Author: mopress

In one paragraph, Columbia professor Samuel G. Freedman congratulates Gates for bringing

“intellectual honesty” to the admissions debate. In another paragraph, Freedman says that although

Gates asks the right questions, he gives the wrong answers. See the paragraphs below. Is Gates

honestly confused? [Quote:] Gates of Texas A&M asked the right questions, even if he gave the wrong

answers. He recognized that the college admissions system is profoundly flawed. He erred in continuing

to trust standardized tests and thinking that, without racial or legacy considerations, the playing

field would be level.

It never can be perfectly level, and we should operate on that

assumption. If we give up the notion that merit can be measured by a test, and if we acknowledge that

many variables contribute to an applicant’s prospects and to his or her ultimate value to a college,

we can bring integrity and sanity back to the admissions process.

Diversity should be a

plus; so should legacy, high grades and many other factors. Once we unshackle ourselves from this

belief in statistical objectivity – once we plainly say that admissions decisions are an art, not a

science – we can lay to rest the merit-vs.-race argument and save millions of high school kids and

their parents from the collective nervous breakdown that applying to college has

become.

I know this new way can work, because I have experienced it. As a faculty member

at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, I have operated in just such an

unapologetically subjective system for a dozen years. Our program consciously has refused to require

standardized tests because of our conviction that they largely tell us who had enough money to pay for

Princeton Review or Kaplan courses.[end quote, USA Tdoay, Jan.

22]

Duke

University has affirmative action and legacy admissions. What prevents Texas A&M from the same?

Perhaps the public nature of the university is a consideration, but if Aggie alumni wanted to follow

the Duke plan by restoring legacy and affirmative action, who can doubt their political abilities in

Texas? State Senator Jeff Wentworth suggests that the Ten Percent Plan is raising enough complaints to

attract the legislature’s attention. But here’s the question, is Aggie hostility to affirmative

action greater than their political desire to continue a legacy program. And if hostility to

affirmative action exceeds alumni loyalty at Texas A&M, what does that say about the temperament of

Aggie Culture when it comes to race?

[Published at TheBatt, Jan. 27,

2004]

[Quote:]

Duke’s own commitment to a racially and ethnically diverse student body was unequivocally affirmed in

the spring of 1988, when the board of trustees approved a statement of Policy and Criteria for

Undergraduate Admissions. The statement embraced the concept of “a student body that is diverse not

only in academic and personal interests and achievement but also in more general ways: racial, ethnic,

cultural, economic, and geographical.” It went on to say, “Special consideration may be given to

minority candidates. There is a strong commitment to provide educational opportunities for black

students and to increase further the diversity of the student body by having substantial representation

of Hispanic, Asian, and Native-American students.” Other categories of special interest were

mentioned–including children of alumni, North Carolina residents, and athletes. That remains the

university’s guiding policy. [Robert J. Bliuise, Re-Affirming Affirmative Action, Duke Magazine,

Sept.-Oct. 2003.]

Conclusion: “Critics say admissions should be based solely on

merit. But that argument assumes an objective standard can assess merit across the nation’s wide range

of college-bound students. In the subjective world of admissions, pure merit does not exist. Nor should

it.

“Choosing a diverse student body that contributes to a stimulating campus

environment is a freedom worth preserving.”[USA Today Editorial, web posted Jan. 25, 2004, see more

excerpts below.]
[Quote:] By pressuring colleges to drop legacy admissions, the federal

government would interfere with the right of universities to manage their own affairs as long as they

aren’t violating anti-discrimination laws.

Some universities are ending legacy

admissions on their own. Texas A&M stopped the practice last month in the face of criticism that it

kept legacy preferences even after dropping affirmative action.

Pressuring all

universities to follow Texas A&M’s example, however, sends the federal government down a slippery

slope…..[end quote]