Valpo Strategic Plan

[David81]

Which brings me back to The Cresset. You are likely correct that the cost was very low, but there are two questions that would need to be considered for whether Valpo should start it again. 1. What was the subscription revenue prior to The Cresset being stopped? (note here that I am not even saying the revenues need to cover costs, I am really just trying to judge the interest...1000 subscribers has a much greater impact than 100 subscribers, 2. Are there people willing to regularly write content for free? On this second point, I have seen great periodicals in which faculty write articles (University of Chicago), but I have seen many more cases where faculty don't consider it a priority. Admittedly, my perspective is on the engineering and business sides - so maybe motivations are different in liberal arts.

I have edited university journals, print and online, for more than 40 years. I also served as a columnist for The Cresset for 7 years. I can assure you that the cost of resuming publication of the journal would be minimal, and the decision to restart The Cresset is merely a matter of will.

It would return as an online journal, which would eliminate the major costs of paper, printing, distribution, mailing, etc. The Valparaiso University e-publication precedent and program are already in place at no cost to The Cresset (see https://scholar.valpo.edu/). The Cresset was already publishing companion online versions of its issues when the hiatus happened, and the journal's entire archives are available through Valpo Scholar as well. Check The Cresset Valpo Scholar page: https://scholar.valpo.edu/cresset_archive/

The editor could be compensated with a reduction in teaching load and a small stipend. In the academic arts and literature fields, it is commonplace for authors to submit articles to publications for no pay, merely for the prestige and credit, which can be added to a curriculum vita. The same is often true for assistant editors willing to serve as peer readers. Students can even be added as interns to help with everyday matters.

To view some other journals at Valparaiso University following this model: https://scholar.valpo.edu/peer_review_list.html

valpopal - If you have someone willing to be the editor, I recommend making that pitch. It does sound like academics in your areas are a little more willing to write articles for no pay (just prestige and credit) than in my areas (note: in my areas, there are a lot of other options for contribution that do not generate additional pay - editorships and reviewing for academic journals, articles in media or practitioner-oriented periodicals, etc.).

I will point out that the PlumX metrics on the link you provided show total downloads for articles ranging from 8 to 35 (35 for the last edition). My guess is that the low counts are because the vast majority of access has been via hard copies, but you need to address perceptions regarding interest.

I can assure you that the administration is aware of the above information and about campus candidates willing to serve as editor. As for the download counts, the 36 I see for the last issue is only downloads since 2/10/22 for an issue that was published in February of 2020. The ongoing downloads for The Cresset are 138 in the last 30 days and more than 2,500 in the last year, again for a journal that hasn't published a new issue in more than 3 years and when subscribers received print copies. On the other hand, Valpo Scholar journals overall have had about 750,000 downloads in the past year and more than 6,250,000 total.

A few points to supplement those above, especially valpopal's helpful explanations, on The Cresset and intellectual/literary journals like it:

1. Even before much of its content was also available without charge online, paid subscription revenue has never been the yardstick by which these publications are evaluated. They typically have subscriber bases in the hundreds, and they're not always on top of sending out renewals. Plus, a lot of copies tend to be distributed without charge. The key question -- a very subjective one -- is whether the journal contributes to a conversation important to the school. And in that regard, The Cresset has long played that role for decades.

For those who haven't heard of it, that doesn't render it unimportant. Hey, there are students and faculty at VU who couldn't tell you a thing about the basketball team. That doesn't mean it isn't a very important part of the University. At virtually any school, people will pay attention to what draws their interest, and often be completely unaware of that which does not.

2. Reviving The Cresset as a completely online publication, as valpopal suggests, should be eminently doable if at least a small core of faculty (or even emeriti) are committed to making it happen. The University should offer appropriate course reductions and stipends were that the case. Even in an online format, publishing the journal is a significant commitment.

The B-School's Journal of Values-Based Leadership (https://scholar.valpo.edu/jvbl/), under Prof. Elizabeth Gingerich's ongoing leadership, has transitioned to a fully online platform some time ago and continues to publish. I think it's a good example of how an online format can work well.

3. Payment for contributions was never the incentive to publish in The Cresset. When I contributed a piece in 2017, I was surprised to be offered a $250 honorarium. (I declined it and asked for some extra copies of the issue instead, which they were happy to provide.) I'm confident that if The Cresset is revived, people will submit quality articles and not expect payment in return.

4. I would be very, very happy if The Cresset returned. I also understand why faculty may feel reluctant to take on a significant responsibility in view of current workloads and lingering shell shock over all of the cuts and program closures. Having experienced this at my university several years ago, I can attest that resentment and distrust are normal amongst those who remain. Perhaps revival of the publication could signal a modest reclaiming of some intellectual territory.

[78crusader]

From an article in Quillette - "After College - the Coming Cultural Collapse of American Higher Education"

"The members of the public on the other side of this chasm are still willing to consider college as the surest path to a career, but they are growing skeptical. That skepticism, however, turns into outright disaffection when they ponder how our colleges and universities often foster what is worst in young people: ingratitude to their families and their nation, self-centeredness, and aimless alienation. Colleges ignite group resentment, unwarranted pride, or equally unwarranted shame. And the education that colleges provide has been hollowed to near pointlessness. Students graduate with a veneer of knowledge rather than a core. An increasingly obsolescent institution has wedded itself to an increasingly noisome cultural stance.

The braver students are already finding viable alternatives to college. More and more will follow. A substantial number of Americans now look at college as something that menaces the psychological wellbeing of their children. If they send their sons and daughters to college, it is with well-warranted apprehension, and because they cannot yet think of what else to do."

I hope our new president gets this. I think he does but not sure yet.

Paul

ps I still think he's wrong to prioritize a new basketball arena over a new health sciences building. The ARC was built in 1984. LeBien went online in 1970.

[usc4valpo]

is a new basketball arena in the works or just upgrades as discussed earlier?

[vu72]

is a new basketball arena in the works or just upgrades as discussed earlier?

Not sure where 78 got that other than the fact that the hiring of Roger Powell and the President's comments about the new arena at that time. 

The actually Strategic Plan states the following with no priority per se:

Build to our Future — Evaluate the construction of a new building for the College of Nursing and Health Professions and a facility for a nationally competitive NCAA Division I athletics program.

[crusadermoe]

This is a very fair hedge in a strategic plan even though it is frustrating to not know more.   

The word "evaluate" really only means they will study the costs and then evaluate early donor reactions before any type of timetable even sees the light of day in public. I would guess you are talking 1-2 years of planning and top donor testing, 2-3 years to meet the full gift goal and 2 years to build?  If so, you play your first game in the arena in the fall of 2028 to 2030. 

And of course the nursing project has a timetable of its own in tandem even though it would be a smaller goal and a shorter time.

[78crusader]

At Homecoming last year President Padilla said that each project would have a $50 million+ price tag.

It is true that he did not say which building would come first. My impression from his comments was that the arena would have priority - but of course I could be wrong.

Paul

[David81]

From an article in Quillette - "After College - the Coming Cultural Collapse of American Higher Education"

"The members of the public on the other side of this chasm are still willing to consider college as the surest path to a career, but they are growing skeptical. That skepticism, however, turns into outright disaffection when they ponder how our colleges and universities often foster what is worst in young people: ingratitude to their families and their nation, self-centeredness, and aimless alienation. Colleges ignite group resentment, unwarranted pride, or equally unwarranted shame. And the education that colleges provide has been hollowed to near pointlessness. Students graduate with a veneer of knowledge rather than a core. An increasingly obsolescent institution has wedded itself to an increasingly noisome cultural stance.

The braver students are already finding viable alternatives to college. More and more will follow. A substantial number of Americans now look at college as something that menaces the psychological wellbeing of their children. If they send their sons and daughters to college, it is with well-warranted apprehension, and because they cannot yet think of what else to do."

I hope our new president gets this. I think he does but not sure yet.

Paul

ps I still think he's wrong to prioritize a new basketball arena over a new health sciences building. The ARC was built in 1984. LeBien went online in 1970.

I dunno, the full piece reads like variations on ideological claptrap that have been regularly lodged at universities from the both political extremes for decades. There is so much distortion here, often twisting out of shape important topics worthy of discussion, but I'll just look at a few:

On college as a "menace" to psychological well-being and fomenting all of these terrible qualities: First, I'm sorry to say this, but many schools are finding that many of their students are arriving with a lot of psychological and emotional issues already. Add to this the specter of helicopter parents and you've got huge challenges for faculty and administrators at the ground levels.

I don't know what schools this fellow is familiar with, but at mine we do not have the time, energy, or motivation to inflame our students with "ingratitude to their families and their nation, self-centeredness, and aimless alienation." Sheesh. Indeed, I'm happy to teach at a school whose students are generally pretty grounded and unspoiled, and most leave that way as well, with hopefully some value added that we provided.

The full piece challenges left-wing raging with some right-wing raging of his own:

It is a place where certain ideologies are so far in ascendency that they cannot be discussed let alone criticized: America's endemic racism, climate-change catastrophism, and patriarchy lead the list. These should be understood not as systems of belief so much as symptoms of cultural confusion. Contemporary college is so lacking in a coherent intellectual core that anything that students run into that rings of passionate advocacy wins admiration. Black Lives Matter zealotry, transgender raving, antisemitic bloodlust, and postcolonial or indigenous fabulism each attract cultic worshippers who mistake their idols for "critical thinking." Why not? They have been brought up to believe that "critical thinking" means attacking whatever stands in the way of today's version of "social justice."

Really? While even I find many of the cultural/identity wars to be somewhat overwrought and even tiresome, this guy might be so busy raging against "climate-change catastrophism" that he may miss the flood waters or wildfires threatening his home or those of people he cares about.

If someone wants to skip college because they'd rather learn a skilled trade, or join the military (though recruitment numbers are falling short of goals), or sign a huge bonus to jump from high school to the NBA, then we shouldn't have any problems with that. But even with all of the issues, challenges, and excesses facing the higher ed sector, a bachelor's degree from a solid school remains one of the more solid entry or maintenance points for America's middle class.

[vu84v2]

I agree with the wise comments from Valpo22 and David81, but will add comments on a few areas.

The article states that colleges foster "ingratitude to their families and their nation, self-centeredness, and aimless alienation". I have worked and taught at two universities now for a total of 12 years. Beyond getting to know many of my students, I have a few assignments that I have used that offer the opportunity for personal reflection and life planning using course concepts. What has been surprising (to me) is how much gratitude students express - especially towards their families. I did not expect ingratitude, but the degree of gratitude has always been amazing. I also do not see self-centeredness, as many students express a desire to first reach financial independence and freedom and then pursue endeavors that help society - while starting families and being loving and caring parents (often seeking to emulate their parents).

Frankly, when I see these types of articles I wonder if the writers have been on a college campus or, if they have, spent time seeing the many aspects of a college campus. Between students, faculty and staff, my university is a community of over 14000 people. Combine this with an environment where people are free to express and explore their views and you could write an article arguing that it is heavily associated with any ideology across a spectrum. For the writers of these articles, it is fairly easy to conclude that they are telling their audience what they want to hear.

[valpopal]

The main issue that I have with the HSI goal is that it is unachievable, since getting certification requires 25% of all students be Hispanic. In a general sense, unrealistic goals combined with executive leadership that drives to meet those unrealistic goals can lead to investments, incentives, and behaviors that are not good for the organization.

On the other hand, the university where I work (which is better positioned to achieve HSI) also set this goal and improved to about half of the required percentage. Many very positive initiatives were created that increased the likelihood of Hispanic students succeeding (especially those from first generation college student households)...initiatives that also helped a wider range of students. As senior administration did not excessively drive for HSI (they dropped it 3 years after announcing the goal), it did create positives for student recruitment and retention while avoiding the negatives that can come with unrealistic goals.

Today's decision by the Supreme Court striking down race-based admission at universities could further hinder Pres. Padilla's already improbable goal for VU to become an official HSI. As 84 mentions, a student fte population of 25% Hispanic already was likely unachievable and unrealistic for a school like Valparaiso, which currently is 10% Hispanic.

[Just Sayin]

The main issue that I have with the HSI goal is that it is unachievable, since getting certification requires 25% of all students be Hispanic. In a general sense, unrealistic goals combined with executive leadership that drives to meet those unrealistic goals can lead to investments, incentives, and behaviors that are not good for the organization.

On the other hand, the university where I work (which is better positioned to achieve HSI) also set this goal and improved to about half of the required percentage. Many very positive initiatives were created that increased the likelihood of Hispanic students succeeding (especially those from first generation college student households)...initiatives that also helped a wider range of students. As senior administration did not excessively drive for HSI (they dropped it 3 years after announcing the goal), it did create positives for student recruitment and retention while avoiding the negatives that can come with unrealistic goals.

Today's decision by the Supreme Court striking down race-based admission at universities could further hinder Pres. Padilla's already improbable goal for VU to become an official HSI. As 84 mentions, a student fte population of 25% Hispanic already was likely unachievable and unrealistic for a school like Valparaiso, which currently is 10% Hispanic.

Good! "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." MLK

"The Harvard and UNC admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause. Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points. We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the six-justice majority.

[crusader05]

Pal,

I don't see how it would. Having a desire to increase more students to your population is not the same as using race as a reason not to accept someone. The Supreme Court case specifically indicated that it was about the negative use of race but still okayed other ways where an individual's race could be considered such as in essay format. The HSI initiative is not about admitting more Hispanic students but about encouraging more that meet our standards to choose to attend Valpo over other schools.

I think this case is interesting but will have little to no effect on most colleges who do not have an affirmative action program because they accept 2/3 or more of their applicants. This will only effect the most elite which will find other ways to ensure they maintain the diversity of students that they value.

[crusader05]

Valpo is also not atypical in that. These Elite schools have so many applications and so many spots taken up with legacy/athletes etc that they really have to figure out what to do with the other half of the class to make sure there is some semblance of balance.

My guess is what you will see is a switch to class based/need based decisions around this which will once again mean that the person that gets squeezed in this is the same person who gets squeezed in most college admissions in some way or another. Upper Middle class people who will still be predominately white with no social pull and will be very indistinguishable from their peer (all of whom will have high test scores/extras etc) but also would have to take out a large amount of loans to afford an elite school.

Honestly the biggest problem here is how the mentality around universities has turned into things like "high rejection rates mean quality" or "you must only go to fancy name brand school"

[valpopal]

Pal,

I don't see how it would. Having a desire to increase more students to your population is not the same as using race as a reason not to accept someone. The Supreme Court case specifically indicated that it was about the negative use of race but still okayed other ways where an individual's race could be considered such as in essay format. The HSI initiative is not about admitting more Hispanic students but about encouraging more that meet our standards to choose to attend Valpo over other schools.

I think this case is interesting but will have little to no effect on most colleges who do not have an affirmative action program because they accept 2/3 or more of their applicants. This will only effect the most elite which will find other ways to ensure they maintain the diversity of students that they value.

My comment suggested Pres. Padilla's HSI goal "could be hindered" by the Supreme Court decision. Three points. First, you state "the HSI initiative is not about admitting more Hispanic students"; however, to match the goal to be an HSI university, Valpo would need to increase Hispanic enrollment from the current 10% to 25%, which means admitting many more. Secondly, you imply that Valpo is already admitting almost all applicants, but that undercuts the suggestion that many Hispanic students applying to Valpo are not accepted because they do not "meet our standards." Finally, the Supreme Court decision will need to be examined closely because it seems to prohibit race-based admission "programs" and "processes." If viewed comprehensively, this might additionally inhibit universities like VU from race-based considerations in financial aid packages, which could reduce the number of Hispanic applicants to VU who receive decision-making assistance coming from substantially higher amounts of economic support and tuition relief.

[crusader05]

I think the bigger point is that we are not an HSI because we do not have enough students of Hispanic heritage choosing to apply or accept their admittance to Valpo both of which can be achieved without employing an affirmative action that prioritizes their admittance over others or leads to the denial of another person's admittance.

I did not mean to suggest we are not admitting them because they don't meet our standards but just that in general our pool needs to grow and we need to increase our yield on those students. Neither of which are an affirmative action issue.

[valpopal]

05 and 22: Do you really think VU can achieve the HSI goal set by Pres. Padilla without the assistance of race-based admissions programs and processes? If the modest targeted campus student population long-term level of 3,000 recently proposed becomes reality, the number of designated Hispanic/Latino students needed to achieve HSI status of 25% from today's 10% would be 750, about 500 more than now and easily more than the current entire freshman class enrollment. As 84 mentioned about his university, which apparently is better situated to attract Hispanic students, they dropped the HSI goal, seemingly deeming it unrealistic and unachievable three years after announcing it.

[vu72]

this might additionally inhibit universities like VU from race-based considerations in financial aid packages

I was wondering the same thing.  One of my granddaughters is getting a scholarship from Fordham in part because she has a Columbian grandmother, thus making her a latina.  I presume the high court's ruling will outlaw this sort of thing. As usual these sort of decisions add more questions than they remove.

[wh]

05 and 22: Do you really think VU can achieve the HSI goal set by Pres. Padilla without the assistance of race-based admissions programs and processes? If the modest targeted campus student population long-term level of 3,000 recently proposed becomes reality, the number of designated Hispanic/Latino students needed to achieve HSI status of 25% from today's 10% would be 750, about 500 more than now and easily more than the current entire freshman class enrollment. As 84 mentioned about his university, which apparently is better situated to attract Hispanic students, they dropped the HSI goal, seemingly deeming it unrealistic and unachievable three years after announcing it.

What's with all the nitpicking? If I made the same comments about what President Padilla is trying to do, you and David would be labeling me a racist or Hispaniphobe or some other made up leftist term by now. You say reaching 25% is not doable. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Is there any downside to getting say halfway there and adding millions of dollars to the coffers of a university struggling to keep its head above water?

Your negativity makes no sense, unless...Are you and your buds resistant to learning to speak, read, and write Spanish, like STEM faculty is doing? I know you're all tired, discouraged, and feel betrayed by your president, so I can understand if that's the case.

It also occurred to me that maybe you have a much better plan. If so, please lay that out for me.

[crusader05]

I agree with WH. When we know that the Latino population is the fastest growing demographic in the area and will make up over a quarter of our college aged population soon it seems silly to not work to make yourself stand out by showing you are prepared to meet their needs. Even if we don't make it to 25% increasing our population by increasing the number of applicants or those that pick Valpo over another school would help us reach that 3000.
Universities have always found ways to give scholarships to the students they want to give scholarships too and honestly this opens up what I think is going to be a massive legal headache for lots of universities: unless you have a direct paper trail indicating that X student was picked over X specifically for their race there is still going to be a lot of discretion on universities to be able to pick their classes. Are we going to want the legal system to decide whether a university didn't' pick the right student based on how they weighted their essay response? or if they have another skill like say, speaks another language, or meets their scholarship requirements for first generation. A lot of people who are bringing these law suits are going to be people mad they didn't get into a school they decided they deserved to attend and that therefore someone "underserving" got in for another less valid reason

[usc4valpo]

I feel the Supreme Court decision will not completely stop racial discrimination or disable university diversity in their enrollment. For many cases, the applicants race can be identified based on their name, location, zip code, etc. Based on that information, colleges can still maintain racial diversity without explicit inquiries about an applicant's race.

[Just Sayin]

I feel the Supreme Court decision will not completely stop racial discrimination or disable university diversity in their enrollment. For many cases, the applicants race can be identified based on their name, location, zip code, etc. Based on that information, colleges can still maintain racial diversity without explicit inquiries about an applicant's race.

Not so fast.

Yesterday, I wrote:

I am aware that, even if it does, colleges that want to keep discriminating will probably find a way. Certainly, Congress can prevent universities from asking applicants their race, or from instituting quotas, or from publicly admitting that they favor candidates from one group over another. But it cannot stop admissions offices from signaling that they will consider the "applicant as a whole," and from making it abundantly obvious that an aspirant who begins a cover letter with "as an immigrant from Ghana" or "as the descendent of slaves" or "as a poor woman from Appalachia" will benefit from having done so. We are, I suspect, about to see an onslaught of clandestine resistance from our universities.

But, in today's decision striking down affirmative action, the Court made it clear that it would not accept that:

But, despite the dissent's assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) "[W]hat can- not be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows," and the prohibition against racial discrimination is "levelled at the thing, not the name." Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277, 325 (1867). A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student's courage and determination. Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student's unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/a-key-provision-in-the-affirmative-action-decision/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=next-article&utm_term=first

[vu84v2]

The editorial board from today's Chicago Tribune offered an editorial about the impacts of yesterday's ruling, which I agree with. There will be quite a few public comments about the ruling, but universities will find ways to continue to have a diverse population. The ruling stated that race cannot be used in the college application review process. What it did not say was that overcoming challenges, specifically socioeconomic challenges, could not be used as a criteria. Indeed, overcoming challenges should be considered as merit-based criteria. Beyond adjustments to recruiting, I expect that there will be an even greater emphasis on essays describing how the applicant overcame challenges.

Additionally, the ruling essentially only applies to highly selective schools - top state universities (e.g., Michigan) who offer the best combination of price and perceived prestige and prestigious private universities (e.g., Ivy League, Northwestern, Stanford).

[usc4valpo]

My daughter is attending Rice this fall and I can certainly see the potential impact on this decision.

[wh]

The "3-D" parking lot is listed for sale.
1201 LINCOLNWAY
VALPARAISO, IN 46383
$3,489,139

https://www.remax.com/in/valparaiso/home-details/1201-lincolnway-valparaiso-in-46383/12641218509165810594/M00000259/531821

[wh]

A blow to the strategic plan IMO. Following is an opinion piece, but I think it makes some important points that many consumers agree with.

What happens now that Supreme Court struck down Biden's student loan handout scheme
Biden can't forgive student loan debt, so it's time for Congress to hold colleges accountable

1. "A student debt jubilee would have let colleges off the hook for their role in this crisis and given them a blank check to keep on raising costs, secure in the knowledge that the federal government will step in when debts get out of hand."

2. "With this ruling, the Supreme Court has protected hardworking Americans who have paid back their student loans or never went to college from having to unfairly cover the college debt of others."

2. "Colleges have launched dozens of expensive humanities degree programs that don't provide students with marketable skills. These sociology-adjacent majors generally teach postmodernism, identity politics and a victim mentality that leave students unprepared to succeed in today's competitive economy. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has vowed to end such low-value degrees in his country."

My takeaways - Universities have to reengineer their business models to survive. President Padilla's goal of increasing tuition in the future defies the law of supply and demand. Those days are over. If anything, private universities will need to lower tuition long term unless they can demonstrate unique tangible value.

More specifically, IMO righting the Valpo ship will require elimination of more administrative positions and academic programs with limited student participation. It's the only way to make a 3000 student enrollment baseline work. Otherwise, that number would need to be much higher to eliminate current operating deficits. So, for those who are surmising from President Padilla's recent presentation that we need only add a few more students and we're good to go may want to reconsider.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/what-happens-supreme-court-struck-down-biden-student-loan-handout-scheme

[David81]

The SCOTUS decision on affirmative action hurts diversity admissions and enrollment at elite schools more than any other part of the higher ed sector. (I speak as a supporter of some types of affirmative action who is not surprised, but nonetheless saddened, by the ruling.)

To the extent that two identifiable racial groups have lower aggregate test scores, applicants in those groups who had very strong, but not superlative test scores benefited from the "bump" that AA gave them, sometimes automatically in the calculus of inner elite circle schools. That cohort may have more trouble gaining admission to Inner Elite Circle U after the SCOTUS decision. They will likely fall to the outer circle of elite schools.

And falling from the outer circle of elite schools will be some very qualified racially diverse applicants who no longer got the AA bump. Schools like Valpo and schools like it -- very solid academically, but not elite -- will have a chance at some of these students, and if they enroll they could do very well at these institutions.

It will be interesting to see what happens outside of the elite circles of higher ed.

(In the meantime, Black and Latino/Hispanic candidates who present sterling credentials will be sorting through letters of acceptance with full scholarships -- regardless of financial need, somewhat ironically -- from the most highly ranked schools. The SCOTUS decision basically turned diversity student recruitment at those schools into something resembling P5 athlete recruiting. It will likely be one of the major unintended, ground-level consequences of the ruling.)