<p>
</p>
<p>It’s going to be different in Michigan most likely though. If you look at where kids in Michigan come from at Michigan, you’re going to see a huge number from Washtenaw and Oakland counties. Those that come from Wayne county are largely from Grosse Pointe, not Detroit. These are all White/Asian areas, not Black. If they got the top 10% from Detroit, Flint, Saginaw, Pontiac, and Benton Harbor schools, they’d be getting a lot more Black students than they do now. </p>
<p>If they’re aiming to increase Black enrollment at the university, this would likely do it. Not saying it’s a good proposal, but it would likely do what they’re looking at. </p>
<p>If we accept the proposition that the university should look more like the state, then why concern ourselves only with race? Well, 1.14% of Michigan in-state undergrads (by my count) are from the UP, but the UP has about 3% of the state’s population. Why not bolster recruitment efforts in that regard, too? </p>
<p>I don’t think so Vladenschlutte, I personally think the percentage would go down… Even if you include Detroit, Flint, Saginaw, Pontiac city high schools and on the west side Benton Harbor, Muskegon, Muskegon Heights, and perhaps one or two others, Lansing comes to mind, maybe Kalamazoo, there are at least 900 other high schools in Michigan if not more. The top 10% or 7% or whatever per cent plan will not work in Michigan the way advocates of greater percentages of black students wish it would exactly because the black population is concentrated in a few school districts. For instance at my kids district there is 1% black, 1% Asian, 1% Hispanic and that is not highly unusual…in Michigan in general there are more Hispanics than Asians and the state as a whole is 80% white. For the 7% rule to work the black population would need to be spread throughout the state districts with massive migration throughout the state occurring and that isn’t going to happen. </p>
<p>Two of the fastest growing counties in the state have very low levels of black students - Grand Traverse at less than 1% and Ottawa at 1.7% and both those counties have significantly higher numbers of Hispanics than blacks and even less Asians. Kent county with the second largest city in Michigan runs at about 8% black population. Quota percentages will not increase the number of black students at UofM from the state and only in-state students get need met.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That seems like the opposite of what would make it happen.</p>
<p>The way it’s going to happen is that they’ll get the top students at majority Black high schools. If every school 12% Black and the school takes the top 7% at every school very few of those will be Black, certainly not 12%. If most schools are majority White and some majority Black, they’ll get Black students from those Black schools.</p>
<p>But schools with 80% black populations comprise about 1/10th of the total high schools if you include charters and privates…the numbers don’t add up. Even if the top 7% from the high schools mentioned in the previous post were comprised of 100% black students, the numbers wouldn’t rise at University of Michigan. Even if it were a district thing there are 550 districts in Michigan so perhaps with the exception of Detroit, the percentages of black to total high school graduating population declines if you factor the districts as opposed to the individual high schools. </p>
<p>If you look at the very largest individual high schools, like East kentwood in Grand Rapids, Saline or Clarkston over by Detroit/Ann Arbor…these high schools are quite diverse but in sheer numbers it still doesn’t add up. </p>
<p>Also, don’t forget that many of those top 7% URM students would decide NOT to go to Michigan (as they do with UT-Austin). Either due to cost (due to lots of factors, including better merit aid from other schools), competition from other universities or “fit” (they have no interest spending 4 years in Ann Arbor). </p>
<p>Either way, it’s out of the Universities control, the 10% (or X%) plan would need to be approved by the state legislature (as it was in Texas). </p>
<p>Some interesting stats to consider…</p>
<p>In 2006 (the last year with affirmative action). Blacks made up 7.1%, Hispanics 4.3%, Asians 12.1%, whites 59.7% and nonresident Aliens made up 11.76%.</p>
<p>In 2013, Blacks made up 4.2%, Hispanics 4.3% (Hispanic enrollment was NOT impacted), Asians 11.3% (less than when 2006), whites 57.4% (less than 2006) and non-resident Aliens had 13.7% (a 2% increase). You also have 2.9% that have identified as having 2 or more races, this wasn’t counted in 2006. </p>
<p>If you go back to 1998, Blacks made up 7.6%, while whites made up 61.8% (all other groups where less than in 2006 or 2013).</p>
<p>The % identified as white has steadily decline, even with the removal of affirmative action. The decline in black enrollment has been matched by an increase in non-resident aliens and multi-racial students.</p>
<p><a href=“All Current Reports | Office of the Registrar”>http://ro.umich.edu/enrollment/</a></p>