UNIV of MICHIGAN continues race based admissions despite Sup Ct decision

Applying to College
1

<p><a href="http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061017/SCHOOLS/610170324%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061017/SCHOOLS/610170324&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Tuesday, October 17, 2006</p>

<p>Study: Race still key at U-M</p>

<p>Mark Hicks / The Detroit News</p>

<p>Despite a mixed 2003 Supreme Court ruling on the use of racial preferences in University of Michigan admissions, race and ethnicity still factored heavily for students admitted to the school over four years, according to studies released today by a national research group.</p>

<p>The studies were compiled based on data on undergraduate, medical school and law school admissions that the university provided to the Center for Equal Opportunity, a Sterling, Va.-based nonprofit research and educational organization, through freedom of information requests.</p>

<p>The data, which cover incoming freshmen in 1999, 2003, 2004 and 2005, reveals that last year, African-American and Hispanic applicants who scored 1240 on SAT and earned a 3.2 grade point average had a 9 out of 10 chance of being admitted to U-M. Whites and Asians with similar scores and grades had a 1 out of 10 chance.</p>

<p>The studies suggest a "dramatic difference" in which students are admitted, said Roger Clegg, president of CEO.</p>

<p>""The studies found race is not (a) small factor, but an overwhelming factor for who does or doesn't get in," he said.</p>

<p>But U-M spokeswoman Julie Peterson said that while the university does consider racial makeup of its campus, the study does not take into account academic essays, teacher recommendations or extracurricular activities.</p>

<p>"No top university admits students solely on the basis of grades and test scores," Peterson said. "We consider many factors in order to admit a group of students who have diverse talents   "</p>

2

<p>So are we supposed to believe everthing CEO says? -- a right wing organization, that promoted and is heavily in favor of the ballot intiative in Michigan to end any consideration of race in admission, that conveniently puts out this "study" three weeks before the vote on that intiative, and somehow managed to issue "responses" to Michigan's questioning the validity of the study before Michigan even issued anything questioning its validity.</p>

3

<p>Drudba -you must be joking</p>

<p>WAKE UP the university itself has implicitely affirmed that the SAT data is correct, and its only other substantive response is the standard diversity boilerplate language:</p>

<p>QUOTE</p>

<p>Univ of Michigan "spokeswoman Julie Peterson said that while the university does consider racial makeup of its campus, the study does not take into account academic essays, teacher recommendations or extracurricular activities." "No top university admits students solely on the basis of grades and test scores," "We consider many factors in order to admit a group of students who have diverse talents "</p>

<p>END QUOTE</p>

<p>The diverse "talent" in fact turns out to be one's race in the case of blacks or one's enthnicity in the case of Hispanics</p>

<p>Apparently, per the university blacks and hispanics must simply have better EC's, recommendations, and essays - in fact so extraordinary that they more than makeup for the lower SAT scores (and no doubt lower grades and class ranks) - relative to typical asian and caucasian applicants</p>

<p>Sorry, no one believes this nonsense.</p>

4

<p>The Supreme Court ruled race could be used as a factor in admissions as long as it's "narrowly-tailored" and was used "to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body." My interpretation from this is that as long as colleges don't use stringent quota systems, the Supreme Court is giving them a lot of leeway to set their own standards for Affirmative Action.</p>

5

<p>Pacers is right. And they can use the definition for the next 24 years per the Supreme Court decision.</p>

6

<p>pacers - if the data and results that this conservative organization indeed withstand scrutiny and turn out to be accurate, I think Michigan has some litigation risk here, if only because the odds appear to be so fantastically in favor of certain groups - thus bringing raising whether the improper Gratz practices are continuing in a different format. And I don't think Gratz can be read as authorizing any preferences short of a quota, although you may have a point that given the political inertia of universities they will strain to read it that way. I would read Gratz as permitting a thumb and perhaps a couple of fingers on a scale - no more, particularly when mixing in the predictive element of a now changed Supreme Court. </p>

<p>drusba - there is certainly plenty of room for argument over AA, but merely dismissing the views of a group because they are "right wing" is hardly thoughtful and is probative of nothing. It serves to dissuade, rather than persuade as to your position. What do you think is wrong with the study? It is easily viewable on the Internet. Does it reflect a flawed regression analysis? Does it fail to deal with the incompleteness of data in a responsible way, given, the limitation that the authors can't speak wholly to what they don't know. What is substantively wrong with their work? And if you don't have an opinion, so be it - but really, merely dismissing a piece of work as a right wing diatribe without making any substantive comment is silly. </p>

<p>I am disapointed in the University's response. If, as the University avers and the researchers concede, the data set is incomplete (which, according to the University, is due to attributional privacy concerns), then they ought to at least intuit or explain at a summary level how the incomplete data set skewed this group's conclusions. Otherwise, it leaves the impression that the analysis is correct, and that they cannot say anything to the contrary given the litigation risks. And programs at public universities cannot operate in secrecy - if they do - they will fail in the long run.</p>

7

<p><a href="http://criticalmoment.org/issue13/lee-lin%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://criticalmoment.org/issue13/lee-lin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Anyone remember the incident in which two Asian UM students were verbally assualted and urinated on by some drunken white Michigan fratboys?</p>

<p>Yeah. So University of Michigan continues its fine tradition of taking a p!ss on Asian American students. Bless Ann Arbor.</p>

8

<p>I don't think any right minded person treating anyone else anywhere near the the manner in which the Asian students were alleged to have been treated - its simply grieviously wrong. This having been said, even the most socially conscious of schools will have bad actors from time to time. </p>

<p>But the question of how much preference should be attributed to race is a different one. If Michigan is really giving as much preference as the study indicates (and that study likely needs to undergo scrutiny), it is not a policy that I believe the general public will accept because it belies an intent to conform to a quota rather than giving a reasonable thumb on the scale.</p>