NEWS
Wiley: Race matters
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Andriy Pazuniak:
- SSFC wittles Wunk Sheek budget (October 21, 2005)
- Cieslewicz, Judge come out on top in spring election (April 9, 2007)
- Music industry serves campus (March 22, 2007)
- UW to RIAA: No way (March 21, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Greer accuses Wiley of endorsement (October 24, 2002)
- Regents debate admissions process (September 7, 2001)
- Wiley wraps up discussion series (October 25, 2001)
- LLPC sets up mock sweatshop (April 4, 2005)
- Wiley details segregated fee cuts (April 2, 2002)
Share This:
by Andriy Pazuniak
Thursday, January 25, 2007
A physicist by trade, Chancellor John Wiley describes himself as a numbers guy.
Graphs, statistics, analysis of percentages and averages — Wiley loves it all. He says he even plays around with different number theories in his spare time.
And when it comes to discussing whether the University of Wisconsin should consider race as a factor in admissions, Wiley points to statistics and numbers to defend the university's policy.
For Wiley, UW must continue to consider race when deciding who is admitted to the university and who is denied, because race plays too significant a role in a person's life to be left to chance in admissions.
"If something is important and you ignore it, you turn it into a random variable. And if it's a random variable, it's subject to random fluctuation," Wiley said during an interview with The Badger Herald Wednesday in his Bascom Hall office. "If we ignore race, if we don't pay it any attention, we'll get such anomalous fluctuations that people will say, 'It's got to be racism. There's no way you'll get that result, except by discrimination.'"
If UW admissions were blind to race — if students were admitted solely on the basis of academic performance, and campus diversity was left to chance — Wiley said there would inevitably be long stretches of time when the campus would not be as diverse as it needs to be.
"Why would you want something that's important to fluctuate randomly?" Wiley said. "You'd like to have some control over it."
The question of whether UW should consider race in its admissions decisions arises as the Board of Regents debate allowing all UW System schools to add race and other "non-academic factors" to their admissions criteria.
Critics of the proposed policy changes, including state legislators and a prominent social activist, have argued that using race as an admissions criteria is discriminatory and sacrifices UW's academic integrity.
"The University of Wisconsin is a government agency, and it is bound by Constitutional law to treat people as equals," said Ward Connerly, a former University of California regent and current chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, who is also black. "If you say [race] wasn't the only reason, but the university gives you extra consideration because of it and I didn't get that consideration, that's discrimination."
However, Wiley maintains that no student has ever been granted or denied admission to UW because of his or her race.
"We've gone out and looked for people that provide ethnic diversity to the campus, but we don't admit them unless they're fully qualified to be admitted," Wiley said. "If we were doing that — shame on us. That's a fraud on everybody, including the ones we admit, because we are bringing them into an environment where they can't succeed."
But according to spokesperson Mike Mikalsen, state Rep. Stephen Nass, R-Whitewater, is not swayed by Wiley's argument.
"If [UW] honestly believes that race has never decided if someone got in, then why do they use it?" Mikalsen said. "The reality is that race does play a deciding factor."
The numbers, however, prove otherwise, Wiley said.
According to admissions data released by UW, the university has admitted a higher percentage of "low-scoring" — applicants with ACT scores ranging from 6 to 15 — "majority" students than "minority" students.
And ultimately, Wiley said, race should remain an admissions factor because it remains a factor in "real life."
"Nobody wishes more than minorities that [race] were irrelevant and that they could be confident that they're always judged other than by their race," Wiley said. "But that's not the world we live in."
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 8:03am):
Inner city schools are disadvantaged, you say. This is the reason for justifying race-based admissions, right? What about the non-black students in inner city schools? Do they get the same treatment, or are blacks the only "special" group in America? It seems to me that the poor white kids are similarly disadvantaged, so race shouldn't be an issue.
Why does racism still exist? Because racism helps as much as it hurts. Don't take away quotas, and don't discriminate. Don't treat minorities differently unless it involves free money.
Perpetuate the problem.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 8:17am):
Isn't Wiley thinking about this from the exact wrong point of view? I never saw one instance where the sort of forced diversity that has people wetting themselves in excitement over added that significantly to my education at UW. It's nice that he can throw out the quantitative mumbo jumbo to confuse the issue. It's nice that he views "diversity" as some sort of social experiment.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 12:02pm):
haha... that puppet of the Bradley Foundation only says he's black when it helps his argument.
The only reason why Ward Connerly has such a prominent position in the ironically named American Civil Rights Institute is because he's a black man speaking against affirmative action. Do you honestly think people would pay him to travel across the country to say this mess if he were white? I guess Republicans like Grothman only like affirmative action when it works to dismantle it.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 12:52pm):
"What about the non-black students in inner city schools? Do they get the same treatment, or are blacks the only "special" group in America? It seems to me that the poor white kids are similarly disadvantaged, so race shouldn't be an issue. "
This doesn't mean race is not an issue, this means that the economic status of all students is also an issue. "Race" and "class" go hand in hand, but this does not mean race no longer becomes a factor in admissions because there are white students that happen to be poor as well. From a race perspective, the university reflects a significant amount of white students and is not up to par for students of color -- that is the issue here.
"Why does racism still exist? Because racism helps as much as it hurts."
HAHA. You can't be serious. This must have been a joke!
"I never saw one instance where the sort of forced diversity that has people wetting themselves in excitement over added that significantly to my education at UW."
And that is the point, friend! Have you ever considered that there is a reason why you have yet to have a diverse experience that has contributed to your education? Do you ever consider what it is about the university that does not offer you this opportunity? Or do you consider how lacking a form of a diverse experience might affect you in your career later in life? It is no secret that there are departments on campus that are losing the interest of large employers to universities that are offering a wider range of diversity in their curriculum as well as their student body. The reason why the administration is "wetting themselves" is because a school's diverse experience determines the quality of the education as well as its reputation, as well as the preparedness of UW students entering into various professions. "Diversity" isn't something he is viewing as a "social experiment" but as a social reality that affects EVERYONE.
-=Ken Taté
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 2:49pm):
Wiley has no credibility here. He so badly mishandled the Barrows case that no one trusts his judgment now. A replacement chancellor is needed.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 3:04pm):
What about the way Wiley treated Paul Barrows? That case has become a colossal embarassment to the UW-Madison.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 3:28pm):
Racism is a self-perpetuating machine indeed.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 3:47pm):
As long as you divide anything on the basis of race (or anything else for that matter), there will always be racism and segregation (by definition, that is separating people into different groups).
MLK Jr. himself wanted a color blind world... unfortunately, we like to feel good touting forced "diversity" (which is a wonderful thing) at the same time perpetuating the problems MLK Jr. fought (died) so hard to eliminate.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 4:28pm):
Wiley's statements are troubling for a few reasons; I will discuss a few.
Some of Wiley's positions don't make sense.
He says:
1) No white students have been denied admission because of racial preference.
Yet, he goes on to say,
2) We have to look at race in admissions, or else some years we won't have very many minority students.
Wouldn't that mean with a limited number of spots, that minority students would be receiving preference over other students? This contradicts his statement in #1.
3) He seems to also advocate giving racial preference so people don't think that the UW is racist. ("It's got to be racism. There's no way you'll get that result, except by discrimination.'")
4) He advocates that race is a factor in "life" and therefore race should be considered in admissions. Isn't it too narrow minded though to look only at the race factor and not other major influences on students lives?
5) His comments on "low scoring" ACT scores do not support his proposition. Scores in the range of 6-15 on the ACT are not low scores but horribly low scores. I suspect it is very rare for students in that range to be accepted at any college unless there are special circumstances. The real question on race and ACT scores is when the minority student with a score in the low 20s is compared with a white student with a score in the mid 20s. Look at that data Mr. Wiley.
How long is his contract? Can we please have a new chancellor?
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 5:41pm):
"Why does racism still exist? Because racism helps as much as it hurts."
Affirmative action is ultimately helpful or hurtful? This example explains the statement, sorry for the confusion.
Anonymous (January 25, 2007 @ 5:46pm):
MLK was for affirmative action. Read a history book, and stop misappropriating his message.
-Summer
Anonymous (January 26, 2007 @ 5:40am):
Summer, MLK was NOT for affirmative action (there was no such thing or even such a concept at the time). He wanted ALL PEOPLE to be treated equally and he knew that separation promoted inequality. He is rolling over in his grave right now at all the stupidity being spewed in his name.
BTW, nobody misapropriated his message, I think you meant misinterpreted. I guess that explains why you think he was in favor of something or a concept that did not exist.
Anonymous (January 29, 2007 @ 10:16am):
Ken, there was plenty of "diversity". I am just saying that for me it was of little benefit to me when it is being shoved in my face every day. It actually had the opposite affect.
Anonymous (January 29, 2007 @ 1:06pm):
Wiley is a dolt.
Anonymous (February 2, 2007 @ 1:38pm):
I agree with several of the above posts. It is just absurd for John Wiley to try to defend race preferences after his shameful treatment of Paul Barrows. UW-Madison's reputation his been badly damaged by this scandal, and it's all Wiley's fault.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 11:38pm):
Yes, and now the lawsuit against Hong will go to trial.
Anonymous (April 15, 2007 @ 9:34pm):
No argument from me: John Wiley has been just terrible. I cannot remember a chancellor as bumbling and inept as Wiley. He has made a mess at UW-Madison that will take years to clean up.
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.
