This fall marks the arrival of the third class admitted to colleges since the Supreme Court put an end to race-conscious admissions. As the effects of this decision begin to surface, some aspects of the situation are becoming less visible. Recent research indicates that on a national scale, the percentage of first-year students whose race or ethnicity is categorized as “unknown” grew from 3.3 percent prior to the ruling to 4 percent in 2024. This increase is more pronounced at Ivy Plus institutions and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs).
The increase, though modest overall, complicates understanding the changing admissions landscape and whether opportunities are expanding or narrowing. Public discourse has largely centered on changes in enrollment at a select group of highly competitive colleges. To offer a wider perspective across higher education, Lumina Foundation collaborated with admissions researcher James Murphy from Class Action to produce two reports this year.
Enrollment Changes Across Institutions
The first report examines enrollment shifts across over 3,000 colleges. The second, released in June, focuses on the rise in first-year students whose race or ethnicity was recorded as unknown and its implications for interpreting these changes. Murphy analyzed federal data covering over 3,000 institutions and more than 3.5 million first-time enrollments. He compared the 2024 entering class with the averages from 2022 and 2023.
At Ivy Plus institutions, the proportion of underrepresented students of color dropped by 4.33 percentage points, equating to nearly a 19 percent decrease. Black enrollment fell by 25 percent, while Hispanic enrollment declined by approximately 15 percent. Conversely, at state flagship universities, the enrollment of underrepresented students of color rose by 8 percent. Meanwhile, white and Asian American enrollment remained largely stable across most institutions, with an increase in Asian American enrollment at Ivy Plus schools.
Murphy describes these developments as a “cascade effect,” where declines at the most selective institutions align with increases at less selective ones. Although data doesn’t reveal where any given student might have enrolled before the ruling, it poses a critical question: If highly qualified students increasingly attend institutions with lower completion rates or weaker post-graduation earnings, how will this affect their long-term prospects?
The Rise of Non-Reporting
The report Known Unknowns shifts the focus towards understanding who enrolled rather than where. Across all institutions, the share of first-year students with an unreported race grew from 3.3 percent before the ruling to 4 percent in 2024. While more than 95 percent still had a reported race or ethnicity, the increase varied. At Ivy Plus institutions, non-reporting rose from 3.2 percent to 5.8 percent. At HBCUs, it increased from 3.2 percent to 4.9 percent. Public four-year institutions and state flagships experienced the smallest rises.
Beyond enrollment, the report evaluates 115 colleges and universities with data on applications, admissions, and enrollment. Here, non-reporting among applicants went up by 0.7 percentage points, mirroring the national rise in enrollment. Within this smaller, nonrepresentative sample, less selective schools had the highest pre- and post-ruling non-reporting rates and the largest increase after.
Admission rates for non-reporters were somewhat higher than the overall applicant pool. This trend defies a straightforward explanation. Some students might assume that omitting racial information benefits their applications. Others might be confused about the ruling’s implications or unsure how colleges will use their information. The “unknown” category may also reflect evolving identities, the limitations of available categories, or errors in institutional reporting.
The report found little correlation between rising non-reporting and changes in enrollment shares for specific racial or ethnic groups. Hence, we cannot ascertain the identities of these students or use the unknown category to adjust numbers for any other race or ethnicity.
Impact on Admissions Essays
An examination by The Hechinger Report of admissions essays post-ruling provides a related observation of how students are adapting to the changes. Some students continued writing about race’s impact on their lives, while others chose not to emphasize that aspect. Although essays cannot account for the rise in unknowns, they illustrate students grappling with new and at times perplexing signals about what to disclose.
Gaining more insights will be crucial for understanding if shifts in access lead to changes in completion rates and economic mobility. Factors such as who enrolls, where they enroll, and who completes a credential are essential to assessing the longer-term effects of the ruling. Students, institutions, and their supporters are navigating a transformed admissions environment. Guidance from the National Association for College Admission Counseling can aid counselors and admissions professionals in understanding evolving admissions practices and assisting students in making informed decisions.
Currently, we possess only a single year of comprehensive national post-ruling enrollment data. Additional federal admissions data is anticipated, which might eventually allow researchers to scrutinize applications, admissions, and enrollments, though it remains uncertain when these data will be fully available. As this academic year progresses, a new entering class will contribute to an evolving picture. The next few years of data will reveal whether the current patterns are temporary or lasting changes and whether they impact college completion and the economic opportunities that follow.
Jasmine Davis-Randolph, Ph.D., is the strategy officer for research at Lumina Foundation, an independent organization dedicated to promoting continued learning beyond high school. James Murphy is a senior fellow at Class Action, an entity focused on rebuilding public trust through inclusivity.