Over the last 30 years, federal courts have consistently ruled that restrictive speech codes and minuscule free speech zones on college campuses violate the First Amendment. So, why do college … Continue reading “This Case Gives the Supreme Court a Chance to Protect Campus Free Speech”
The syllabus is such a basic document that most of us tend not to think much about what goes into making one. What are its necessary ingredients? A listing of … Continue reading “What’s in a Syllabus? The Keys to Undoing Academic Freedom, If We’re Not Careful “
Even though Harvard won the first round in its battle with Students for Fair Admissions, a case challenging the university’s affirmative action policy, the judge did not address the deep … Continue reading “Testing Affirmative Action”
The Gallup Organization and Inside Higher Ed co-hosted a conference in Washington on September 15. They called it “Not Out of the Woods: Colleges, Diversity and Affirmative Action after a … Continue reading “College Officials, Take Note: We’re Watching You”
When the Supreme Court agreed to hear Abigail Fisher’s challenge to the University of Texas’s admissions program a second time, it seemed that the writing was on the wall. Why … Continue reading “Fisher Decision a Disappointment, But Won’t Stop Campaign Against Racial Preferences”
Perhaps you have noticed that many jobs requiring only basic skills and a cooperative attitude are now walled off to Americans who don’t possess a college degree.
The mania for college credentials hampers upward mobility for individuals without a college degree. They are confined to the shrinking and mostly low-pay segment of the labor market where educational credentials still don’t matter. (As I argued here, that explains much of the earnings gap between workers with and without college degrees.)
The Supreme Court endangered Christian student groups, but some states are coming to the rescue
Another awful affirmative action ruling could send the issue back to the Supreme Court.
This paper by Bryan O’Keefe and Richard Vedder raises a provocative question. Does the increase in college enrollment over the past 30 years partly reflect the changing pressures on employers based on a 1971 Supreme Court decision? And if so, could these pressures also explain the much-touted increase in earnings that comes from a college education?
O’Keefe and Vedder explore the impact of the Griggs v. Duke Power decision on today’s college enrollment. In Griggs, the plaintiffs argued that Duke Power’s reliance on two aptitude tests discriminated against minority groups. Subsequent cases and statutory law have changed the environment for employer testing. This may have changed the pressure to attend college.
The paper is jointly published by the Pope Center for Higher Education Policy and the Center for College Affordability and Productivity.
Conservatives willing to brave the touchy-feely miasma of the Supreme Court’s recent decision of Grutter v. Bollinger, which allows universities to consider race in admissions as an element of diversity, should be heartened by the ruling, flawed as it is. Here’s why.