Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How university diversity rationales inform student preferences and outcomes

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Significance

          There are numerous reasons why institutions of higher education may choose to embrace diversity. A common rationale sanctioned by the US Supreme Court is that diversity provides compelling educational benefits and is thus instrumentally useful. We show that such instrumental rationales are the predominant rationale for diversity efforts in American higher education, are preferred by White Americans and not by Black Americans, that they are expected to advantage White Americans, and that they correspond to greater racial disparities in academic achievement. Overall, these findings suggest that the rationales behind universities’ embrace of diversity have nonlegal consequences that should be considered in institutional decision making.

          Abstract

          It is currently commonplace for institutions of higher education to proclaim to embrace diversity and inclusion. Though there are numerous rationales available for doing so, US Supreme Court decisions have consistently favored rationales which assert that diversity provides compelling educational benefits and is thus instrumentally useful. Our research is a quantitative/experimental effort to examine how such instrumental rationales comport with the preferences of White and Black Americans, specifically contrasting them with previously dominant moral rationales that embrace diversity as a matter of intrinsic values (e.g., justice). Furthermore, we investigate the prevalence of instrumental diversity rationales in the American higher education landscape and the degree to which they correspond with educational outcomes. Across six experiments, we showed that instrumental rationales correspond to the preferences of White (but not Black) Americans, and both parents and admissions staff expect Black students to fare worse at universities that endorse them. We coded university websites and surveyed admissions staff to determine that, nevertheless, instrumental diversity rationales are more prevalent than moral ones are and that they are indeed associated with increasing White–Black graduation disparities, particularly among universities with low levels of moral rationale use. These findings indicate that the most common rationale for supporting diversity in American higher education accords with the preferences of, and better relative outcomes for, White Americans over low-status racial minorities. The rationales behind universities’ embrace of diversity have nonlegal consequences that should be considered in institutional decision making.

          Related collections

          Most cited references40

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Cultural Diversity at Work: The Effects of Diversity Perspectives on Work Group Processes and Outcomes

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Brown v. Board of Education and the Interest-Convergence Dilemma

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Social identity contingencies: how diversity cues signal threat or safety for African Americans in mainstream institutions.

              This research demonstrates that people at risk of devaluation based on group membership are attuned to cues that signal social identity contingencies--judgments, stereotypes, opportunities, restrictions, and treatments that are tied to one's social identity in a given setting. In 3 experiments, African American professionals were attuned to minority representation and diversity philosophy cues when they were presented as a part of workplace settings. Low minority representation cues coupled with colorblindness (as opposed to valuing diversity) led African American professionals to perceive threatening identity contingencies and to distrust the setting (Experiment 1). The authors then verified that the mechanism mediating the effect of setting cues on trust was identity contingent evaluations (Experiments 2 & 3). The power of social identity contingencies as they relate to underrepresented groups in mainstream institutions is discussed. (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
                Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
                pnas
                pnas
                PNAS
                Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
                National Academy of Sciences
                0027-8424
                1091-6490
                20 April 2021
                12 April 2021
                12 April 2021
                : 118
                : 16
                : e2013833118
                Affiliations
                [1] aDepartment of Psychology, Princeton University , Princeton, NJ 08540
                Author notes
                1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: jstarck@ 123456princeton.edu .

                Edited by Mary C. Waters, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and approved January 25, 2021 (received for review July 2, 2020)

                Author contributions: J.G.S., S.S., and J.N.S. designed research; J.G.S. performed research; J.G.S. and S.S. analyzed data; and J.G.S., S.S., and J.N.S. wrote the paper.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5503-1283
                Article
                202013833
                10.1073/pnas.2013833118
                8072243
                33846243
                54cf9788-5d3c-4978-b642-1a4f7ff26d7b
                Copyright @ 2021

                This open access article is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND).

                History
                Page count
                Pages: 7
                Categories
                431
                Social Sciences
                Psychological and Cognitive Sciences

                diversity,education,instrumentality,morality,inequality
                diversity, education, instrumentality, morality, inequality

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content12

                Cited by17

                Most referenced authors174