Moving Higher Education from Reactionary to Agenda-Setting in the Classification of U.S. Americans

• In Event: Division J Vice Presidential Session: Planning for 2030: Critical Tensions and Postsecondary Possibilities with OMB’s Racial/Ethnic Classification Revisions

Abstract

In light of the recent directives issued by the US Office of Management and Budget (OMB) concerning new classifications for race and ethnicity, the US Department of Education (ED), along with its various offices and agencies, including the Institute for Education Sciences (IES), is mandated to integrate these new standards. According to OMB, this major revision aims to more accurately reflect the diverse compositional makeup within the U.S., yet it remains unclear how educational institutions and the accompanying datasets that collect and report their data will handle the revisions. Such a transformation holds profound implications for institutional research units, educational scholars, and the individuals whose identities and experiences are encapsulated within these datasets.

The adoption of these new standards presents an unprecedented opportunity for education researchers with expertise in race and ethnicity to actively contribute to the implementation of these guidelines. This expertise uses Critical Race Theory (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1997; Solorzanzo et al., 2000) and QuantCrit (Gillborn et al., 2018) perspectives surrounding terminology (e.g., Viano et al., 2024), data disaggregation (e.g., Teranishi et al., 2020), and multiracial categorization (e.g., Ford et al., 2021) to advocate for a more proactive and participatory approach to implemention. However, an inherent tension persists between academia and policymaking. Policymakers operate within an environment characterized by the necessity for rapid, actionable solutions and are inundated with information from a wide range of stakeholders. Conversely, researchers often provide nuanced findings that raise further and deeper questions rather than offering immediate, conclusive answers. This dichotomy is compounded by the academic reward structure, which traditionally undervalues policy engagement and interaction with policymakers, domains typically outside the purview of standard academic training.

Thus, the objective of this position paper is to critically interrogate these tensions through the prism of the current policy shift, aiming to generate strategies by which higher education can transition from a reactive stance to one of agenda-setting for the new classification standards. This paper will explore the mechanisms through which educational researchers can transcend their traditional roles, and instead foster a meaningful and impactful relationship with policymakers. Indeed, by harnessing interdisciplinary approaches and fostering collaborative networks, researchers can enhance the utility and impact of their work within policy frameworks. In other words, the paper will offer new considerations for integrating policy engagement into academic work, thereby aligning scholarly pursuits with actionable, policy-oriented outcomes.

The new standards for race and ethnic classification by OMB and ED represents a critical juncture for higher education. By shifting from a reactive to a proactive, agenda-setting approach, educational researchers and institutions can play a pivotal role in the policy implementation process. This paper aims to provide a roadmap for such engagement, highlighting the potential for higher education to not only respond to but shape policy directives in meaningful and impactful ways, whereby the academic community can ensure that the data reflecting our diversity is more accurate and utilized to promote equity and inclusivity within educational contexts.

Authors

• Mike Hoa Nguyen, University of California - Los Angeles

• Karly Ford, Pennsylvania State University

• Hironao Okahana, Council of Graduate Schools