This document summarizes a seminar on access to higher education presented by Jason Reece at Ohio State University. The seminar discussed unequal access to higher education in Ohio as a form of inequity and examined what drives disparate educational outcomes in the state and what can be done to improve access. Reece, a senior researcher at the Kirwan Institute, explored how systemic barriers to higher education represent inequity in Ohio and how providing greater access promotes greater equity.

1. Seminar for Social Immersion Project
Honors & Scholars Center
Hale Center, Ohio State University – January 24th 2011
Instructor: Jason Reece
Senior Researcher, Opportunity Communities Program
Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race & Ethnicity, Moritz College of Law
33 West 11th Ave, Room 204; E-mail: Reece.35@osu.edu

2.  Access to higher education
 Unequal access to higher education as a form of
inequity
 Understanding the impacts of inequity on our
state and society
 How do we understand disparate outcomes in
education in Ohio?
 What drives it?
 What can we do to improve it?

3.  Multidisciplinary applied research
institute
 Our mission is to expand opportunity for
all, especially for our most marginalized
communities
 Founded in 2003 by john powell
(executive director)
 Opportunity Communities Program
▪ Opening pathways to opportunity for
marginalized communities through
investments in people, places and
supporting linkages
▪ Disrupting systems of disadvantage
▪ Opportunity mapping, Regional Equity,
Neighborhood Revitalization, Opportunity
Based Housing
3

4.  About me….
 About you….
 What’s your background?
 What inspired you to participate in this program?
 Are there particular questions or topics you would
like me to address?

5. A Form of Inequity in Ohio

6.  What do you think?
 Why Should we about access to higher education
in Ohio, or in our nation?
 Is their “fair” access to higher education in Ohio?

9.  For Ohio 9th graders
 Less than 3 in 4 will graduate
High School
 Less than 2 out of 3 of those
Source: Data and information
graduates will go to college derived from presentation by
 Only 1 in 2 of those will Nancy Nestor Baker, available
on-line at:
graduate in 6 years http://principalsoffice.osu.edu/f
iles/zone.8.08.knowledge.php
 Resulting in only 1 in 5
earning a bachelors degree

10.  For new jobs in our economy
 About 7 in 10 new jobs require post secondary education
 Only 1 in 10 are accessible for those with less than a high school
diploma
 The recession has made these conditions worse (more
competition)

14.  Systemic barriers to higher education and
disparate educational outcomes are a sign of
inequity in Ohio
 What is inequity?
▪ Disparities between groups (systematic group level disparities)
▪ Not having fairness or treating all groups fairly, barriers
blocking access to opportunity for some groups
 Conversely, providing greater access to higher
education is an example of promoting greater
equity in the state

15. Understanding Inequity

16.  Who is impacted?  Other potential dimensions to
 Class inequity
 Race/Ethnicity • Disparate impact of policies
 Gender • Often institutional and/or
 Language structural in nature
 Place/Geography • Durable inequality
 Disability • Cumulative disadvantage
 Sexual Orientation • Denial of opportunity
 Age • Groups left out of the democratic
 Other???? process
• Limited political voice
 Intersectionality • Limited agency
 Interaction of various factors on
multiple scales
▪ For more information review the writings of
Kimberle Krenshaw

17.  Is their inequity in the US?
 Yes, and it is growing in many ways
 How does this manifest?
 In various ways for various populations
 Example:
▪ Disparity: gaps in outcomes for whole group population
 How do we explain this?
 Personal or cultural characteristics, institutional or
structural causes
 Culture of poverty, cumulative disadvantage, The
underclass

18.  Although racial attitudes are improving steadily, racial
disparities persist on every level.
 Income, poverty, employment, health, crime, incarceration,
education, assets, housing, among others
National Racial Disparities 2003 National Racial Disparities 2003
80.0% $100,000
71.5% $88,000
70.0% $90,000
47.3% $80,000
60.0%
$70,000
50.0% 46.3%
$60,000
40.0% 34.8% $46,310
$50,000
30.0%
24.7% 23.9%
21.9% $40,000 $29,772 $34,751
20.0% 16.8% $30,000
10.1%
10.0% $20,000
$6,000 $7,900
0.0% $10,000
$-
Poverty Rate College Graduation Homeownership
Rate Rate Median HH Income Median HH Net Worth
White African American Hispanic White African American Hispanic
18

21.  How do we understand these disparities if they are not
explained by personal discrimination or explicit laws and
policies? When do disparities matter?
 Three sources:
 Biology: Much less prevalent today, but was a common explanation
during the 19th and early 20th centuries; theories of racial, ethnic, and
gender inferiority.
 Individuals & Culture: Idea that individuals alone can (and should) rise
above their conditions of poverty, and the idea of a defective “culture
of poverty”.
 Structures & Institutions: States that even within neutral arrangements
and without discriminatory actors, disparities can still exist.
21

22. 22

23. Physical
Social Cultural
Outcomes
&
Behaviors
These structures interact in ways that produce racialized outcomes for different groups, but also
in ways that influence identity and culture

24.  Five decades of research
indicate that your environment
has a profound impact on your
access to opportunity and
likelihood of success
 High poverty areas with poor
employment, underperforming
schools, distressed housing and
public health/safety risks
depress life outcomes
 A system of disadvantage
 Many manifestations
▪ Urban, rural, suburban
 People of color are far more
likely to live in opportunity
deprived neighborhoods and
communities
 Social determinants of race: Where
you live dictates access to
opportunity structures and also
determines racial norms
24

25. • One variable can explain
why differential outcomes.
…to a multi-dimensional understanding….
• Structural Inequality
– Example: a Bird in a cage.
Examining one bar cannot
explain why a bird cannot fly.
But multiple bars, arranged in
specific ways, reinforce each
other and trap the bird.

26. Source: Barbara Reskin. http://faculty.uwashington.edu/reskin/
26

27. Some people ride the “Up” Others have to run up
escalator to reach the “Down” escalator to
opportunity get there
27

28. Educational
Opportunity Map for
Ohio:
Ohio’s Geography of
Educational
Opportunity
Direct Education Indicators
School poverty rate
Average teaching experience
Percent reading proficiency - 11th grade
Percent writing proficiency - 11th grade
Percent math proficiency - 11th grade
Graduation rate 2004-2005
Percent of teachers with Bachelor's degree
Percent of teachers with Master's degree
Total hardware/software (computer expenditure)
Access to libraries
Percent associates degree or higher
Other Neighborhood Indicators
Percent poverty
Percent unemployed
Access to prenatal care
Total crime indicator
Percent of houses owner-occupied
Percent of houses vacant
Housing median value
Child poverty rate
Median household income

29. SOUTHWEST OHIO SOUTHWEST CENTRAL OHIO

30. Impacts of Inequity

31. We are all caught up in an inescapable network of
mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.
Whatever effects one directly effects all indirectly.
The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

32.  Individual
 Poor economic outcomes, lower educational outcomes,
degraded asset development
 Poor health conditions, higher exposure and risk from crime
 Psychological distress, weak social and professional networks
 Community/Economy
 High social costs, distressed and stressed communities, fiscal
challenges
 Weakened civic engagement and democratic participation
 Underdeveloped human capital, poor labor outlook, poor
economic development prospects
32

33.  Richard Florida states in Flight of the Creative Class:
 “Rising inequality is a deadweight drag on our economic competitiveness…The basic
formula is simple: Those companies, regions and countries that reduce waste and
effectively harness their productive assets have a huge advantage in the Darwinian
competition that powers creative capitalism.”
 Rondinelli, Johnson and Kasarda argue that the marginalization found in
core urban communities and declining geographic/social mobility
threaten to undermine hopes of adjusting economic development to the
global economy.
 “…the expanding underclass that is concentrated in the cores of U.S. cities is ill prepared
educationally and psychologically for productive work and technological change…”

34.  The State’s economic future is dependent on its most
plentiful natural resource, human capacity and innovation
 Without addressing the various inequities facing the state,
our future is compromised
34

35. Building Greater Equity in Education

36.  Many solutions…but resources and public will to
implement them are the primary barriers to resolving
 Our Approach
 Investing in People, Places and Linkages
▪ Bringing opportunity to distressed communities, bridging
opportunities to those who are disconnected from our educational
resources
▪ Providing holistic support to Ohio’s students and communities
▪ Engaging disadvantaged communities and families
 What would you do? What is your solution?

37.  Reece.35@osu.edu
 33 West 11th Ave, Room 204 A
 The Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race &
Ethnicity
 On-line at:
 www.kirwaninstitute.org
 www.race-talk.org
37