1

ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

Dismantling Cycles of Inequity by Addressing Race Neutral Higher Education Policy

Jamaal R. Washington

Kremen School of Education and Human Development - California State University, Fresno

HEAL 227: Law, Policy, & Ethics

Dr. Juan C. Gonzalez

December 14, 2021

2
ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

Introduction

A recent article titled An Argument Against ‘Raceless’ Policy Making (Lederman, 2021)

was published in Inside Higher Ed. last month summarizing a series of compelling arguments

made by Dr. Shaun Harper - who is a professor at the University of Southern California (USC),

founder and executive director of the USC Race and Equity Center, leading expert on diversity,

equity, and inclusion, and author of more than 100 peer-reviewed articles and academic

publications (Harper, 2021) - lobbying for systemic change amongst state executive officers of

higher education policy. According to the article, Dr. Harper used the opening keynote of the

Higher Education Policy Conference to address a vast array of racial and socioeconomic

inequities that exist in higher education and challenged state executive officers to stop

introducing racial equity policies that are race-neutral (Lederman, 2021). This topic and the

themes within were of particular interest to me - as national institutions of education returned to

in-person instruction following the national reckoning with racial and socioeconomic realities of

our education, justice, health, housing, business, employment, etc. as cascading dimensions of

the COVID-19 pandemic. My purpose centers on how our education systems (specifically higher

education) take bold steps to center practice on the racial and social realities and inequities that

exist for students and the greater society. I will further analyze the laws, ethics, and the

parameters of social justice responsibility for higher education leaders to address race-neutral

education policy; making connections to our course literature and other points of reference

critiquing the legal, political, and ethical factors that influence current higher education policy. I

conclude this work with recommendations and outline implications for the future of higher

education should race-neutral equity policy continue.

The Myth of Neutrality

3
ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

There is a school of thought that believes that higher education institutions have the

ability to remain neutral - especially when it comes to matters of a racially, socially, or politically

polarizing nature. This notion has been met with scholarly critique. While articulating why he

believes it is impossible for institutions to maintain neutrality, Wolff (1969) utilizes an ethics

perspective to indicate that failing to take action is as much of a stance as choosing to take action

(Wolff, 1969 as cited in Cahn, 2011). Wolff (1969) further points out that the omission of

political action is often more significant than commissions because those currently in power can

earn majority rule by default rather than consent (Wolff, 1969 as cited in Cahn, 2011).

There are overlapping similarities in this perspective and principles embedded within the

core of Critical Race Theory (CRT) which includes the belief that law, education, and many

other foundational structures within American society are not neutral, objective, or apolitical

(American Bar Association, 2021). In fact, CRT recognizes that while the law can be a tool for

racial equality, it also has been complicit in maintaining unjust social order (American Bar

Association, 2021). So as we think about America’s higher education institutions, is the value of

diversity neutral and apolitical?

Addressing the Elephant in the Room

When it comes to engaging courageous conversations amongst higher education leaders

regarding equity efforts for specific racial and minoritized groups, there can always seems to be

an elephant in the room. The elephant in the room for many policy-makers and education leaders

for addressing race with specificity in education policy is Affirmative Action - an executive

order that was initiated alongside the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that aimed to increase access to

employment or education for African Americans (later expanding to include Hispanic, Native

American and women) as a government remedy to generations of discrimination (Encyclopedia

4
ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

Britannica, n.d.). Opposition and subsequent legal challenges claiming “reverse discrimination”

in several landmark cases led to the end of this initiative in California’s Proposition 209 in 1996

(Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d.). Institution specific practices of affirmative action in admissions

have been ruled as unconstitutional at the University of Texas, while state constitution

amendment banned affirmative action in the state of Michigan (Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d.).

Thus the history of policy aimed at responding to legacies of inequity, and discrimination in

higher education have been contested and overturned by the judicial process.

One recommendation that Dr. Shaun Harper offers to the executive officers is to consider

what the benefits from race-based equity policy means for white Americans (Lederman, 2021).

This is a common CRT technique known as interest convergence that leverages the capitalistic

interests of the powerful majority to advance the needs for justice and equity for minoritized

groups.

Professional Standards and Ethical Principles for Higher Education. Higher

education features an array of professional organizations that provide practitioners with

opportunities to access resources that enhance practice, personal growth, development, and

expanded networks while establishing standards, principles, and ethics for the profession.

Several items within the professional and ethical standards of these organizations address the

need for higher education practitioners to advance social justice, equality, and equity within their

practice. The Council for the Advancement of Standards (CAS) in Higher Education (see

Appendix A and B) outline the following standards in regards to Principle IV which is centered

on the commitment to justice:

We actively promote human dignity and endorse equality and fairness for everyone.
5
ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

● We eliminate barriers that impede student learning and development or

discriminate against full participation by all students

● We extend fundamental fairness to all persons

● We examine the influence of power on the experience of diversity to reduce

marginalization and foster community

(Council for the Advancement of Standards, 2006)

The entirety of the CAS Standards serve as a necessary for educators to adhere to, rather

than a select few. Eliminating barriers, extending fundamental fairness, and examining power as

it influences marginalization all sound like standards requiring more from our leaders and policy-

makers in higher education as they work to address systemic student equity gaps and disparities.

Recommendations. While Dr. Shaun Harper acknowledged the challenge faced within

many states to create equity policy written with a level of specificity to race (Lederman, 2021),

identifying the interest convergence that exists across each (disaggregated) student identity, at

each institutional location, and within each social and political context would be a tremendous

step in the right direction. It would require our education leaders and executive policy makers to

tap into truly understanding an overlapping values that is proclaimed across a majority of

American institutions of higher education - diversity. This journey of discovery (if done

purposefully and with good intent) has the potential to push a number of institutions out of a

space of performative rhetoric. How much can the alignment of restorative justice and diversity

in higher education transform the learning experiences, future workforce, and social mobility of

the nation? How can we disrupt systems within the system (such as legacy enrollments) that

perpetuate inequities still operating today and well before ‘desegregation’ of education?
6
ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

My recommendation leads toward a race-specific Executive Order. This is what initially

got Affirmative Action in place simultaneously in all 50 states. Though it would likely face

multiple challenges and contests again, many students (who may not have had the opportunity

had they been born in a different era) were able to benefit. I believe that overlapping an

Executive Order with region and institution-specific aspects of interest convergence marketing

campaigns (a non-neutral position of institutional alignment with Principle IV of CAS Standards)

would be especially effective. The impact that diversity presents - especially within integrated

classrooms - has been proven to reach all students in dimensions that include reduced racial bias,

enhanced leadership skills, and preparedness for work in a diverse global economy (Maxwell &

Garcia, 2019). It is because of the value presented by these student outcomes and the alignment

they have to the best interests of all students, all higher education institutions, all politicians,

America’s labor market, and national economy that creating race-neutral education policy is no

longer a sufficient approach for supporting students.

7
ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

References

Biskupic, J. (2021, December 9). Supreme Court conservatives may have their chance to end

affirmative action at universities. CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/09/politics/affirmative-action-supreme-court-

conservatives-harvard/index.html

Cahn, S.M. (2011). Moral problems in higher education. Wipf and Stock Publishers.

Council for the Advancement of Standards. (2006). CAS professional standards for higher

education (6th Ed.). Washington, D.C.

Encyclopedia Britannica. (n.d.). Affirmative action | Definition, history, & cases.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/affirmative-action

George, J. (2021, January 11). A lesson on critical race theory. American Bar Association.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/

civil-rights-reimagining-policing/a-lesson-on-critical-race-theory/

Harper, S. (2021, March 10). About Dr. Shaun Harper. Shaun Harper.

https://www.shaunharper.com/#about

Harvard Law Review. (1980, January 11). Brown v. Board of education and the interest-

convergence dilemma. (2021). https://harvardlawreview.org/1980/01/brown-v-board-of-

education-and-the-interest-convergence-dilemma/

Lederman, D. (2021). An argument against 'raceless' policy making. Inside Higher Ed | Higher

Education News, Career Advice, Jobs.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/11/16/raceless-policy-making-inadequate-

state-higher-ed-leaders-are-told#.YaZcCKZwchR.twitter
8
ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

Maxwell, C., & Garcia, S. (2019, October 1). 5 reasons to support affirmative action in college

admissions. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/5-

reasons-support-affirmative-action-college-admissions/

Wolff, R.P. (1969). The ideal of the university. pp. 69-76. Beacon Press. (1969).
9
ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

Appendix A
10
ADDRESSING RACE NEUTRAL POLICY

Appendix B