Or...how the UW diversity officers are making fools of themselves and of their students.
Ann Althouse posted this morning about the a report written up by the Center for Equal Opportunity alleging discriminatory practices in the admittance of whites and asians to the university (undergrad and law).
Here are the numbers from the CEO report (obtained via an open records request to the UW admissions office):
By SAT and class rank:
• African Americans favored over whites 576-to-1
• Hispanics favored over whites 504-to-1
• Black SAT score 150 points lower than whites and Asians
• Latino SAT score 100 points lower than whites and Asians
By ACT and class rank:
• Black favored over whites 1330-to-1
• Hispanics favored over whites 1494-to-1
Chance of admission for grades and LSAT scores at the median for that race/ethnic group
• Out-of-state Black: 7 out 10 chance
• Out-of-state Hispanic: 1 out of 3 chance
• In-state Asian:1 out of 6 chance
• In-state white: 1 out of 10 chance
Frankly, to anyone who pays attention, this shouldn't be surprising. What makes this story interesting is the university's reaction.
The provost issued a campus-wide notice last night about something that "involves a threat to our diversity efforts" and called an emergency meeting so that the campus could react "as a community". Since the report from CEO was not released until midnight, this means that the 'provost of diversity and climate' Damon Williams and the dean of students Lori Berquam put forth a call to arms to more than 150 students there without even having the full information of what the reports said.
According to this morning's report in the Badger Herald, students are already active making signs and preparing to protest Roger Clegg 's (the president of CEO) arrival in Madison. Protestors, apparently tired of taking up space in the capitol rotunda, have set up shop at the DoubleTree Inn where Clegg is holding a press conference at 11am. And this is where I'm confused. What are they protesting, exactly?
Of course, they're protesting in support of Affirmative Action policies held by UW admissions. During the meeting yesterday, Williams organized a student rally "to express their solidarity and pride in UW and a sense of togetherness." Do they have pride in the fact that their university actively practices racial discrimination? Williams said: "I want students to be able to be in power; to say this is who we are, this is what we value." Are you sure you don't want to think a bit more before you say that racial discrimination against whites is "who we are" and "what we value"?
What this really brings home is the double-standard hypocrisy of academia. No one here, except Roger Clegg, has any interest in addressing the actual published report. No one has any interest is discussing the numbers and debating explanations. There is simply a knee-jerk reaction that the "aggressive, right-wing" CEO has absolutely nothing to say other than garbage and should be shouted out of town. That's how debate works in academia. What kind of example is Mr. Williams setting for these students? And what kind of education are they getting that the students' first reaction is not "this is interesting, but there are plenty of valid reasons why these numbers are so", but is rather "this is an assault upon who we are and we must destroy anyone who would criticize us"?
And this is where I get really frustrated. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 says that the policy of the United States that discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin shall not occur in connection with programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance. What troubles the "provost of diversity" is that Clegg is daring to point out that UW is claiming that discrimination on the ground of certain races is perfectly acceptable. "Diversity" obviously means "not too many whites and asians" and "everyone who agrees with affirmative action".
Honestly, I would have less of a problem if Damon Williams would simply be honest. State it outright: "We're sure that if we held even standards for everyone getting into UW, there would be significantly fewer blacks and hispanics. In modern days, a 'diverse' campus is necessary in order to gain federal financial support, and in academia diverse = blacks and hispanics on campus. Therefore, we make it harder for Wisconsin students who have the unfortunate luck to have white skin to get in, while we make it easier for out-of-state dark skinned students to come to our school. This way, we make sure to match whatever diversity quota has been set for us by some nameless bureaucrat. Don't blame the playa, blame the game." Of course, that doesn't work...namely because of that lovely law I mentioned in the previous paragraph. Therefore, Mr. Williams and his ilk have to contort their arguments into something that doesn't sound like they're in favor of racial discrimination.
In this instance, so far, they're failing.
Or, Williams could make the historical argument: "Blacks and Hispanics have suffered decades of sufferance under white people (and Asians?) in America. It's only fair that we do everything we can to make sure that as many black and hispanic students that want to get the opportunity to come to UW and study. If that means that some worthy Wisconsin white students can't come here, it's their own fault for being born with the wrong color skin. Now they know how it feels."
Because this is basically how people read the affirmative action argument. It doesn't sound pretty, it certainly doesn't sound politically correct, and it doesn't sound fair. But that's not the point. "Fair" only applies to massive racial groups: "blacks", "Asians", "Hispanics", "Whites". The individual kid who worked his butt off for his ACT scores and to graduate with an appropriate GPA to gain admittance to his state school, but was rejected in favor of an out-of-state kid with fewer qualifications won't be at the protest at the DoubleTree Inn today.
Or, maybe there's a financial aspect. UW makes a much larger profit off of out-of-state students (who have a much higher tuition level) than in-state students. Perhaps Williams' argument could have gone like this: "With the downturn in the economy, UW depends upon out-of-state students to help fund the university. Therefore, the admissions standards are adjusted according to our budgetary needs. Additionally, students from out of state bring a varying perspectives toward life in Wisconsin, and can be counted on to increase the diversity of our campus [so that I can keep my $150,000 salary]." (Maybe that last part was silent.)
And this is why academia is dying. This is why Glenn Reynolds is forever talking about the "bursting of the academic bubble." UW pays Damon Williams $150,000 to do what, exactly? Talk about diversity? He clearly doesn't do that very well, since he can't even honestly talk about what diversity means, or why discrimination is or isn't happening on UW's campus. He is, however, apparently very good as riling up a bunch of students to shout down a campus visitor who has honest complaints about the admissions process. Rather than being taught to think, assess, evaluate, debate, and conclude, these students are learning how to make signs and insult people.
But, hey, they're doing it as a community.
