A ‘Black-Serving Institution’ designation is a great start, but more is needed | Opinion
A new California bill would establish a Black-Serving Institution Program to designate public institutions that “excel at providing academic resources to Black and African American students.” It’s a promising first step. But much more will be needed to ensure equity in Black student outcomes.
California higher education systems — the University of California, California State University and California Community College systems — have struggled to enroll Black students; a challenge well documented over the years. Indeed, a recent report by the ACLU documented a 47% decrease in California’s Black student enrollment from 2003 to 2023, a significant decline that underscores the urgency of targeted policy initiatives like a Black-Serving Institution Program, as advanced via Senate Bill 1348 authored by Democrat Steven Bradford of Inglewood.
Opinion
To be eligible for the designation, an institution must enroll at least 10% of Black students or have a headcount of at least 1,500 Black students. Those selected to receive the title of a Black-Serving Institution must demonstrate evidence of progress in supporting Black student success at the end of the five-year appointment.
Institutions must also develop a student success plan, show senior leadership commitment, allocate resources and have academic and social support programs in place for Black students.
The current bill includes some metrics that move beyond merely enrolling Black students to actually serving them, as scholars have urged in the context of Hispanic-Serving Institutions. Yet, much more will need to be addressed in the bill to help ensure equity in Black student outcomes and the extent to which these students report a sense of belonging and mattering within designated schools.
There are important, additional measures that should be considered as legislators continue to develop the bill.
First, legislators should identify state funding to support designated institutions. This is especially important for institutions that disproportionately serve high-need students. Moreover, campuses across the California higher education systems receive varying levels of state and federal appropriations. Allocating funding to support Black-Serving Institutions will help support the creation and sustainability of targeted programs and resources for Black students.
There is no shortage of documented, on-campus, racial climate issues for Black students that reduce feelings of belonging and ultimately of success. Therefore, designated campuses should be required to formally assess their campus racial climate and adapt their proposed student success plans to address identified issues over the five years of the designation.
These campuses should also be required to produce regular, transparent updates on their progress, including a mid-point assessment. The current bill only requires a progress report at the end of the five-year period. However, routinely assessing progress over the years would allow campuses to make necessary adjustments in real-time, ensuring that efforts are effective and responsive to student needs. Moreover, transparency about progress can help foster trust and provide levers for accountability, especially among Black community stakeholders who may be disillusioned by past harm.
Additionally, aspiring campuses should be required to adopt and prioritize evidence-based practices that have been proven to support Black student success. This means implementing strategies and programs that have demonstrated effectiveness toward improved retention, engagement and graduation rates among Black students.
By incorporating additional criteria, SB 1348 can be more than just a symbolic gesture; it can become a powerful lever for increasing enrollment and enacting equity for Black college students in California.
State legislators have an exciting opportunity to begin redressing long-standing inequities in Black student access and success, potentially setting a precedent for the rest of the nation to follow suit.
Royel M. Johnson is an associate professor of higher education at the University of Southern California, where he also serves as director of the National Assessment of Collegiate Campus Climates in the USC Race and Equity Center. Jessica T. DeCuir-Gunby is the Robert H. Naslund Chair in curriculum and teaching and a professor of educational psychology at USC. Darnell Cole, who also contributed to this piece, is a professor of higher education and educational psychology at USC, where he is the co-director of the Research Center for Education, Identity and Social Justice.
