OPINION & EDITORIAL
UW should reveal admissions policies
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:
- Politicking destroyed opt-out's proponents (April 14, 2003)
- Madison's annual hip-hop conference falters (April 14, 2003)
- Dear Dave: Post this near your desk (April 17, 2003)
- Redirecting control (April 23, 2003)
- Don't Cut Historical Society Funds (April 29, 2003)
Related Stories:
- Summer preview: Affirmative-action ruling (May 8, 2003)
- We need a second opinion (February 13, 2007)
- Insult & Inquiry (March 5, 2002)
- The case for affirmative action (April 3, 2003)
- UW’s top-secret admissions process revealed (June 28, 2001)
by Badger Herald Editorial Board
Thursday, December 5, 2002
UW administrators have said time and again that their admissions policies do not discriminate against anybody, but many students wonder if there isn’t something more going on than administrators will admit.
Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear a case in which two white students allege they were unfairly discriminated against when denied admission to the Michigan Law School and another case in which the complainant was an aspiring undergraduate.
The school uses a point system in which minorities are distinctly rewarded.
For example, members of traditionally underrepresented minorities are awarded 20 points on their undergraduate application, whereas 12 points are awarded for a perfect SAT score and one point is given for a good admissions essay.
A federal appellate court initially held up Michigan’s policy, but the case was appealed. The eventual decision rendered by the high court will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications for universities nationwide, including the University of Wisconsin.
Currently, UW does not have a codified policy explaining whether targeted minority students receive preferential admissions standing as a sole consequence of their minority status. Administrators insist no minority students are admitted who can be deemed “under-qualified.” However, all concede minority status is a factor in the determining of a student’s initial designation as “qualified.”
Such hair-splitting is troubling and stands at odds with the high-minded rhetoric the administrators apply to their other diversity efforts. A university that openly recruits and allocates resources through academic scholarships and special programs such as PEOPLE and POSSE in attempts to raise minority enrollment must make clear in what ways it rounds out the process of bringing acceptable numbers of minority students to campus. Additionally, UW’s vague policies hinder its attempts to improve campus climate. There are those on this campus who believe the bar for targeted minorities is lower than the bar for white and Asian students.
Some students develop prejudices toward people of color, and minorities themselves are left to question their credibility among classmates. Students, staff and taxpayers are left to speculate about what preferences may or may not exist in the admissions office.
In light of the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the Michigan case, we implore UW to clearly and lucidly disclose the specifics of its admissions procedures, specifically revealing how students of different races fit into that process.
UW is currently receiving more applications than ever before and faces an increasingly competitive admissions process; the school needs to be more forthright with the specifics of its admissions policy. It is impossible to have a constructive, responsible dialogue about minority enrollment when current policies and procedures are at best vague and at worst unintelligible.
