The way a university admits students says a great deal about the quality and vision of the institution. Unfortunately, the controversy surrounding the admissions process at the University of Michigan has caused myths and rumors to spread about the goals and implementation of affirmative action.
Critics argue that ensuring diversity in any one specific class of people (e.g., race, ethnicity) amongst the student bodies of state-sponsored universities is not \a compelling state interest."" In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in The Regents of the University of California v. Bakke that diversity was a compelling state interest, and that narrowly-tailored affirmative action programs are not only permissible but also necessary. The court also found that ""the diversity that furthers a compelling state interest encompasses a far array of qualifications of which racial and ethnic origin is but a single element.""
According to the National Association for College Admission Counseling, proper understanding of the admissions process would reveal that there is no such thing as ""race-based"" admissions: race is but one factor taken into consideration, along with a wide variety of academics, extracurricular activities and geographical location. Why is it that the conservatives don't claim discrimination based on GPA or ACT score?
Those in opposition to affirmative action also claim that students admitted on the basis of race and not sufficient academic credentials often perform poorly in the schools to which they are admitted unqualified and for which they do not have the skills for success. Basically, this statement says that if you are a person of color, you don't deserve to be here.
The bottom line is that no one is ever admitted solely on the basis of race. Under Bakke, the university cannot admit unqualified applicants (students who score below a certain score on the SAT or below a certain GPA level). If you are above that criteria, then you are qualified. Many qualified students of color are denied every year for admission, so just because a student is qualified and a person of color does not mean they will be automatically admitted.
Furthermore, a recent article from the Harvard Business Review entitled ""A Report Card on Diversity,"" showed that over and over again, students with SAT scores of 1100 who are put in schools where the average is 1300 do better than students with an 1100 board score admitted to a place with an average of 1100. The fact is that people will consistently rise to the challenge of higher expectations. The article concluded that ""the individuals who are admitted because of race-sensitive policies are succeeding in school, and they are going on to successful careers while playing an active role in civic life at disproportionately high rates. Moreover, students of all races are benefiting educationally from diversity on campus.""
The biggest myth of all is that race-conscious admissions disregard merit. Rather, such admissions processes take into account the fact that it may take more than simple book smarts to succeed. When choosing a football team, a coach looks at more than simply how many points a player scored in the last game. When choosing employees, executives look at more than who got the highest GPA in college. Such situations examine what people, considered individually and collectively, have the background, experience, talent and work ethic to succeed.
This editorial was originally supposed to be in opposition to an anti-affirmative action resolution being proposed by several conservative members of the Associated Students of Madison Student Council at their meeting. They wanted to give these myths and racist statements credibility by saying that they represented your beliefs. Just recently, the conservatives decided to remove the resolution from the agenda. Let's hope they realized that inaccuracies and bigoted statements do not represent the views of the students of UW-Madison.
