The University of North Carolina (UNC) has made a significant decision to no longer consider race as a factor in its admissions and hiring decisions, including in the application essays.
This move comes after the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action in college admissions, ruling that it violated the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The UNC Board of Trustees approved a resolution that prohibits the use of "race, sex, color or ethnicity" in admissions and hiring decisions. The resolution also extends this prohibition to include factors such as religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, disability, genetic information, and veteran status. UNC Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz emphasized the university's commitment to following the law and ensuring compliance.
This decision by UNC comes in the wake of Harvard University's announcement that it would still consider race in its admissions process. Harvard plans to use applicants' essays detailing how race has affected their lives in order to comply with the Supreme Court's decision. While UNC has chosen to eliminate race as a factor, Harvard believes that considering race in admissions is still necessary.
However, despite UNC's change in admissions policy, there are still concerns about the university's use of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) trainings in its medical school. Kenny Xu, president of Color Us United, criticized UNC for its focus on DEI in medical school training. Xu argues that the university's emphasis on race, gender, and sexual orientation in training, admissions, and promotion contradicts the new admissions policy.
North Carolina Representative John Hardister recently sent a letter to UNC School of Medicine executive dean Christy Page, inquiring about the school's use of DEI in their training. Page responded by emphasizing the importance of understanding racial differences in order to provide the best medical care to all patients. Page cited accreditation requirements that focus on eliminating healthcare disparities and understanding the impact of disparities on all populations.
However, Xu argues that Page's response does not address the question of why UNC chooses to use race, gender, and sexual orientation in training, admissions, and promotion. He believes that the university's focus on race-based treatment conflicts with its new admissions policy.
In February, UNC voted to ban DEI statements and compelled speech from admission, hiring, promotion, and tenure. Prior to this change, the UNC medical school required applicants to provide a statement detailing their commitment to DEI. The medical school also disbanded its DEI task force before implementing any of its recommendations, which included studying topics such as unconscious bias awareness and understanding the structural racism in America's medical system.
Xu argues that there is growing frustration in North Carolina with the use of public funds to support what he sees as racial discrimination and a lowering of standards. He believes that the state needs excellent students and doctors to succeed in both the public and private spheres.
UNC's decision to eliminate race as a factor in admissions and hiring decisions reflects the changing landscape of affirmative action in college admissions. While some universities, like Harvard, continue to consider race, UNC has chosen to take a different approach.
Login