Many institutions are far more interested in appearing to do good rather than having the courage to actually do good.

From A 'Dubious Expediency': How Race-Preferential Admissions Policies on Campus Hurt Minority Students by Gail L. Heriot. From the Abstract.

Mounting empirical research shows that race-preferential admissions policies are doing more harm than good. Instead of increasing the numbers of African Americans entering high-status careers, these policies reduce those numbers relative to what we would have had if colleges and universities had followed race-neutral policies. We have fewer African-American scientists, physicians, and engineers and likely fewer lawyers and college professors. If, as the evidence indicates, the effects of race-preferential admissions policies are exactly the opposite of what was originally intended, it is difficult to understand why anyone would wish to support them.

I have seen these claims more frequently in the past couple of years. There is a logic to them and the evidence seems increasingly persuasive. Despite the evidence, it also appears that more and more academic institutions are refusing to share their information because of their concern that it will undermine their current preferred strategy of affirmative action.

We are a long way from great clarity but it does seem that this is a great litmus test for moral seriousness. With the current evidence, it appears that many institutions are far more interested in appearing to do good rather than having the courage to actually do good.