Abstract

This paper interrogates two important but obscured admission policy developments at leading American universities in the post-World War II era. First, we critically examine the University of California’s “special admissions,” later formalized as the “Admission by Exception” policy adopted at two flagship campuses (Berkeley and UCLA) to open opportunities for veterans returning from the War under the GI Bill. The scale of this Admission by Exception policy was orders of magnitude larger than any comparable admissions policy in recent decades, including both the eras with and without legally permissible affirmative action. Second, we excavate archival evidence from the immediate aftermath of the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision, where leaders at the flagship University of Texas at Austin campus hastily adopted a new standardized exam requirement because their enrollment modeling indicated this was the most efficient way to not face further losses in federal court while excluding the largest number of African Americans (and thereby resisting Brown) and maintaining the same overall size of the freshmen class.

These two post-war admission policy changes, one arising in de facto segregated California and the other in de jure segregated Texas, operated as racialized institutional mechanisms analogous to “redlining” racially restrictive housing policies that are a more familiar feature of the post-War era. We draw on historical data about earnings and wealth accumulation of the overwhelmingly white graduates of UC and UT in the 1950s–70s and connect these findings to the theoretical frameworks of Cheryl Harris’ “whiteness as property” and George Lipsitz’s racialized state investment. We show how these admission policies contributed to the intergenerational transfer of advantage. We then turn to the contemporary admissions landscape at highly selective American universities after the Supreme Court’s SFFA v. Harvard ruling. We link current trends at some elite institutions toward a return to standardized testing requirements, maintaining considerations of athletic ability, mostly in “country club” sports, as manifestations of bias in university admissions, which tend to favor white applicants. The paper connects historical racialization of admissions to ongoing inequities in access and outcomes, showing how both historical and contemporary admissions policies reward inherited forms of cultural capital aligned with whiteness.

The paper can also be found on the website of Social Sciences.