NEWS
Regents want race to count
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Blake Anderson:
- Program docks at Marinette (January 31, 2007)
- Big promises, big questions (January 30, 2007)
- Doyle plans to aid UW (January 29, 2007)
- UW-M looks to expand campus (January 29, 2007)
- Race policy forum today (January 29, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Time to decide for UW leaders (February 8, 2007)
- Debating policy's legality (February 14, 2007)
- Race policy forum today (January 29, 2007)
- Walsh: 'We may be wrong' in the long run (February 9, 2007)
- Board approves UW admissions (February 12, 2007)
Share This:
by Blake Anderson
Friday, January 19, 2007
The University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents has come under close scrutiny in recent weeks for considering allowing race as a factor in admissions decisions at all UW System schools.
Part of a “holistic” admissions policy that takes into account nonacademic factors like extracurricular activities or socio-economic status, race is already a factor in admissions decisions at UW-Madison. The regents hope to expand the practice to the other 25 UW System campuses, in part to increase diversity.
UW System officials also maintain an adequate predictor of collegiate success cannot rely only on a student’s high-school GPA, class rank and standardized test scores.
David Giroux, spokesperson for the UW System, compared such narrow criteria to Badgers football coach Bret Bielema recruiting a football player solely on his performance in the 40-yard dash.
“[Bielema] would need to look at the many different aspects of the individual,” Giroux said, “such as his blocking ability, his ability to catch and the many other aspects that make up a well-rounded football player.”
Garnering national attention, former University of California regent Ward Connerly visited Madison Dec. 19 and testified before a special legislative committee reviewing the use of race-based affirmative action at UW System schools. According to Connerly, who chairs the California-based American Civil Rights Institute, the use of race goes directly against the principles for which affirmative action was created.
“The original executive order was you treat people without regard to race,” Connerly said in a phone interview with The Badger Herald. “Now affirmative action is acting with regard to race in the interest of diversity; the two ideas are totally different.”
Connerly, who is black, said the university system should respect “individuals as individuals” without regard to race or ethnic background.
At the legislative committee’s Jan. 11 meeting, however, UW-Madison Chancellor John Wiley testified that no minority applicant has ever been accepted at the expense of a white student.
“There has never, ever been a student admitted because of the color of their skin,” Wiley said, according to The Associated Press. “It’s not the case where some student lost a seat to a lesser qualified applicant of any race.”
Wiley did not return a phone call seeking additional comment.
Mike Mikalsen, spokesperson for state Rep. Stephen Nass, R-Whitewater, said these nonacademic factors, if approved, would directly contradict state law — in addition to offending many individuals. Mikalsen also said the debate shouldn’t concentrate on ethnic background, but instead on the student’s ability to do well at his or her respective university.
“The bottom line shouldn’t be whether it’s a minority student or not,” Mikalsen said. “When you admit someone to college who’s not capable of success, you’re not helping the student body, and you’re certainly not helping the student.”
Although the use of affirmative action in America has been present since the 1960s, Connerly called it a dying cause and predicted the practice is now in its final hours.
“I think the current form of affirmative action, which is advantageous to people of color, is coming to a close,” Connerly said. “Universities are trying to keep it alive, but they’re just beating a dead horse. I think we’re witnessing the end of an era.”
Jennifer Knox, a UW-Madison student and member of the MultiCultural Student Coalition, said the revisions could be beneficial, but added she is hopeful the state will do more research before making any final decisions.
“Affirmative action is really about building our university and building an environment where everyone can succeed,” Knox said. “I think there needs to be more emphasis on whether or not we’re being effective at laying out the landscape for a diverse campus.”
Anonymous (January 19, 2007 @ 1:46pm):
John Wiley is a complete boob. A new Chancellor is needed to clean up the mess he
has made at UW-Madison.
Anonymous (January 19, 2007 @ 2:55pm):
David Giroux misses the point when he compares demonstrated academic success with Bielema recruiting players solely on a 40-yard dash performance. Ironically, he attempts to explain the need for a qualitative UW admissions policy by reminding us of the need for a quantitative football recruitment process. Sorry Giroux, past academic success IS a good indicator of future academic success. Race is not. Perhaps Giroux would like Bielema to consider race in his recruitment process. After all, race is an important part of having a well-rounded football team.
Anonymous (January 22, 2007 @ 8:53pm):
The first response is correct. John Wiley is in no position to go before the legislature and discuss any UW policy, especially one dealing with race. His bumbling incompetence and total ineptness in handling the Paul Barrows case has been just disgusting. We need a new Chancellor at UW-Madison.
Anonymous (January 26, 2007 @ 2:28pm):
I agree completely. Wiley has been a massive failure. UW-Madison needs new
leadership.
Anonymous (January 29, 2007 @ 1:10pm):
Yes, Wiley and Farrell have really been bad. I think they are defending affirmative action now because they so badly handled the Barrows/Hong dispute. It's the biggest collapse of leadership at UW-Madison that I can remember.
Anonymous (February 2, 2007 @ 1:44pm):
If Wiley is defending racial preferences now because of his poor judgment in the Barrows case, then he should be replaced immediately. If Farrell is acting similiarly, then he too should be replaced. They are only making UW look worse to the public and legislature.
Anonymous (February 15, 2007 @ 2:49pm):
Walsh and Reilly should be fired also.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 11:43pm):
Hong case now headed for trial. Could get even uglier for Wiley.
Anonymous (March 4, 2007 @ 10:50pm):
No question about it: John Wiley is the worst chancellor UW-Madison has ever had, and by a huge margin too. Where did they get this guy?
Anonymous (March 13, 2007 @ 9:22pm):
Total, complete, and undiluted catastrophe. That's John Wiley's record as UW-Madison Chancellor. Dump him.
Anonymous (March 25, 2007 @ 7:58pm):
Many of the posts here have been pretty tough on John Wiley. Well, I cannot defend him. I would say, however, that the UW Board of Regents has not done its job, either. They should have replaced Wiley after Barrows won in the ASAC last April. Instead, they have been dithering with things like the marriage amendment and the admissions criteria. Frankly, I am amazed at their failure to correct the mounting disaster as Bascom Hall. They seem to be completely detached from reality now, and I'm afraid the UW will be permanently diminished by this whole mess. It is sad and depressing.
Anonymous (April 3, 2007 @ 11:24pm):
I agree. What are the regents doing? The mounting scandal and corruption at Bascom is truly revolting. They must intervene and do something before it is too late.
Anonymous (April 9, 2007 @ 9:51pm):
It's probably too late now. Barrows v. Hong is headed for trial in Dane county, and
Barrows is planning to file a new complaint against the Claims Board. I suspect this will get very ugly.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
