SCOTUS Staff Training Best Practices and Logistics

Recommended Actions and Practices

Institutions were already doing these things, but they have now increased their efforts in the wake of the ruling.

1. Continuous training on application review and evaluation

Continuous training is essential for effectively reviewing and evaluating applications:

• Primary Training: Typically takes place in the fall prior to application reviews. A large flagship public institution noted that they begin training their new admission staff and interns in early summer so they’re already familiar with the information when full staff training starts in fall.
• Regular Check-Ins: Establish opportunities throughout the application review season to allow staff to answer questions, identify trends they may be seeing, and ensure everyone is on the same page.
• Comprehensive Training Methods: Incorporate homework including mock application review, readings, group work, and a final assessment to ensure thorough understanding.

2. Incorporate bias training into staff training

Bias training is an integral part of application evaluation training:

• Include Internal and/or External Experts: Some institutions rely on internal experts for bias training, while others bring in external specialists. Many use a combination of both, depending on their needs.
• Leverage University-Wide Trainings: One selective institution in the South requires bias training for all employees and students, so the admissions office doesn’t implement additional training.

3. Determine who gets to view applicants’ racial status and when

There are mixed strategies on whether staff see applicants’ racial status on the application:

• State Bans Pre-2023 Ruling: Some ADC sponsor institutions in states with previous bans on race-conscious admission chose to suppress applicants’ racial status on the application.
• Post-2023 Ruling: Following the 2023 ruling, other ADC institutions have also decided not to allow staff and readers to see applicants’ racial status during the review process.
• Data Collection: The ruling did not specifically address data collection or require institutions to suppress or remove racial status from applications. U.S. Department of Education Post-SFFA guidance advised that suppression of an applicant’s racial status  from view of file reviewers and admissions staff involved in selection was warranted.

4. Be prepared for questions

Questions from staff and their understanding of the ruling may vary based on experience level:

• Common Concerns: Many ADC sponsors noticed that the most common questions from staff are centered around correctly following the law while evaluating applications.
• Application Review Notes: A highly selective institution in the Midwest shared that many staff grapple with writing notes that don’t appear to consider racial status when students talk about race as part of their live experience within their application materials. 
• Experience Level Differences: Some ADC sponsors indicated they see a difference in the level of understanding of the ruling from their entry-level and senior staff. For example, a selective mid-Atlantic institution shared that their junior staff often present questions about the “gray area” and the ruling’s impact on the profession, reflecting their developing admission experience. Conversely, a private institution in the South found that seasoned staff presented questions due to their familiarity with previous processes, while newer staff had fewer questions as the application evaluation process was new to them.

Explore Toolkit Content

ADC Sponsor Examples

A selective private institution in the South 

This institution typically conducts training in October before reading files in November. Trainings are usually half days with check-in points throughout the year.

• The institution has a campus-based team, regional staff throughout the country and outside readers. The campus-based team and regional staff are expected to participate in on-campus training. While virtual training was productive, the institution felt it was better for staff—especially new staff members— to have hard conversations in person. 
• Zoom is used to train external readers, but the line of communication is always open. 
• The admissions office participates in the institution’s required (even for students) university-wide bias training. 

A public flagship institution in the Northeast

This institution conducts its main training in October with permanent staff and seasonal readers, enhanced by periodic touch points. Most training is virtual, with some in-person sessions. 

• During the 2023–2024 cycle, the school’s general counsel was invited to attend in-person training and implicit bias training. 

• The most sensitive topics are discussed in person to ensure staff feel comfortable processing the content. 

• Seasonal readers are required to attend the in-person sessions. 

• The institution has roughly 25 external readers. 

• Live virtual training is conducted via Microsoft Teams and the sessions, lasting typically 30 – 60 minutes, are recorded and shared with the staff. 

A selective private institution in the Midwest

This institution conducts their file training at the end of October into early November, holding 4–5 half day sessions. 

• They conduct pre-season training for new admission officers in August before they hit the road. 

• Legal counsel provides aggregate data on racial status to staff. 

• All training is held in person but it is recorded. Part-time reader training is exclusively virtual. 

• The team reads in pairs (a professional staff member with another professional or part-time reader) who read activities lists and additional contextual information. 

• The professional staff conducts academic evaluations, and a committee-based evaluation model is used.