Reprint from the Badger Herald, November 21, 1996
Controversy over the UW-Madison’s quest for racial/ethnic “diversity” in undergraduate enrollments continues. It is fueled by our continued failure to analyze the available data in an effort to better understand the effectiveness of our efforts to recruit more minorities and to ascertain the dimensions of the pool of potential applicants. As a consequence, new plans and proposals are regularly advanced, without solid knowledge about their potential effectiveness.
We have another instance of this during the recent celebration of “(Lack) of Diversity Week.” The Civil Rights Coalition (CRC), a student group, staged a week-long series of meetings to discuss proposals addressed to Chancellor Ward that seek to improve minority student recruitment by the year 2000. This action follows the successful efforts of CRC last spring to secure the Chancellor’s commitment to raise by the year 2000 UW-Madison’s percentage of new freshman minority enrollment to equal the percentage of minorities graduating from Wisconsin’s high schools. That agreement is now described by the CRC as “a good start.”
The new CRC material goes beyond that, repeating old charges from last spring and introducing others. One is that undergraduate minority students are severely unrepresented on this campus, with students of color constituting only 9.4 percent of enrollment as contrasted to 19.7 percent at four-year colleges nationwide. Another is that UW-Madison has one of the worst records for minority recruitment in the Big 10. A third is that campus’ total minority enrollment of 10.27 percent falls short of the state’s college age population of 13.08 percent. The first comparison is not relevant, the second is questionable, and the third is simply incorrect. For this, the CRC deserves a failing grade in its research.
More important, CRC missed the obvious: the CRC goal Chancellor Ward agreed to last spring has already been met and exceeded. The goal was realized not over the four year timeline in the agreement but in less than a single year. The evidence is unambiguous. This fall minorities constitute 9.0 percent of new freshmen, thus exceeding the 8.5 percent share of minorities among Wisconsin’s 1995-96 high school graduates.
This new information should be cause for a gigantic campus celebration by the CRC, Chancellor Ward, and everyone else. The goal of proportional representation originally set by the Faculty Senate and pursued for more than two decades has finally been realized. Progress has been frustratingly slow and uneven, despite the fanfare of a succession of programs and initiatives, the most publicized being former Chancellor Shalala’s Madison Plan. Even opponents of minority recruitment goals must admit the importance of this accomplishment.
Before assuming a complete victory, several reminders are in order. One is that both the percentage figures used in measuring proportional representation fluctuate from year to year. This occurs because of changes in the number and mix of both new freshmen and the state’s high school graduates. The former reflects the University’s inability to control the precise number of those admitted who choose to enroll, either overall or for any racial/ethnic group. Thus, small fluctuations next year could change the percentages and push us back below proportionality.
The other and more serious problem is the possible ambiguity in the Chancellor’s agreement which refers to “our minority student freshman enrollment.” Exactly what does that phrase mean? The agreement could easily be construed, in light of long-standing concerns about the small numbers of African Americans students, as requiring proportional representation for each of the five major racial /ethnic groups — African Americans, Native Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and White Americans.
Under this interpretation, there is less reason to celebrate. Fall enrollment data indicate that Hispanic Americans are very close to proportional representation, with 1.9 percent of new freshmen compared to 1.8 percent of Wisconsin high school graduates. African Americans, however, continue to be seriously underrepresented, with 1.6 percent of new freshman compared to 3.9 percent of the state’s high school graduates. American Indians are less seriously underrepresented, with 0.5 percent of new freshman and 0.9 percent of high school graduates. Curiously, White Americans are also underrepresented, with 91.0 percent of new freshmen compared to 92.5 percent of high school graduates. Only one group stands out as being overrepresented, Asian Americans, who constitute 4.9 percent of new freshman while representing only 1.9 percent of Wisconsin high school graduates.
What if anything should be done about these imbalances? Should the campus increase its intake of new freshmen from the three underrepresented groups so as to achieve proportionality? Doing so would require a substantial increase in freshman enrollment because of the presence of so many more Asian Americans. Or should it reduce the intake of new Asian American freshman in order to make way for more African Americans, American Indians, and White Americans? A strict interpretation of proportionality that recognizes the constraints on overall enrollment would require the latter. In quantitative terms, this would mean reducing the number of new Asian American freshman from this year’s 267 to 104, with offsetting increases for the other three groups.
Many students would probably go for the first option. However, the Board of Regent’s current enrollment management policy would prevent much of any increase in overall enrollment. Substantial numbers of other students might argue that the second option would seriously reduce the number of Asian American students. The affected students would probably argue that such action discriminates against them, a minority group, many of whom have academic credentials superior to other students in both the minority and nonminority categories.
The difficulties of operating a program that seeks proportionality in the enrollment of racial/ethnic groups should be apparent. Moreover, there are strong arguments for admitting students to UW-Madison on the basis of their academic qualifications and their likely success as students. Even if minority groups are to be singled out for special consideration, some effort must first be made to determine what fraction of each racial/minority group is in some sense “qualified” to be admitted.
The evidence indicates clearly that the racial/ethnic composition of the state’s high school graduating class is a poor indicator of the proportions who qualify for admission to UW-Madison.