OPINION & EDITORIAL
Letter to the Editor: Seltzer report indicates larger problems
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by :
- Blair's approval rating up since war (April 16, 2003)
- Support our troops: protest (April 16, 2003)
- Santorum deserves relief (April 29, 2003)
- Anti-semitism by another name (April 24, 2003)
- All the fits that are news to print (June 3, 2003)
Related Stories:
- UW’s top-secret admissions process revealed (June 28, 2001)
- UW admissions policy lacks transparency (February 6, 2007)
- Regent report reveals new challenges (February 14, 2002)
- No place for race (January 18, 2007)
- We need a second opinion (February 13, 2007)
Tuesday, September 4, 2001
The mysteries of deciding which applicants to admit to UW-Madison may be revealed at this week’s Board of Regents meeting.
Not that much can be learned from a regent-requested report from Admissions Director Rob Seltzer. His vague, page-and-a-half effort barely scratches the surface in describing how the admissions process works. His report, and also the admission brochure (of doctored-photo fame), both omit important information. One is the faculty legislation requiring eligible applicants to graduate in the top half of their high school class. Faculty legislation also requires that admission be based on likely success. This latter criterion is ignored, as the consistently low minority-graduation rates indicate.
Still another omission is any reference to state law on discrimination. In fact, Wis. Stats. 36.12 explicitly prohibits discrimination in UW admissions and programs based on race/ethnicity.
The Seltzer report’s incompleteness points to deeper problems. At a March meeting attended by several regents, Chancellor Wiley, and other UW officials, Seltzer claimed his office has no written materials describing the procedures and criteria used in admitting students — it operates using an “oral tradition.”
Is this any way to operate the admissions process that affects the lives of so many young people? How can they be assured fair and consistent treatment? What does this mean for accountability?
And, does the Seltzer report tell the full story? Let us hope the regents press for answers.
—W. Lee Hansen Professor Emeritus, Department of Economics
