The U.S. Supreme Court just set a date to consider whether President Joe Biden's student debt cancellation plan is legal - and advocates say Black and Brown student borrowers have the most to gain or lose.

On February 28, the high court will take up two lawsuits that challenge the Biden plan - which aims to forgive up to $20,000 in Pell Grant debt for certain low-income borrowers.

Samantha Seng, legislative director and policy advisor with the nonprofit NextGen Policy, said this program provides a chance to reduce the racial wealth gap.

"Getting a clean slate, or as much of that debt forgiven now, is going to help them realize the promise of higher education," said Seng, "to get those better jobs, to get on track and to start building generational wealth for their family."

According to the American Association of University Women, more than 70% of Black students go into debt to pay for higher education, compared to 56% of white students.

And Black students borrow more money than their white counterparts, because many families struggle to save for college.

Aissa Banez, senior advisor for policy and strategy with the national nonprofit Student Borrower Protection Center, said Black women in particular have to borrow at the highest rate of all students.

"So," said Banez, "when we're talking about students entering into a workforce where they're already having to navigate a lingering pay gap, and ongoing workplace discrimination, on top of the unequal burden of student debt - it's actively exacerbating racial and economic inequities in our country."

More than 26 million people have applied for debt relief under the Biden program, and 16 million applications were processed before it was paused in court.

Opponents of the debt-relief program claim it unfairly benefits educated workers over people who never went to college or who have already paid off their loans.

New York colleges and universities are seeing the effects of the Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action.

New data from Education Reform Now show schools such as Columbia and Cornell universities saw Black student admissions decline. However, national admissions data has been mixed, as some schools have seen more Black and minority students admitted.

Wil Del Pilar, senior vice president of the Education Trust, said schools need to re-evaluate what they value in admissions.

"Institutions need to really alter what they value most in admissions," Del Pilar emphasized. "Then think about, like, what are the necessary attributes of successful students, not what are the attributes that we value in admissions that overwhelmingly tend to prioritize wealthier white students."

He noted some schools are masking or underreporting their admissions data by providing a percentage of minority students without breaking it down by race and ethnicity. Before the Supreme Court's decision, nine states banned affirmative action in college admissions. Many studies show those states saw an increase in racial disparities in admissions and fewer minority students enrolling.

Since affirmative action ended, higher-education advocates want schools and states to end legacy admissions. Four states have banned legacy admissions with states such as New York introducing legislation to do the same.

Del Pilar argued despite ad hoc measures to end legacy admissions, it is not going away so quickly.

"When you have established power, you're not going to release it that easily," Del Pilar observed. "Those who have the opportunity to enroll at these institutions are going to try and maintain those policies."

He added such practices might help schools keep in touch with wealthier families who might be donors. If schools are going to end or re-evaluate legacy admissions, Del Pilar feels it is worth looking at athletic preferences. He cited the "Varsity Blues" admissions scandal, where athletic recruiting was used as a way to get wealthy students into elite schools.

Support for this reporting was provided by Lumina Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

A program in Washington state helping college students from migrant families is being celebrated for its support of the Latino community.

Washington State University's College Assistance Migrant Program is one of four recognized this year by Excelencia in Education, a research-based organization serving Latino students.

Michael Heim, director of migrant education student access and support at Washington State University, said migrant families often live below the federal poverty level. He explained the program supports students and families who mostly have experience working in farm fields.

"They need the support system and maybe a little bit of financial help through a scholarship for participating in the programs," Heim pointed out. "And just the attention that first gen students coming from minoritized backgrounds, marginalized backgrounds might not normally receive."

The other three programs recognized this year by Excelencia in Education are at Reading Area Community College in Pennsylvania, California State University and The Immokalee Foundation in Florida.

The Washington State program has high rates of success for the students it assists. That includes a retention rate of 85% over the past three years and a graduation rate of nearly 70%.

Heim noted each year there are about 50 students in each cohort.

"The results are statistically significant and our students are graduating at higher rates and being retained at higher rates than students who aren't receiving CAMP's services," Heim emphasized.

Heim added the benefits stretch beyond the students in the program.

"Because they've been successful, we've been able to be recognized as having best practices that are worth implementing at other institutions," Heim observed. "And even across just WSU here at home."

Support for this reporting was provided by Lumina Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

Kentuckians head to the polls in a few weeks and on the ballot is Amendment 2, a proposed change to the state Constitution to allow public funds for vouchers to pay tuition at private schools.

A group of county school superintendents across the Commonwealth opposes the measure, arguing it would funnel public dollars to schools with little to no accountability to taxpayers.

Tom Shelton, executive secretary of the group, the Council for Better Education, said other states to have passed similar amendments have a track record showing they worsen outcomes for students, widen inequality gaps and cause already struggling public schools to cut resources and staff.

"That's actually the main reason we oppose this issue," Shelton explained. "The data that we've seen from other states is clear that this is bad policy."

According to the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, Amendment 2 would hit the state's poorest rural areas the hardest, communities where public schools are also large employers. Supporters of the ballot measure argued it would increase opportunities for school choice for parents who could not otherwise afford private schools.

Shelton pointed out Kentucky's public schools are woefully underfunded and have stayed afloat despite a $2 billion budget shortfall since the mid 2000s. He added voucher money for private schools often does not affect those who need it the most.

"On average, 70-75% of the money goes to students who are already in private schools," Shelton emphasized. "It doesn't really increase private school enrollment and it doesn't take kids out of public schools."

This year alone, legislators in 29 states have proposed 80 bills tied to school vouchers, Education Savings Accounts, refundable tax credits and tax-credit scholarships.


get more stories like this via email