August 2024
This post marshals reason and facts that vindicate a politically incorrect conclusion: There is no socially redeeming value in funneling taxpayer money into a retrograde institution that promotes racial tribalism and denies students the benefits of social integration.
Currently, the US is home to 88 four-year Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), of which 40 are state supported public institutions. Although people of all races have the right to attend, the vast majority of HBCUs remain highly segregated.
Private HBCUs are not the focus of concern. They have a legal right to indulge voluntary segregation as long as their customers and private benefactors foot the bill.
Rather, the problem involves public HBCUs. In 1953 the Supreme Court ruled that separate public schooling is UNEQUAL, and therefore unconstitutional. State colleges and universities are not exempted from that decision.
So, why are taxpayers still bankrolling HBCUs that have failed to desegregate, as expected by law?
.....................
Why has de facto segregation at public HBCUs persisted to this day?
Soon after the Civil Rights act of 1964, States that still operated a dual systems of public higher education were ordered to dismantle it. They ended de jure segregation by repealing the exclusionary Jim Crow laws and ensuring that public colleges operated according to race-neutral standards.
Unfortunately, this was not enough to eliminate, or even cripple, the dual system. Although Traditional White Institutions (TWIs) were modestly successful in enrolling black students, white attendance at HBCUs was miniscule, and still is. So, most HBCUs remained highly segregated.
Lingering prejudice is not the only reason college-bound whites are averse to HBCUs. These schools still identify with their mission as minority serving institutions that memorialize African American culture and tradition. It's a fairly clear signal that whites are not welcome.
Furthermore, if white recruitment were too successful, HBCUs' appeal to blacks would be undermined. So, HBCUs really prefer only token integration, as evident in the lethargy of their DEI departments.
In 1975, the entrenched segregation at Mississippi's public HBCUs was challenged in Federal Court. State officials defended the segregation on the grounds that it arose voluntarily, from students' "unfettered freedom of choice."
The court demurred. It ruled that just because segregation is voluntary does not make it educationally equal or beneficial. After all, a black student's "free choice" might be influenced more by the vestiges of Jim Crow than by enlightened self interest. In this case, the state is obliged to terminate public funding of HBCUs that don't desegregate, and use the funds to expand alternative educational opportunities for Black students.
However, the court also ruled that if voluntary segregation contributes measurably to black educational attainment, public funding should remain.
In other words, the court gave the dinosaurs of Jim Crow an excuse to avoid extinction. As long as voluntary segregation proves to be educationally valuable, taxpayer funding is legitimate. Naturally, the HBCU lobby embarked on a search for educational value.
The "secret sauce" theory of educational value.
Citing favorable studies, the HBCU lobby promoted the notion that HBCUs possess a distinctive recipe for student success that substantially boosts educational outcome for black students.
The secret sauce was summarized this way: in contrast to their counterparts at TWIs, black students at HBCUs enjoy the benefits of cultural affinity, nurturing academic relations, insulation from invidious comparisons, and peace of mind. As a result, students are more academically engaged and confident, and because of this, they are more likely to graduate.
In other words, the educational value of segregation is evident in better GRADUATION RATES, according to the HBCU lobby.
How can this be true, given that the average graduation rate for HBCUs is abysmally low: only 32% of their entering freshmen graduate within 6 years compared to 44% at TWIs.
Well, according to two large statistical studies, that abysmally low 32% is actually superior!!!
The studies arrive at this conclusion by comparing TWI and HBCU graduation rates after controlling for other factors, especially students' academic ability and financial need. The simplest interpretation of the statistical results is this:
If TWIs had to educate students of the same academic and financial stature as are admitted to HBCUs, the TWIs would actually do worse; they would graduate less than 32%. In other words, HBCUs are superior at graduating disadvantaged students.
What explains HBCUs' statistical advantage? The study published by an advocacy group credits the secret sauce, of course. The other, an academic publication, admits that after sifting through the data, they can't find the answer. It could be the secret sauce or something else.
It's definitely something else. The problem with those non-experimental studies is that their models only include the variables the authors are aware of and can quantify. The many variables left unattended could be the 'something else' that explains the results. In this case, the overlooked 'something else' is relaxed grading standards.
HBCUs' statistical edge in graduation rates is not the outcome of a unique educational regimen or style, but an artifact of accommodative grading.
The claim that grading standards affect graduation rates is supported by a longitudinal study of non-HBCU schools. It finds that grade inflation (not smarter students) is the major culprit in the upward trend in graduation rates since 1990.
However, the evidence that this finding applies to HBCU graduation rates is admittedly circumstantial. That's because most colleges keep evidence of their grading standards secret; i.e., they do not release data on students' grade distribution or even average GPA. Among the minority that do, HBCUs are conspicuously absent. I wonder why.
The following is the circumstantial evidence that "accommodative grading" benefits HBCU graduation rates.
(1) HBCUs have been under pressure to improve their chronically low retention and graduation rates, and grade inflation is one way to achieve that. (President Obama favored denying accreditation to colleges with less than 25% graduation rate).
(2) Competitive pressure also induces accommodative grading. Studies find that high schools that face vigorous competition for applicants award higher grades. Weak evidence suggests the same for colleges. Since the 1970s HBCUs have been losing an increasing percentage of college-bound blacks to TWI competition. To maintain enrollment and accreditation, they have been compelled to lower both admission and grading standards.
(3) Also, Private high schools are found to dole out higher grades than their cheaper rivals in the public sector. The same is true for non-HBCU private colleges. (Rich students must get their money's worth). This might explain how private HBCUs manage to graduate a higher percentage of students than public HBCUs.
(4) Since HBCU graduates are slightly more likely to major in "hard" STEM fields, we would expect them to graduate with a slightly lower GPA than TWI counterparts. But their GPA is actually a tad higher.
(5) Indeed, lenient grading is implied by HBCUs' rationale for segregation, which is that it fosters racial pride and confidence. There's no better confidence builder than good grades.
(6) Spelman University's high profile grade manipulation scandal. Grades in an Econometrics course were inflated by senior administrators without consulting the instructor, a full-time, tenure-track assistant professor. When he complained, they fired him without a hearing.
.................................
It's time to end public funding for the relics of Jim Crow.
Built on the falsehood that black students benefit more from separation than integration, HBCUs are a retrograde institution. Their claim that they implement a unique recipe for effective education is a public relations myth.
Without evidence of "educational value," public HBCUs have no legal justification for failing to desegregate. So says the Supreme Court.
There's no educational value in a graduation rate that's inflated by accommodative grading. In fact, this inflation undermines the value of education. It dilutes the quality of the graduates, and thereby erodes the economic payoff from a college degree. Indeed, Fryer's regression analysis shows that HBCU graduates earn 14% less than similar graduates from TWIs, despite the fact that the HBCU grads are more likely to major in a STEM field.
The same study also exposes the educational cost of segregation. HBCU graduates are much LESS likely to agree that "college developed my ability to get along with other races."
However, the HBCU lobby touts one more source of educational value: HBCUs' disproportionate service to the academically marginal poor kids.
The below-par applicant pool reflects the fact that public HBCUs have been losing out to the competition. In 1976 HBCUs enrolled 18% of all black college students; today it's only 9%. The reason is simple: as the number of college-bound blacks grew since the 1970s, more of them chose to attend TWIs. Furthermore, Black students admitted to TWIs are, on average, better prepared academically and financially. This leaves HBCUs with a pool of applicants who are below average in those respects.
This inordinate service to the disadvantaged definitely had educational value 50 years ago when non-segregated alternatives were few and far-between. But today, with the expansion of low-tuition public college systems, some of which feature open enrollment, public HBCUs are not just superfluous, they are retrograde.
Take Florida for example. Highly ranked Florida A&M, the state's only public HBCU (tuition $3200), enrolls about 8,000 Blacks. Other in-state Black students, about 100,000, attend Florida's expansive State College System which features open enrollment.
Each of the 28 State colleges offer lower division courses that articulate with bachelors' programs at State Universities. However, each College is also authorized to award Bachelors degrees in selected high demand fields. For example, at Indian River State College (tuition $2500), a student can earn an AA degree in Manufacturing Technology (with a job guarantee) or a BS degree in Cyber Security.
..........................
Dubious narratives of segregation's educational value is not the only way that public HBCUs preserve their existence. In addition, they have blamed their failure to desegregate on chronic underfunding by the government. If they only had more money to upgrade facilities and expand programs, they could attract more white students.
Mississippi is the historic example. Its public HBCUs won a class-action suit against the state and finally reached a settlement in 2002. The state agreed to pay out $500 million for the upgrade of facilities and programs over the next 20 years.
If you build it, they will come, right? Not in this case. White enrollment has actually declined since 2002. At Alcorn State it's down to 2%; at Jackson State 3%. The most successful is Mississippi Valley State with 7%.
So what did the settlement accomplish? By reforming admission standards and funding remedial programs across the whole public system, it did more to help Black students enroll in TWIs than whites in HBCUs. In short, it facilitated integration at TWIs, but propped up segregation at HBCUs.
Final word, in case you missed the message. There is no socially redeeming value in funneling taxpayer money into a degenerate institution that promotes racial tribalism and denies students the benefits of social integration.
Comments