Apparently, scholarly pursuit in Wisconsin has not been up to par. This week, an article appeared in the Stevens Point Journal that discussed the Wisconsin All-State Scholars program in conjunction with a number of quantitative metrics about the class of 2010, such as admissions statistics and geographic representation. The program, which awards academic scholarships to Wisconsin's top high school seniors, had 44 of its 120 recipients matriculate at the University of Wisconsin-Madison this fall. While the article lauds the accomplishments of the All-State Scholars, it does suggest that not having a majority of the students at UW-Madison is representative of a larger problem. Through references to information about the class of 2010, the article noted that the university had made positive steps in terms of the number of minority students it had accepted, but opined about a perceived bias toward non-residents over Wisconsin residents.
The article cites a statistic about the number of applicants who were not admitted and analyzes this fact by stating that it "gives rise to claims that qualified Wisconsin students are 'wait-listed' while more qualified non-residents get in." While the analysis is slightly misleading, as it draws assumptions about the number of Wisconsin residents not accepted, the author's claims also bring up another point: Should qualified Wisconsin residents be given preference over more qualified non-residents in the application process?
A quick response for many might be that a state school should benefit the residents of the state in which the institution resides, or that since Wisconsin residents bear a larger portion of the tax burden to support the UW System it should be easier for in-state applicants to gain admittance. While these arguments do contain important considerations for administrators, they should not be regarded as the decisive elements in the decision-making process.
Furthermore, the magnitude of the problem is also an element that deserves inspection. For the class of 2010, the University admitted 13,322 people, or 58.4 percent of the total applicant pool. To claim that qualified Wisconsin students are being disadvantaged by the acceptance process thus necessitates a definition of what the standards for "qualified" are. While there are obviously some that might fit the minimum standards, it is important to realize that individual distinctions bear upon the admissions process and that someone who cannot find his or her way into the top 50 percent of a pool of 23,000 might not be as qualified as originally thought.
The most important consideration for the Office of Admissions, and rightly so, is an objective academic standard that can be uniformly applied to all applicants. While the UW System does have obligations to the state of Wisconsin and its residents, guaranteed acceptance into UW-Madison should not be rigorously applied.
While the author of the newspaper article finds fault with the idea that some "qualified Wisconsin students" are wait-listed in favor of "more qualified non-residents," the reasonable observer should applaud UW-Madison for striving to find the most qualified students and for maintaining the university's high academic standards. The necessity of admitting the most qualified students, even to the detriment of some Wisconsin residents, is essential to the purposes of an academic institution, and it is one that should not be ignored to appease a few unhappy individuals.
Regardless of geographic origin, the best outcome for students — and by extension, the state — is to admit the most qualified applicants. By doing so, the University creates a more robust academic environment and also brings more talent into Wisconsin. By admitting the best applicants, students can be guaranteed to have a more productive and edifying educational experience, something that makes them both more prepared and more competitive upon entering the job market. To admit less qualified students into UW-Madison is strikingly similar to subsidizing an uncompetitive industry. By protecting the residents of Wisconsin through the creation of less rigorous admissions requirements, it reinforces sub-par academic performance by in-state residents. The outcome of this situation is that the university is forced to admit increasingly less qualified students and the state of Wisconsin begins to produce less academically prepared students.
UW-Madison's situation is unique compared to many other schools; it is a nationally acclaimed university that just also happens to be funded publicly. To continue to be competitive on the national level, and thus benefit the state of Wisconsin, the University must be able to accept the most qualified applicants, even if it means that what works best in Madison is not what works best in Neenah.
Mike Skelly ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in finance and political science.
