure. She was a shrewd marketer, and she and her team had been able to attract more and better-qualified students. Unfortunately, with increasingly higher ACT scores from their incoming freshmen, more students of color were denied admission. Jessica's graduate work had been in the area of standardized test differentials, so she was acutely aware of this phenomenon. Admittedly, the decline in Hispanic numbers was slight, but some people were starting to notice. Student groups and faculty were agitated about the declining number of Hispanics admitted, and the president of the college was feeling the heat. The issue was compounded by the fact that the town had been experiencing a Hispanic population boom.

On one hand, Jessica understood their concerns. Enrolling a diverse student body was a compelling issue and important enough to allow colleges to consider race as a plus factor in admission. However, recent University of Michigan U.S. Supreme Court cases (Gratz, 2003, Grutter, 2003) gave Jessica pause; colleges and universities across the country were reevaluating their admission policies to be sure they were legal. These court decisions addressed the use of race in admission, but much of the discussion surrounding them indicated that minority scholarships and financial aid would be the next targets. In sum, the decisions said that race could be a factor in assuring diversity in admission, but there could not be a quota system to ensure minority representation.

Her college had never used an affirmative action policy in admission and the information distributed to the public indicated that the college did not consider race in admission decisions. The scholarship application, however, did ask for race, but the form clearly indicated it as optional and as having no impact on the scholarship decision. If Jessica started to use that piece of information as part of the scholarship decision process, it would feel unethical and might be illegal. Jessica wondered if she could consider race in this scholarship situation- after all, both students would be admitted to the college.

As she was considering, the college president contacted her and said that he had just received an angry call from a member of the college's board. This Hispanic member was outraged at the possibility that a minority student might be passed over for the scholarship due to lower test score. He pointed out that a minority student had never received this scholarship (in fact, few had ever applied).

The president, tired of all the pressure, told Jessica that she should give Juan the scholarship. As she put down the phone, Jessica knew she had to make the most ethically-challenging decision of her career. Traditionally, the admission director made scholarship decisions. Should she allow outside pressures to determine the recipient?