One of the co-authors of that Atlantic article is Richard Sander, who's the leading proponent of the mismatch hypothesis and routinely overstates the evidence f

One of the co-authors of that Atlantic article is Richard Sander, who's the leading proponent of the mismatch hypothesis and routinely overstates the evidence for it. His original study is based on outcomes for law students who started law school in 1991 -- not necessarily applicable, I'd argue, to undergraduates starting college in 2015 -- and his methodology has been pretty much discredited anyway (see the amicus brief that doctorpangloss cites). This is off-topic from the original post, but I think the whole mismatch controversy has been kind of a scary illustration of how one determined academic can shape the narrative around an issue: because he's a professor, and because media outlets trust professors (and like controversy), he can easily find a platform to represent the debate in a way that's favorable to his side (e.g. [0]). I don't think it's a crazy hypothesis or anything, and it's definitely worth debating, but I'd be skeptical of claims coming from someone who's staked so much of his career on its validity. </rant> [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/12/10/an-emerging-scholarly-consensus-on-mismatch-and-affirmative-action-ideologues-not-welcome/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...