Thinking outside the (check) box

Elmhurst College, a private university in Illinois, recently introduced a question on its admissions application that allows students to self-report their sexual orientation. While this sexual orientation question is the first of its kind to actually be implemented, issues of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender recruitment have become increasingly important subjects of debate in the realm of university admissions.

Although Elmhurst claims that the question’s primary role is to collect more data on what types of students apply every year, the inquiry could ultimately serve as a recruiting tool aimed at the increasingly visible LGBT community. The LGBT question arms admissions counselors with another data point in their efforts to shape the diverse student bodies that many elite universities, Duke included, aim to admit. Without the equivalent of a race or ethnicity box to check, some LGBT students may not have an avenue to openly disclose their sexual identity.

We worry that the introduction of an LGBT question will place undue stress on college applicants. While estimates peg the number of openly gay high school students at almost 750,000, that figure fails to accurately portray the multitude of students who may not be comfortable with disclosing their sexuality. In addition, the fact that the college admissions process is oftentimes a family affair could make students unwilling to accurately report on sexual orientation out of fear of alienating parents or siblings. Even if the LGBT question provides an option to decline answering, placing this type of undue pressure on a 17 or 18-year-old high school student could tempt students to lie about their true orientation.

These risks outrun the benefits of an LGBT question, especially because there are other ways to express sexual orientation indirectly on a college application. If someone’s sexual orientation significantly represents part of his or her identity, that person could reference it in their admissions essay, communicate it in an interview or even demonstrate that interest through extracurricular activities. Anyone who feels uncomfortable expressing their orientation now will likely be more uncomfortable checking it off in a box. This question won’t help identify any more students than can be identified already.

Some will view Elmhurst College’s introduction of a sexual-orientation disclosure option on its application as a progressive shift away from heteronormativity, but this shift could have unanticipated consequences. For instance, how would religiously-affiliated colleges and universities react if the question became a staple on the Common Application? And, while we sincerely hope that applicants don’t fall into the mindset that being gay can help with admissions, we believe that including a sexual-orientation question could unnecessarily add increased temptation to students hoping to game the admissions process. While introducing this question on a school-by-school basis remains a viable option, making it a standardized Common Application question could present more challenges than benefits to universities across the country.

While the LGBT status question will likely remain in debate for some time, we do not believe that instituting such a change on a widespread level would ultimately benefit students. LGBT students can already voice their interests through several channels on an application, and the introduction of an identification question adds too many drawbacks to warrant a sweeping change in admissions.