Opinion
Affirmative action right for UW
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Elizabeth Sanger:
- Affirmative action right for UW (April 13, 2006)
- Both sides now: Executive's budget cuts ignite a firestorm of controversy (October 20, 2005)
- Liz agrees with Joelle (May 4, 2006)
- Both sides now: Inclusionary zoning creates controversy for Madison (November 3, 2005)
- Both sides now: Taking on alcohol, religion in Wisconsin penal system (November 17, 2005)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
In 1999, the University of Wisconsin-Madison implemented Plan 2008 to "enhance campus diversity" by recruiting and retaining "domestic 'targeted' minority students, faculty, and staff." According to the university, "targeted minority means Black, American Indian/Alaskan Native, Southeast Asian (Laotian, Vietnamese, or Cambodian origin), or Hispanic." The impetus for Plan 2008 came with the prediction that by 2050 the U.S. population will be less than 50 percent white, and the acknowledgment that UW students must be prepared to work and live in a diverse world.
Plan 2008 does not disfranchise smart, talented, or otherwise qualified white students; rather, it works for all students because everyone benefits by learning in a climate that values and cultivates diversity. Plan 2008 encompasses a variety of programs created to increase campus diversity, including recruitment, mentoring, financial aid, and student support services.
An example of UW-Madison's need for increased diversity on campus has been made painfully clear in recent years by companies like Alcoa and General Motors. They've stopped recruiting from the College of Engineering because of the lack of diversity on campus. They're not the only ones with reservations — Kimberly Clark, the Cargill Corporation, and Proctor & Gamble were among the companies to urge the School of Business to increase its enrollment of students of color during a Diversity Forum. Every potential job applicant — white students included — is affected when big companies refuse to come to our campus to recruit candidates.
UW has many good plans in place to recruit and retain targeted minority students, faculty and staff. The PEOPLE Program, the Faculty Strategic Hiring Program and increased need-based financial aid are some highlights of Plan 2008 elements that are working. The most contentious (and only a small part of) these successful strategies is the Lawton Grant. Lawton Grants direct state funds to cover part of the tuition burden for targeted minority students who demonstrate financial need. These grants are only offered beginning sophomore year; their specific purpose is to support underrepresented students who face significant financial obstacles to completing their degrees.
In May 2003, an External Review of Plan 2008 at UW-Madison yielded a recommendation that the university increase and maintain its financial aid competitiveness. Offering increased financial assistance for significantly underrepresented groups would provide incentive for resident minority students to stay in state and draw non-resident minority students to UW.
Currently our university has one of the least diverse campuses in the Big Ten. We fall considerably behind some of our biggest competitors, including the University of Illinois, the University of Michigan and Northwestern. The relatively homogenous population of the state of Wisconsin is partly to blame, but all the more reason why UW should continue to offer incentives like the Lawton Grant and other scholarships to potential students of color.
Some people don't agree with the goals and methods of Plan 2008. They're often caught up in an ideological opposition to the plan, and ignore the positive implications for all students of a more diverse campus. The reality of Plan 2008, however, is that it's working and showing promise.
We're not there yet, but we're headed in the right direction. Proctor & Gamble resumed recruiting at UW-Madison's College of Engineering last spring. The first-year retention rate gap between all students and targeted minority students has been closing since 1998, as have the second- and third-year retention rate gaps. And there's more good news to come if we stick to the plan.
Liz Sanger (ejsanger@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in violin performance and English.
6 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Brother Ali makes an ‘Exclusive’ stop
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
A person should not be accepted into college just because he or she is a minority. I don't care if every student that gets in is Chinese. If they are the best qualified, then let them in. Would you see a doctor who only got into medical school because he was black?
Why does a campus need "diversity?" What nonsense is this? Is some employer going to look at your resume and say, "Well Johnny Whiteman, I see you had a 4.0 at one of the best schools in the country. Numerous scholarships, awards, undergraduate research experience. You're a veritable genius. Unfortunately, there were not minorities in your class, so you're not qualified to work for us."
But I needn't worry. In 2050, when whites become the minority, it will be our turn to beg for handouts. We will get all of the choice jobs. I'd better learn to start complaing and to blame everyone else for my problems. "Don't blame me, I'm a poor white man, I'm a minority. It's not my fault I'm underqualified. But give me the job anyway."
Science and technology doesn't care what race you are. You're either capable of doing the work or you're not. Letting possibly underqualified students into the university will hurt those students and the university. What happens when the engineering departments can't find good students because everyone is a "African American Studies" major?
The entire thesis of this article is really stupid. Like it or not, when a white student with a 28 ACT isn't accepted into UW because their spot was taken by a minority with a 22 ACT something unfair has happened.
Liz, would you be willing to give up *your* spot to a less-qualified student of racial-minority status?
So GM is hiring people based on their experience in ethnicly-diverse climates? How has that worked out?
when is the forum? isn't there always one in april, or is the new crop of activists letting the ball drop?
While I'm staying out of the affirmative action talk (pros and cons of many different types of affirmative action programs take WAY too long), I have to make one response to poster number 1. White people are not becoming "the minority" in 2050 (or whatever year they have that pointed at). Very simply, at that time ALL the minorities in the country COMBINED will make up 50% or more of the population. In other words, there will be no majority. White people will still be, by a huge amount, the largest group.