AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
Should Colleges Consider
Race as a Factor in Admissions?

I believe race should be one of the many factors considered when deciding which students are admitted to our nation's colleges and universities. My belief is widely shared by institutions of higher education, as evidenced by their use of affirmative-action programs to achieve racial and ethnic diversity.

At the University of Michigan, the undergraduate and Law School admissions policies are being challenged because both allow the consideration of race. More specifically, the undergraduate policy uses a point system and assigns points on a wide variety of factors.

There are 150 possible points available. Academic factors account for up to 110 points. Applicants receive up to 40 points for other factors that indicate an applicant's potential contribution to the undergraduate college. For example, an applicant may receive 20 points for one of the following: membership in an underrepresented minority group, being a white student who attended a predominantly minority high school, socio-economic disadvantage, athletics, or at the provost's discretion. The Law School does not use a point system for academic or diversity factors, but does consider many of the same factors considered in the undergraduate system, including race.

Many people's views on affirmative action are affected by some common myths: First, race-conscious admissions policies are not substitutes for anti-discrimination laws. Anti-discrimination laws are important tools, but they are not designed to create a diverse learning environment in colleges and universities. In contrast, the University of Michigan admissions policies do not seek to remedy discrimination, but do help create diversity.

Second, race does not guarantee any student of color admission into the college of his or her choice. For example, the University of Michigan Law School has, in the past decade, rejected a greater percentage of black applicants than white applicants. Race is just one of many individual attributes considered. Academic achievement, unique talents and abilities, and leadership skills are examples of some of the other attributes given consideration.

Third, affirmative action programs do not admit unqualified students. American colleges and universities have always considered a variety of admissions factors, even when deciding among all white applicants. Despite this fact, many opponents of affirmative action argue that colleges should employ a narrow standard of merit that relies primarily on test scores and grade point averages.

In support of a narrow standard, affirmative-action opponents sometimes point to the lower test scores of some minority students compared with white students in the same class. This is not a useful observation. In a typical college class composed of different racial groups, some white students will have higher test scores than some minority students and some minority students will have scored higher than their white classmates. However, every admitted student has scored within the acceptable range, deserves admission and is capable of succeeding. As assistant dean at the Michigan Law School, I am constantly amazed by all of our students' talents, intelligence and energy.

Finally, affirmative-action programs do not stigmatize their beneficiaries. I make this statement as an African-American woman who is also a beneficiary of affirmative action. I feel no sense of shame in having my race considered, in addition to a list of other positive attributes, in determining what contributions I might make in the classroom, and beyond.

Not a Neutral Concept

So, why should race be a factor in college admissions? Race is not and has never been a neutral concept, no matter how much we might wish it so. Current events, such as the Trent Lott controversy, signal that racial issues are as potent and emotionally charged as ever. Our race helps shape our experiences and perceptions. Even when we don't talk about it (and perhaps because we don't talk about it enough), race permeates. Given the unique place that race holds in American society, colleges and universities should not be forced into neutrality on race, while still being able to consider factors like athletic ability or alumni connections.

Furthermore, the consideration of race is necessary to achieve the educational benefits that flow from racial and ethnic diversity. One can't predict a person's views simply by knowing the person's race, but race may help shape experiences and perceptions. Having a class containing students of diverse racial backgrounds, as well as diverse experiences, creates a rich learning environment and is much more likely to result in a meaningful exchange of ideas.

If colleges are forced to drop race as an admissions factor, there would be a resegregation of many college classrooms. The nation's most prestigious institutions, which train many of our future leaders, would likely experience the sharpest decline in the number of minority students.

For example, after the elimination of racial preferences in Texas and California, there was a dramatic drop in the number of minorities enrolled in those states' top schools. Those numbers have not rebounded to what they were when affirmative action was in use. However, at some less competitive schools in California and Texas, the number of minorities has increased. It appears that some students of color are being pushed downward in the Texas and California systems.

This "downward mobility" works against true integration, which must occur at every rung of the educational ladder. Downward mobility cannot be justified by the belief that minority students are better off in schools where they can compete on an equal footing with their white and Asian peers. Any such belief is shattered by the multitude of African-American and Latino students who have successfully competed at the very top rung of American colleges and universities.

Segregation, at any level, cannot be justified, though many arguments have been put forth as attempted justifications. For example, the nongraduation rate of African-American students at the University of Michigan has been inaccurately reported as almost three times higher than the nongraduation rate for whites. The actual difference in rates is much less. In fact, the university's graduation rate for African-American undergraduates is higher than the national average for all students, including white students. In the nearly six years that I have been an administrator at the University of Michigan Law School (one of the top 10 law schools in the country), not one student has failed to graduate because of academic difficulties.

What King Died For

Even though our nation's high schools are graduating many talented, hard-working, and qualified students of color, if affirmative action is outlawed only "token" numbers of minorities would likely be admitted to many of America's colleges. I believe such a result to be unacceptable, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's 1954 decision in Brown vs. Board of Education. In that case, the court struck down the "separate but equal" doctrine, a doctrine that mandated segregation of public schools and other public facilities.

In his famous "I Have a Dream" speech, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed of a day when we would all be judged by the "content of our character" and not the color of our skin. Unfortunately, Dr. King's dream of a color-blind society remains a dream. Race matters, and race-conscious admissions policies help to achieve the type of integration that Dr. King committed his life to fighting for.

In sum, race-conscious admissions policies are legal, fair, and should be maintained. We cannot achieve a color-blind society by sweeping race under the rug and ignoring its significance. We cannot afford to abandon diversity in our nation's classrooms. Nor can we afford to turn back the clock on the integration of our colleges and universities.