The Otterbein University administration will not get rid of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies currently in place, despite federal pressure from a Dear Colleague letter.
The letter, released by the Department of Education on Feb. 14, was directed toward all academic institutions that receive federal funding for education. The letter threatened to pull funding from any institution the government considers to have “race conscious” DEI programs that lead to preference “certain racial groups” and teaching students that some races bear “unique moral burdens that others do not.”
Ohio has recently experienced the pending approval of anti-DEI legislation through Senate Bill 1 (SB1), which has added to the controversy of the Dear Colleague letter. SB1, if passed, would cut state funding for higher ed institutions found to have DEI policies in place.
Given the fact that Otterbein University is a private institution, it does not need to comply with SB1. However, because Otterbein receives federal funding, the Dear Colleague letter threatens many of the programs in place that promote racial equality and inclusivity on campus.
The letter references a Supreme Court decision from 2023, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA), which “clarified that the use of racial preferences in college admissions is unlawful” and therefore “sets forth a framework for evaluating the use of race by state actors and entities covered by Title VI,” according to the letter.
Jefferson Blackburn-Smith, executive vice president for strategic initiatives for Otterbein, said that Otterbein’s admission policies are compliant with the SFFA v. Harvard decision.
“We have never used any race-based admissions processes or practices. We have done a lot of work in building relationships and recruiting effectively and seeing the diversity of our class grow really significantly over the last 10 years," Blackburn-Smith said. "We've also been focused heavily on low-income and first-generation kids and providing an environment that meets their educational needs."
Blackburn-Smith said the Trump administration is interpreting the decision of SFFA v. Harvard very differently than the Supreme Court ruled in the law; he said the Supreme Court’s decision was that race should be narrowly used, but remains legal.
The case, which reversed affirmative action, did not omit the usage of a student’s lived experience as they describe in essays or other application materials, according to Blackburn-Smith.
“It [the Dear Colleague letter] also says there's no compelling interest for diversity, and the Supreme Court said again in the 2023 case, universities have a compelling reason to want a diverse class; they just want to very narrowly limit the way you get there. So the letter is full of inaccuracies and untruths. Do we need to pay attention to it? Absolutely, because the government is saying ‘This is what we're going to try to enforce,’” Blackburn-Smith said.
Otterbein’s Office of Social Justice and Activism (OSJA) falls in the realm of DEI and could be targeted by the federal government. Frank Dobson, chief diversity officer at Otterbein University, works to encourage “belonging” on campus; he considers cultural differences to be important because they enrich students and faculty alike.
“We don't call it a diversity plan. We have a belonging plan for the whole university because everyone here should feel as though they belong. They found their people. They found their community,” Dobson said.
Dobson said further that the belonging plan is different from DEI because it emphasizes community and cultural differences, which support authentic diversity.
Otterbein’s policy remains unchanged while public universities like the Ohio State University have removed DEI policies in response to federal pressure. This has fueled student criticism and protest.
Students at Otterbein are beginning to discuss ways anti-DEI legislation will affect higher education in the future.
A call to action: 50501 movement
