Affirmative Action in College | Hu Index of Diversity

Arthur's Anything Index | Home | Home | Diversity / Politics / Opinion | webmaster |(c) 1995-2011
website views since 4/11/2011 | updated 4/20/2011 | View My Stats
Page Contents

Introduction

This is where I keep my reference information on Affirmative Action in colleges. If you want my summary writings, check out my Hu's on First editorials page

Basically my findings are that Affirmative Action generally means racial preferences for under-represented groups, and sometimes means preferences that aren't under-represented such as Asians in law school (Stanford, University of Washington), or in the general university (University of Minnesota). At the most selective schools such as MIT, Harvard or Stanford, the chance of admission was typically 1.5 to 2 times greater with much lower academic scores and grades for favored groups.

This is contrary to the once popular notion that affirmative action was never about preferences but about treating students equally regardless of race. As laws such as Prop 1209 and Initiative 200 directly banned preferences, the defence has moved from denying the presence of prefernces to arguing that such preferences are neccesary to maintain "diversity" in the spirit of the 1978 Bakke decision, however later decisions such as Hopwood have effectively struck down even this "diversity" justification for discrimination.

In many schools, the goal which was sometimes achieved was based on population (many elite law and medical schools were equal or over 11-12% balck population in late 80s) or high school graduate (UCLA and Berekeley). University of Washington had over 28% Asian law students in mid 90's despite state population only 5%.

In some cases there was evidence for bias against groups relative to whites, the so-called Asian quotas, such as UCLA and Berkeley in 1984, Brown in 1982, Harvard in 1983 (which oddly enough seemed to also include the under-represented but growing Hispanic population).

The Color of Meritocracy \clipim\99\09\29\color.htm La Griffe du Lion explains why colleges need preferences to increase numbers of minorities and why so many Jews and Asians are found at Harvard based on cognitive IQ distribution. A bit technical, but generally along the lines of what I've found based on SAT distributions.


Admissions Preference Spectrum - white = 1.0
--------------------------------
 7.0 Asians U Minnesota  9/99 CEOUSA
 5.0 Hispanic U Minnesota 9/99 CEOUSA
 3.0 Black U Minnesota 9/99 CEOUSA
 1.5-2.0 MIT Harvard Stanford "minority"
-1.2 Harvard UCLA Asian 1984
-2.0 UC Berkeley Filipino 1994

Links

College Affirmative Action





@@Asian American

%%Benefit

BROWN TREATED ASIANS "UNFAIRLY" IN 1987
z63\clip\2003\02\asprem.txt
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/02/weekinreview/02JACQ.html
February 2, 2003
Asian Students: Not All of Them Are Pre-Med Violinists
By JACQUES STEINBERG
"When Brown assembled the class of 1987, for example, it admitted 20
percent of all applicants, but only 14 percent of those who
identified themselves as Asian. A committee appointed by the Brown
trustees ultimately concluded that "Asian-American applicants have
been treated unfairly,"..struggled to decide whether
Asian-Americans fit the definition of "underrepresented" minorities.

ASIANS END UP GETTING BENEFIT IN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION WARS?
z63\clip\2003\02\asper.txt
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/02/weekinreview/02STEI.html
February 2, 2003
The New Calculus of Diversity on Campus
By JACQUES STEINBERG
U Michigan Law School Admission Rates at middle range of pool:
Black 81%  White 3% Asian 2% [Asians not preferred]

..the main beneficiaries [of percentge program] were Asian-Americans.
The percentage of freshmen entering the Austin campus who were
Asian-American rose to 18 percent last fall, compared with 14 percent
in the fall of 1995. Thus... [nearly 20% vs  3% population]

Admit rates U Texas Austin
      1995 2002
Asian 68   71
White 67   66
Black 59   43
Hisp  72   56

At public universities in California and Texas, the end of
affirmative action in admissions has benefited one minority:
Asian-Americans.

%%Harmful

ASIANS WOULD TAKE OVER BLACK HISPANICS IF NO AFFIRM ACTION
z87\clip\2005\06\afasian.txt
Dropping Affirmative Action Would Harm Black and Hispanic Applicants but Help Asian Applicants, Study Finds
By ERIC HOOVER
the acceptance rates for black
applicants would fall to 12.2 percent from 33.7 percent, while the
acceptance rates for Hispanic applicants would drop to 12.9 percent
from 26.8 percent, according to the study. Asian-American students
would fill nearly 80 percent of the spaces not taken by black and
Hispanic students, the researchers found, while the acceptance rate
for white students would increase by less than 1 percent

NEARLY ALL COMPETITIVE COLLEGES USE RACE PREFERENCES
z48\clip\2001\02\collaf.txt Academe Today [Daily report from the
Chronicle of Higher Education, http://chronicle.com] Thursday,
February 22, 2001 [Center for Equal Opportunity] Report Contends By
PETER SCHMIDT only two, University of Minnesota's Duluth and Twin
Cities campuses, appeared to give preferences to Asian applicants. At
Virginia Tech, the odds of an Asian applicant being admitted were low
enough that the report concluded that the institution was
discriminating against that population.


http://www.ncpa.org/pd/affirm/pdaa/pdaa34.html
National Center for Policy Analysis
\clip\98\16\asiaafac.txt WITHOUT PREFERENCES, ASIAN-AMERICANS GAIN
ADMISSION 
* Even though they make up only about 15 percent of all California
high school students, Asians make up about 50 percent of the pool of
eligible students.
* The system is required to admit the top 12.5 percent of California
high school graduates, and fully 32 percent of all Asian-Americans
graduating from the state's high schools fit into that category in
1990 


@@Administration

SB Woo notes
the ratio of [administrators / (faculty +
professionals)], broken down to races, is a measure of the opportunity
enjoyed by American citizens of different races.  Nationwide, that ratio
for blacks (non-Hispanic) is 0.21.  That is, for every 100 black faculty
and professionals there are 21 black administrators.  The ratio for Native
American is 0.20; for white (non-Hispanic) is 0.16; and for Hispanic is
0.15.  However, it is only 0.06 for Asian American. 


@@Ban

DIVERSITY AFTER BAN ON QUOTAS STAYS ABOUT THE SAME
z75\clip\2004\04\postban.txt
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/13/education/13COLL.html
April 13, 2004
After Ruling, 3 Universities Maintain Diversity in Admissions
By GREG WINTER
At the University of Michigan, the focal point of the court's decision,
black, Latino and American Indian students accounted for 10 percent of this
year's accepted students, a decrease of one percentage point from 2003. Yet
Michigan spent $1.8 million more to evaluate applicants this year, a 40
percent increase.


@@Black

BLACK STUDENTS DECLINE FROM PEAK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
z60\clip\2002\10\cntblack.txt
Counting Black Freshmen
A crude but telling measure of racial progress.
By Timothy Noah
Timothy Noah: Counting Black Freshmen
http://slate.msn.com/?id=2072875
October 21, 2002
Caltech.. 1.2 percent..MIT 6.2 percent black. University of California
at Berkeley has only 142 black freshmen this year, constituting 3.9
percent of the total But why don't they complain now that Berkeley and
UCLA, the two most prestigious universities in the University of
California system, accept a lower proportion of black applicants than
of all applicants?

http://www.jbhe.com/latest/37_admissions_survey.html
z60\clipim\2002\10\24\black\black.htm
CalTech has three black freshmen this year, down from five in 2001
CalTech has lower admit rate
Stanford = national population, won't release admit rate


@@business schools

  WSJ July 6, 1994 "Business and Race"
  Top ranked business schools graduated 5.4% of MBA's compared to
  just 3% of all business schools. according to a survey by the Journal of blacks in
  Higher Education. University of Michagan was rated as the best for
  Blacks based on the high percentage of students (15%) and faculty (4$)

@@Cal Poly

CAL POLY TEST SCORES ABOVE SOME UC, SKIPS AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
Profile in Billionaire Courage March Madness On The Campuses By Steve
Sailer March 28, 2004
Documenting links at:
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/march_madness.htm#profile
That the UC schools are cheating is made clear by the experience of Cal Poly, 
San Luis Obispo. This is the finest college in the second-tier Cal State 
system, with test score averages above several of the nine UC campuses. The LA 
Times sniffed:
"Only 12.9% of Cal Poly's undergraduates belong to those traditionally 
underrepresented minority groups … That is the lowest rate among the 30 California 
public universities with comprehensive undergraduate programs.


  @@Caltech admissions

  Affirmative Action for blacks dropped sometime between 1991 and 1993
  4% / 2.0 admit rate Black -> 2% / 1.0 admit rate

  DOC922:CALTECH.DOC Cal Tech Dean of Admissions
  doc922:caltech.prn
  doc932:caltech.xls  91 admissions
  doc932:caltech3.doc 
  doc932:caltech.txt
  doc937:caltec93.xls 93 vs 91 admissions

@@Class Rank - Top 10%

z42\clipim\2000\05\16\tenpct.efx Wall Street Journal May 15, 2000
Some High Schools Finagle to Cram Kids Into Top 10% of Class. Some
schools have more than 10% of kids in their top 10%, kids in elite
schools complain they must do better than kids in worse schools.


@@College Admissions

\priv\96\06\texpriv.txt Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 01:59:23 -0400 From:
NewsHound@sjmercury.com (NewsHound) Texas Private Colleges to Revise
Programs because of Affirmative Action Decision By Sylvia Moreno, The
Dallas Morning News. One program awarded scholarships sole on the
basis of race, another was similar to banned U Texas system.

\priv\96b\05\goodafac.txt - James Q Wilson shows that race
is the decisive factor  TNR

doc90:prolet.doc - College & Jobs & elite

doc\94\15\blakpass.txt - Passing a student just because he is black?




@@Colorado

PREFERENCES IN COLORADO COLLEGES LOWER GRADUATION RATES
\clip\98\16\colorado.txt
National Center for Policy Analysis

http://www.ncpa.org/pd/affirm/pdaa/pdaa31.html
Source: Robert Lerner and Althea K. Nagai, "Racial Preferences in
Colorado Higher Education," Center for Equal Opportunity, 815 15th
Street, N.W., Suite 928, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 639-0803. 


@@Disclosure

LETS HAVE FULL DISCLOSURE OF COLLEGE PREFERENCES THEN
z75\clip\2003\11\trandisc.txt
http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/comment/kirsanow200311190903.asp
November 19, 2003, 9:03 a.m.
Transparent Discrimination
"What is the termination date of your racial-preference policy?"
By Peter Kirsanow
there should be no objection to attaching to Sen.
Kennedy's bill provisions mandating that colleges that receive federal
aid provide answers to the following questions:
1. Does your school discriminate on the basis of race or ethnicity?
2. which
races/ethnicities are preferred and which are not?
3. What is the median high school GPA/SAT of your school's applicant
pool? (Please disaggregate by race/ethnicity.)
4. What is the median GPA/SAT of admittees from non-preferred
racial/ethnic groups? From preferred racial/ethnic groups?
(Disaggregate by specific race and ethnicity.)


@@Diversity

Diversity is just another name for racial quotas.

SAVE THE ASIANS? IT'S WHITES WHO SUFFER FROM DIVERSITY QUOTAS
z48\clip\2001\02\osuquot.txt
With commentary by Arthur Hu, Kirkland WA arthurhu @ hufamily.com (no space)
13 November 2000
The Ohio Association of Scholars
"To match the state's demographic profile, OSU would have to
discriminate against Asian-Americans in faculty hiring and promotion.
If the quota for Asian-Americans is reached, OSU would have to
totally ban the hiring and promotion of Asian-Americans. "
http://www.nas.org/affiliates/ohio/osu_divplan.htm
A Response to OSU's Diversity Action Plan 
OSU's web site: http://www.osu.edu/diversityplan.
z48\clipim\2001\02\26\diversityplan\index_1.htm
A Diversity Action Plan For
The Ohio State University 
Ohio State's Goal: 
 In autumn 1999, the
                     percentage of minority students enrolled was: 
                          7.26% African American
                          1.75% Hispanic
                          5.29% Asian American
                            .33% American Indian
In Ohio, African-Americans represent 11% of the
                     population, Hispanics 1.4 %, Asian Americans 1.0%. By
                     2010, these percentages are expected to increase to
                     13.8%, 2.2% and 2.9% respectively. 

In 1999, 12% of the regular, tenure track faculty were members of
ethnic minorities. Of the 2968 regular faculty, 3.25% (N=96) were
African American, 0.1% (N=3) were Native American, 7.3% (N=216) were
Asian American and 1.4% (N=43) were Hispanic. 

The goals for the total university over the next five years should be
to increase the number of women and minority faculty by the following:
Female 25% N=197 African-American 30% N=28 Asian-American 10% N=21
Hispanic American 30% N=13 Native-American 100% N=3 [Why increase
Asians if they are already 7.3% vs 1% state 4% national population]?


@@Engineering

NACME says  research
should be tied to racial quotas, 6 of top 10 producig
colleges  are predominantly black 


@@Evidence of Effectiveness

There is very little evidence that affirmative action actually
improves the quality of education. Studies actually show that
blacks actually learn more in predominantly black institutions.

STUDIES SHOW BLACKS LEARN MORE IN BLACK, NOT DIVERSE COLLEGES!
http://www.arthurhu.com/99/07/colldiv.txt
From: "Albert Himoe" 
To: 
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 00:11:01 -0500

Diversity and Critical Thinking: Analysis of the Gurin Report

The Gurin Report (Gurin, 1999) was prepared in support of the University 
of Michigan's defense of a lawsuit, which was filed on behalf of white 
students who believed that they were denied admission to the University 
of Michigan on account of their race. The University admitted that their 
admission standards are more lenient for "underrepresented minorities", 
but defends itself by claiming educational benefits of "diversity".

Gurin P. The report is online at 
http://www.umich.edu/~newsinfo/Admission/Expert/summ.html

[Himoe basically says the data is nonexistent, inconsistent or
outright made up]

the question was whether black students learn better at historically
black or predominantly white colleges. ...There was no significant
difference between learning gains of black students attending white
colleges or those attending black college in reading, math, critical
thinking, or science reasoning. However, in writing skills, blacks
students attending black colleges scored 14 percentile points [0.35
SD] better than their counterparts attending the more "diverse"
predominately white colleges. This study provides no support for the
value of diversity [in the person of white students] on the learning
of black students. If anything, the effect is negative.


The following is my analysis the Gurin Report, which purports to show 
empirically the value of "diversity" in higher education.


@@exclusion

affirmative-action.exclusion

\clip\97\12\leo.txt Who said PC is passe?  BY JOHN LEO U.S. News &
World Report 5/12/97 Cal State Montery Bay requires comparing
literature of at least 3 different groups, of which two must be
non-Eurocentric, but the bookstore carries no literature by white
authors.

\priv\95\04\mincours.txt - PLF is university which was minority-only
englishcourses.

d:\priv\95\01\nowhite.txt - Cal Poly admitted no white men to some
majors


@@Gap


Admission Ratio vs white, Equally Qualified, Grad Rate
-------------------------------------------------------
177 North Carolina State 1995
173 U Michigan Ann Arbor freshman 1995
111 U Virginia 1999
 61 UCLA 1994
 35 U Maryland Medical School 2000
 17 Nation's top law schools

z68\doc\web\2003\07\reward.txt
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=8716
Rewarding the Unqualified
By John Perazzo
FrontPageMagazine.com | July 3, 2003
Based on CEO data:

* In the University of Washington's (UW) 1995 freshman ... admission
rate for blacks was 96.6 percent, as compared to 78.5 percent for
Asians and 74.4 percent for whites... black freshmen had scored 80
points lower than whites on the verbal SAT exam, and 140 points lower
on the math SAT. black freshmen in the 75th percentile were roughly
equivalent to the scores of whites in the 25th percentile;
* In the 1995 freshman class at the University of California at Irvine,
the 75th percentile math SAT scores of blacks admitted were a
remarkable 20 points lower than the corresponding scores of whites in
the 25th percentile.  Not surprisingly, the graduation rate for that
cohort of blacks was about 47 (53) percent, as opposed to 68 (32 =
1.65 dropout ratio) percent for whites and 73 percent for Asians.
The 75th percentile scores of black and
* UC San Diego Hispanic admittees in 1995 were roughly the same as the
white and Asian 35th percentile scores. The graduation rates for
blacks at UCSD during the 1990s hovered around 41 percent. For whites
and Asians, the rates generally exceeded 70 percent.
* University of Virginia's (UV) 1999 freshman class white and Asian
applicants, whose composite SAT scores were nearly 200 points higher.
Statistically, black applicants were an astonishing 111 times more
likely to be admitted to UV than were whites with equivalent
qualifications.
* At UW, the percentage of 1995 freshman who eventually graduated
within six years was 70 percent for whites, 65 percent for Asians, and
a mere 29 percent for blacks.
* In the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor's 1995 freshman class,
The six-year graduation rate for blacks was 66 percent, as compared to
86 percent for Asians and 87 percent for whites. The odds of a black
applicant with the same qualifications as a white applicant being
offered admission to UM Ann Arbor was an incredible 173.7 to 1.
* At North Carolina State in 1995, blacks were admitted at a slightly higher
rate than whites and Asians, though their SAT scores were, on average, 210
points below those of Asians and 190 points below those of whites. A black
applicant was statistically 177 times more likely to be accepted than a
similarly qualified white applicant.
* At the University of Maryland Medical School in 2000, blacks with college
grade-point-averages (g.p.a.) of B or B+ and Medical College Admissions Test
scores in the bottom half of all test-takers had a 70 percent chance of
admission; for whites and Asians of similar credentials, the chance was 2
percent. At our nation's top law schools, blacks are admitted at 17 times
the rate that a colorblind process would allow. 
* At UCLA Law school in 1994,
a black applicant with a college g.p.a. between 2.5 and 3.5, and a Law
School Admissions Test score between 60 and 90, had a 61 percent chance of
admission. The corresponding rates for similarly qualified Asians and whites
were 7 and 1 percent, respectively.

NEARLY ALL COMPETITIVE COLLEGES USE RACE PREFERENCES
z48\clip\2001\02\collaf.txt Academe Today [Daily report from the
Chronicle of Higher Education, http://chronicle.com] Thursday,
February 22, 2001 [Center for Equal Opportunity] Report Contends By
PETER SCHMIDT "black applicant was four times likelier than a white
applicant with the same standardized test scores and high-school
grades to be admitted to the University of Minnesota at Duluth; eight
times likelier to be admitted at the University of North Carolina at
Charlotte; 18 times likelier at Longwood College in Virginia; and 57
times likelier at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington.  ..
The few that did not use racial or ethnic preferences at all were
ones that either accept more than 85 percent of applicants or open
their doors to anyone who applies.  "


STUDY AFAC BLACKS GOT AHEAD, BUT GRADES, SAT LOWER, AND GPAS WERE
LOWER EVEN WITH SAME SAT SCORES \clip\98\12\collout.txt Elite
Colleges' Race-Sensitive Policies Opened Doors to Black Success, Says
Broad New Study Chronicle of Higher Education, September 9, 1998
http://www.chronicle.com/daily/98/09/98090901n.htm "One chart, for
example, shows that black students who scored between 1250 and 1299
on the SAT had a 74-per-cent chance of gaining admission to the five
colleges. White students with the same scores stood only a
23-per-cent chance of getting in.  See @@graduation outcomes - lower
GPA even with same SAT scores, on average 23rd percentile GPA.

WHITE ADMIT RATE WOULD ONLY RISE FROM 25 TO 27 PERCENT W/O
PREFERENCES
\clip\98\12\collout.txt
http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/national/affirm-impact.html
September 9, 1998 Study of Affirmative Action at Top Schools Cites
Far-Reaching Benefits By ETHAN BRONNER Bowen and Bok point out that
if more than half of the blacks accepted at selective colleges had
been rejected, the probability of acceptance for another white
applicant would rise only 2 percent, to 27 percent from 25 percent.

\clip\98\12\ntlbok.txt The National Review on Bok-Bowen study
http://www.nationalreview.com/daily/nr091098.html National Review,
September 10, 1998 Preferences in Black and Whitewash

Derek Bok and William G. Bowen have just come out with a book, The Shape of
the River, defending the racially discriminatory practices in which they
engaged as the presidents, respectively, of Harvard and Princeton. 
"The study, in fact, says that blacks admitted to universities which use
preferences have lower grades and graduation rates than most
students--which is more than many institutions of higher learning,
including Princeton, were willing to say before the passage of Proposition
209."


@@Georgia


SUPREME COURT SAYS U GEORGIA CANNOT GIVE POINTS TO BLACKS FOR DIVERSITY
z51\clip\2001\08\uga.txt
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/28/education/28GEOR.html?todaysheadlines
August 28, 2001
U. of Georgia Cannot Use Race in Admission Policy, Court Rules
By DAVID FIRESTONE
Race can be considered as a factor in encouraging diversity, but it
cannot be assumed that every nonwhite student will automatically
contribute more to a diverse campus than white students, the opinion
said.
Therefore, the university's system of adding points to the admissions
score of every nonwhite applicant violates the equal protection
clause of the 14th Amendment,

JUSTICE DEPT SAYS OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE FOR RACE PREFERENCE
z46\clip\20000\10\overw.txt [The Atlanta Journal-Constitution,
11.1.2000] Feds fight for UGA affirmative action By Bill Rankin
Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer U.S. Justice Department has
asserted to the federal appeals court in Atlanta that the University
of Georgia's race-conscious admissions program is constitutional and
"enhances the quality of education provided to all students." 


@@Grade Weighting

\clip\97\28\berkgrad.txt Copyright 1997 Associated Press. All rights
reserved.  11/27/1997 13:44 EST Law School Changes Admissions Policy
(Berkeley law stops weighting grades from better universities to help
minorities)


@@Graduation Outcomes

Affirmative action advocates claim that outcomes are just or nearly
as good as other students, but this simply isn't true. In every
field, black drop out rates are 2 to 4 times worse than whites, the
fact that overall rates are small for all races at the best schools
hides this ratio.

Summary - ranked by Black ratio
------------------------------------
Law School No Degree   W1.00 B-2.00
Fail to Grad U-MIT     W1.00 B-2.00
Fail to Grad U-Berk    W1.00 B-2.50
Fail to Graduate Med   W1.00 B-3.00
Fail to Graduate Law   W1.00 B-3.00
Med Honors             W1.00 B-3.00
Fail Med Board         W1.00 B-4.25



%%bok

MORE SELECTIVE COLLEGES HAVE HIGHER BLACK GRAD RATE
\clip\98\12\bowstud.txt "They found that the black dropout rate for
the elite institutions practicing affirmative action was 25 percent,
much lower than the national black dropout average of 60 percent. The
more selective the college, the lower the black dropout rate."  [but
it's still consistently double the white dropout rate!]
September 9, 1998 The New York Times Study of Affirmative Action at
Top Schools Cites Far-Reaching Benefits by Ethan Bronner
http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/national/affirm-impact.html

STUDY AFAC BLACKS GOT AHEAD, BUT GRADES, SAT LOWER, AND GPAS WERE 
LOWER EVEN WITH SAME SAT SCORES
\clip\98\12\collout.txt Elite Colleges' Race-Sensitive Policies
Opened Doors to Black Success, Says Broad New Study Chronicle of
Higher Education, September 9, 1998
http://www.chronicle.com/daily/98/09/98090901n.htm

"Black students with the lowest SAT scores had the best chance of
graduating if they attended the most-selective colleges."

"One chart, for example, shows that black students who scored between
1250 and 1299 on the SAT had a 74-per-cent chance of gaining
admission to the five colleges. White students with the same scores
stood only a 23-per-cent chance of getting in.  The average
cumulative G.P.A.  for black students who matriculated at the 28
colleges in 1989 was 2.61 on a 4.0 scale, compared with 3.15 for
white students. The average black matriculant was ranked at the 23rd
percentile -- or the bottom quarter -- of the class.  White students
with SAT scores above 1300, for example, were ranked in the top 40
per cent, on average, of their classes. Black students with the same
scores were in the bottom 40 per cent of their classes. "


BLACK MED EXAMINERS, MED GRADUATION ONLY 1/2 RATE OF WHITES
http://www.fringeweb.com/politics.html#AffirmativeAction According to
the Journal of the American Medical Association, September 7, 1994,
Vol. 272, No.9 the pass rate for black women was 44% on the national
board of medical examiners step 1 exam required to become a
physician. For white women it was 84%.

The four year percentage graduation rates for black medical students
is now about 52% verse about 90% for the others.

Interestingly, when the study looked at entering students with the
same academic background the success rates were the same and
independent of race. 

"We Have Yet to Begin Dialogue on Race" Abagail Thernstrom Seattle
Post Intelligencer 11/25/97 p. A11 Blacks are 2.5 times more likely
to drop out at Berkeley.

%%Medical

WSJ: GOOD ENOUGH ISN'T THE SAME AS JUST AS GOOD F101597-1 Doctored
Affirmative Action Data Gail Heriot (prof law University of San
Diego) Wall Street Journal Oct 15, 1997. Contrary to the JAMA claim
that affirmative action doctors were just as good, grades were much
lower, regular admits were 3 times more likely to join the honors
society, 8 times more likely to fail the National Board of Examiners
medical exam. Failure rate is low, but 3 times higher for minorities.
1994 JAMA study shows 51.1% of blacks vs.  12.3% of white med
students failed part I, students with comparable credentials scored
about as well. Doctors who take 3 attempts aren't as likely to keep
studying to stay on top. Study found little difference in likelihood
to serve minorities.

Let's attack merit!  BY JOHN LEO US News and World Report 11/18/97
\clip\97\27\leomerit.txt Linda Wightman, The Threat to Diversity in
Legal Education found:

21.9 percent of black law students entering schools in 1990-1991
failed to get a degree, compared with 9.7 percent of whites. 

blacks admitted under racial preferences were about three times more
likely to drop out. 

And the affirmative-action group had a shockingly high attrition
rate--43.2 percent either didn't finish law school or didn't pass the
bar.


%%Undergraduate



RACE GRADUATION RATES ARE CONSISTENT WITH SAT SCORES
\clip\98\16\ucsd.txt
http://www.ceousa.org/ucsd.html CENTER FOR EQUAL OPPORTUNITY Racial
Preferences in Undergraduate Admissions at the University of
California, San Diego, 1995 by Robert Lerner, Ph.D. and Althea K.
Nagai, Ph.D.  Lerner and Nagai Quantitative Consulting

Although we do not have the evidence necessary for a complete test of
this hypothesis, UCSD has provided some information allowing us a
partial test. The class entering in 1989 had the following five-year
graduation rates for groupings of students with similar combined SAT
scores:

41 percent of the African Americans entering in 1988 graduated in
five years, as did 41 percent of those entering in 1989 

48 percent of Hispanics entering in 1988 graduated in five years, as
did 50 percent of those entering in 1989 

67 percent of Asian Americans entering in 1988 graduated in five
years, as did 72 percent of those entering in 1989 

71 percent of whites entering in 1988 graduated in five years, as did

76 percent of those entering in 1989 

black 540+490 = 1030, grad rate is 48%
white 640+550 = 1490, grad rate is 71%

     35 percent of those with combined SAT scores of 800 or less graduated in five years 
black=1030 / 48%
     58 percent of those with combined SAT scores of 801-1000 graduated in five years 
     73 percent of those with combined SAT scores of 1001-1200 graduated in five years 
     74 percent of those with combined SAT scores of 1201-1400 graduated in five years 
white=1490 / 71%
     79 percent of those with combined SAT scores of 1401 or more graduated in five years 

The entering class of 1989 had the following five-year graduation
rates for groupings of students with similar GPAs:

     53 percent of those with GPAs of 3.29 or less graduated in five years 
     64 percent of those with GPAs of 3.30-3.49 graduated in five years 
     71 percent of those with GPAs of 3.50-3.69 graduated in five years 
     72 percent of those with GPAs of 3.70-3.89 graduated in five years 
     78 percent of those with GPAs of 3.90 or higher graduated in five years 

The percentage difference between the top and bottom grouping of SAT
scores is 44 percent. The percentage difference between the top and
bottom grouping of GPAs is 25 percent. The larger size of the former
difference relative to the latter means that it is likely that
combined SAT scores are a better predictor of completion rates than
are grades. 

@@Graglia (Professor, U Texas)

"This Texas law professor has a right to be an idiot" Molly Ivans
Seattle Times Sept 22, 1997 p. B7 "in an uproar since the Hopwood
decision(which overturned the UT Law School's practice of assigning
applicants to two different applicant pools based soley on the color
of their skin)" \images\972\1228\ivans.tif

Austin Review E-Mail Edition
(National Focus) Graglia Continues to Draw Fire from Left By: Brent
Tantillo, Publisher

@@Harvard

"A Victim of Preference" Newsweek Sept 30, 1991 p. 56 Carter was
turned down for Harvard Law School, but accepted when they found out
that he was Black. (F070297)

\doc\95\12\sinommis.txt filed 10-6-95 "Harvard's Sins of Ommision"
Elena Newman (Wash. DC) The Weekly Standard Oct 9, 1995 p. 22 The
Consortium for Financing Higher Education shows black at Harvard
score SAT 1290, 100 points below whites. The gap at Berkeley is more
like 300 points. Minorities are selected without competition to a
minimum instead of "best" standard, and all minorities get full
scholarships regardless of need.


@@Hawaii

z68\doc\web\2003\07\uh.txt
From: "Ken Conklin" 
http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/UHstudentethnicity.html
"Social justice" activists demand free tuition for ethnic Hawaiian students
at the University of Hawai'i, and other race-based benefits for them. One
victimhood claim offered to justify these demands is that ethnic Hawaiians
are under-represented in the student body. But careful study of UH student
enrollment data, together with Census 2000 population data for Hawai'i,
shows that ethnic Hawaiians are significantly over-represented in the UH
student body, while ethnic Caucasians and ethnic Chinese are significantly
or greatly under-represented.

@@Hiring

U WASH AFTER PREFERENCES BAN SAYS RACE PREFERENCES ARE IN EFFECT
uwafac.txt
1999 affirmative action request: Affirmative action information may be one 
of many factors used in the selection process [in violation of I200]

	 
@@Jewish

25.0% MIT 1970s
17.7% Princeton 1977
16.8% US private colleges 1977
10.0% MIT 1980s
 9.1% Princeton 2001
 6.3% US private colleges 2001
 5.1% All US colleges peak 1973
 3.5% All US colleges 1967
 1.6% All US colleges 2001

\clip\2005\09\harvadmit.txt
ELITE ADMISSIONS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED TO SCREEN OUT JEWS, THEN ASIANS
www.newyorker.com/critics/atlarge/articles/051010crat_atlarge
The social logic of Ivy League admissions.
by MALCOLM GLADWELL
Issue of 2005-10-10
Posted 2005-10-03
"A.  Lawrence Lowell, Harvard's president in the nineteen-twenties,
stated flatly that too many Jews would destroy the school: "The summer
hotel that is ruined by admitting Jews meets its fate . . .  because
they drive away the Gentiles, and then after the Gentiles have left,
they leave also.""
"In the nineteen-eighties, when Harvard was accused of 
enforcing a secret quota on Asian admissions, its defense was 
that once you adjusted for the preferences given to the children 
of alumni and for the preferences given to athletes, Asians really 
weren't being discriminated against. But you could sense 
Harvard's exasperation that the issue was being raised at all. If 
Harvard had too many Asians, it wouldn't be Harvard"

JEWISH COLLEGE ENROLLMENTS DECLINED SINCE 1970S
Z52\CLIP\2001\09\JEWCOLL.TXT Sept 2001
College Student Survey Reports a Sharp Decline In Jewish Enrollments
Professor: 'We've Forgotten That We Are the People of the Book'
Problem at Princeton Campus Shakes Ivory Towers
By REBECCA SPENCE 
[Princeton] FORWARD STAFF 
Here at Princeton, the percentage of students identifying themselves as
Jewish has dropped to 9.1% in the class of 2000 from 17.7% in the class of
1977,
A national study conducted by the American Council on
Education/University of California Los Angeles cooperative
institutional research program shows that the percentage of students
at private universities self-identifying as Jewish has steadily
declined to 6.3% in the class of 2000 from 16.8% in the class of
1977. 
When the study, which began in 1967, started asking for religious
preference in 1969, 3.5% of all college students identified as Jewish. That
number peaked in 1973 at 52.1%, and it's now down to 1.6%,

JEWS FAVORED AT VANDERBILT?
z56\clip\2002\05\jewquo.txt
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/johnleo/jl20020520.shtml
John Leo 
May 20, 2002
Jewish quotas are making comback at college
the head of the National Italian-American Foundation said Americans of
Italian ancestry account for 8 percent or 9 percent of the American
population and only 3 percent of Ivy League students.  Jews are only 2
percent of the population, but at Ivy League schools they account for
23 percent of students. In diversity-speak, a language with no word
for merit, this means that Jews are "overrepresented" and logically
headed back toward quotas.  What's new in ethnic finagling on our
campuses? Well, we just learned that Jews are being favored at
Vanderbilt University (aggressively recruited for the first time


[[University of California

\clip\98\11\boalt.txt
Number of Black Law Students at Boalt Law School Rebounds
http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/STATE/t000075305.html
Los Angeles Times, August 18, 1998
Number of Black Law Students Rebounds

Boalt Hall's first-year class in the two years since the ban on
affirmative action in admissions.

      1997 1998 
Asian 47 50 
Black 1  9 
Latino 14 24 
Am. Indian 0 2 
White/Other 178 160 
Declined to state 28 30 
Total 268 275
     1997 1998 
Men   130 124 
Women 138 151

Source: University of California


Official UC By the Numbers

MINORITIES DOWN BY ONLY 20% SYSTEM WIDE, MORE WILL GRADUATE, WHITES
STILL UNDER-REPRESENTED, ASIANS NEGATIVELY AFFECTING WHITES
\clip\98\07\conseq.txt
http://interactive.wsj.com/edition/current/summaries/editorl.htm Wall
Street Journal, April 7, 1998 The Consequences Of Colorblindness By
STEPHAN THERNSTROM and ABIGAIL THERNSTROM "Race-neutral admissions
policies are indeed having a disproportionate racial impact--they are
negatively affecting the state's most "privileged" racial group
[WHITES].  "


DECLINE IS ILLUSION AT TOP CAMPUSES, ACTUALLY DISTRIBUTING MINORITIES
EQUALLY THROUGH SYSTEM
\clip\98\07\uccamp.txt
http://www.sacbee.com/news/beetoday/newsroom/cap/040398/cap05.html
Overall decline in blacks, Latinos entering UC less than at Cal, UCLA
By Brad Hayward, Sacramento Bee Staff Writer (Published April 3, 1998
Despite big declines among some minorities reported at UC Berkeley
and UCLA this week, the University of California system as a whole
has seen a less dramatic drop in the number of African Americans and
Latinos admitted as freshmen this year, according to new figures
released Thursday.

\clip\08\07\uc2000.txt
http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/STATE/t000031775.1.html Friday,
April 3, 1998, Los Angeles Times UC to Offer Admission to 2,000
Initially Rejected Education: Qualified students will be referred to
less popular campuses. Effect on class' racial makeup unknown. 

Today's (4/1/98) Los Angeles Times article on the Berkely and UCLA freshman
class acceptances can be found at:
http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/STATE/UPDATES/lat_affirm0401.htm

The New York Times offers a table with statistics on all the U of
California Schools:
http://forums.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/national/calif-admissions-text.html

Based on the NYTIMES data, for all University of California schools, the
percentages of acceptances by race and ethnicity are as follows:

                                              1997            1998
Black                                   3.6%            2.5%
Asian                                   32.4%           32.0%
American Indian         0.8%            0.6%
Filipino*                               2.2%            2.3%
White/other                     41.8%           36.8%
Hispanic                                13.2%           10.8%
Did not report          6.0%            14.9%
total #                         89284           91407

Note that the University of California schools do not include the
California State universities.

UCLA, UCB: 40% of "NO-RACE" ARE WHITE, 40% ASIAN
\clip\98\07\latuc.txt
http://www.latinolink.com/news/news98/0331nucl.htm Report Sees Drop
in Latino, Black Students at UCLA BY SHARLINE CHIANG © 1998 Los
Angeles Daily News LOS ANGELES, March 31, 1998 -- Admissions of
African-American, Latino and American Indian students to UCLA dropped
by 36 percent for the coming school year

http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/national/calif-admissions-educ.html
\clip\98\07\nyadmit.txt New York Times April 1, 1998 California's
Elite Public Colleges Report Big Drop in Minority Enrollment Table -
freshman class 2002, 2001 broken down by race, Filipino
\clip\98\07\nyt\calif-admissions-text.html

http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/FRONT/t000031083.html
\clip\98\07\laadm.txt Los Angeles Times TOP STORY Wednesday, April 1,
1998 Wednesday, April 1, 1998 Acceptance of Blacks, Latinos to UC
Plunges Education: In first freshman class since affirmative action
was ended, Berkeley and UCLA see dramatic drop-offs. Campuses will
now launch campaigns to persuade students to attend.  By KENNETH R.
WEISS, MARY CURTIUS, Times Staff Writers

     Number of Students Enrolled (admitted?)
                      1997   1998  % Change															                        																										
UCLA																									                      																										
African American     488    280    -42.6%																                      																										
American Indian       81     46    -43.2%																                      																										
Latino              1497  1,001    -33.1%																                      																										
Asian American     4,154   4187     +0.8%																                      																										
White              3,383   3209     -5.1%																                      																										
Declined to state    569   1463   +157.1%																                      																										

UC Berkeley																							                        																										
African American     562    191    -66.0%																                      																										
American Indian       69     27    -60.8%																                      																										
Latino             1,266    600    -52.6%																                      																										
Asian American     2,925   2998     +2.4%																                      																										
White              2,725   2674     -1.8%																                      																										
Declined to state    496   1237   +149.4%																                      																										
      Sources: UCLA, UC Berkeley 																		                      																										
     Researched by NONA YATES / Los Angeles Times 													                        																										

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1998/03/31/MN74003.DTL UC Berkeley To See Drop In Minorities Students get
figures showing 64% decline Pamela Burdman, Chronicle Staff Writer
March 31, 1998 The number of blacks, Mexican Americans and American
Indians in the first freshman class admitted to the University of
California at Berkeley without affirmative action dropped by almost
two- thirds, according to figures released by a group of students
yesterday. 

UNDERGRADUATE MINORITY ADMISSIONS DOWN AT BERKELEY, UCLA
http://www.seattletimes.com/news/nation-world/html98/affi_040198.html
\clip\98\07\fewfresh.txt Seattle Times April 1, 1998 UC admits fewer
minority freshmen by Rene Sanchez The Washington Post BERKELEY,
Calif. - The University of California's two premier campuses say
their first undergraduate classes will have an extraordinarily low
number of black and Hispanic students because affirmative action has
ended. 2% black, 5% hispanic.

NO BLACKS ACCEPT BERKELEY LAW SCHOOL, UCLA GETS 10
\clip\97\16\ucsign.txt
http://www.seattletimes.com/extra/browse/html97/skul_062797.html The
Seattle Times Company Friday, June 27, 1997 Affirmative-action ban
cuts University of California law-school sign-ups by Amy Wallace Los
Angeles Times Not one of the 14 black students admitted this year to
the University of California at Berkeley's Boalt Hall law school has
decided to enroll, officials said yesterday, prompting the school's
dean to call the numbers "a total wipeout."  A UC official calls it
the resegregation, but segregation is assignment by race, not lack of
racial balance.

UC DOWNPLAYS GRADES FROM MOSTLY BLACK LAW SCHOOLS = DISCRIMINATION?
\clip\97\08\lowgrad.txt Los Angeles Times Thursday, March 20, 1997 UC
Accused of Bias in Admissions Education: Civil rights groups allege
in federal complaint that university has retained graduate school
requirements that favor whites and men.  

Comment - Predominantly black law schools have much lower test score
standards, thus their grades won't be the same as grades from elite
schools.  The fact that elite schools aren't predominantly minority
(in fact, because of affirmative action, many of the best schools
reflect the US population of blacks) doesn't mean they are
discriminating on the basis of race. This is just more goofiness.
																				                      																				   
By KENNETH R. WEISS, Times Staff Writer										   	                   																				   


d:\doc\web\96\08\indx0101.txt

UCLA AND BEREKELEY PICK NEW LEADERS TO HEAD DIVERSITY MOVEMENT

c:\clip\97\07\ucjob.txt New York Times March 7, 1997 University of
California Goes Far Afield to Fill 2 Top Jobs "and highly divisive
decision by the regents to end the system's aggressive affirmative
action plan, which had helped make the University of California's
campuses among the most diverse in the world." [Or simply campuses
with so few whites, they meet the federal definition of segregation?]

\clip\96\12\quotback.txt AP 28-Dec-1996 20:25 EST REF5518 Racial
Quotas Back At UC Berkeley LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The University of
California system will again use race and gender in evaluating
applicants next fall now that a judge has blocked the state's
voter-approved ban on affirmative action programs. 

Comment - even the AP is calling race based admission what they
really are - QUOTAS regardless of academic merit when test scores and
grades and even income don't matter, but skin color and surname do.
Now the judge has changed the law from making racial preferences from
merely legal, but optional to making it unconstitutional to admit
without regard to race.

\clip\96\05\lessdiv.txt The San Francisco Chronicle Wednesday,
October 2, 1996 · Page A1 © 1996 San Francisco Chronicle Number of
Non-Asian Minorities Expected to Plunge at Cal, UCLA Pamela Burdman,
Chronicle Staff Writer Comment: High numbers were a deception,new
policies will insure more even distribution of minorities across
the system, whites are the most under-represented group at UCLA
and Cal

\doc\96\04\uc1.gif, uc2.gif Fall 1994 Admitted Freshmen Profile by
SAT and grade point average and UC campus

Ranked by Chance of admission with SAT 490-790
Percent - Campus
11.0 Berkeley
17.7 UCLA
35.5 San Diego
41.2 Irvine
44.9 Davis
60.3 Riverside
66.5 Santa Barbara
71.4 Santa Cruz

\doc\96\03\UCSATRK.wk1
UC Campuses Ranked by 1990 SAT Average

Admission profile
Non-Engineering             1990 SAT
Fall 1994 SAT Composite     Verbal  Math    Comp    Diff
490-790 1400-160UC Campus
   11.0%   92.8%Berkeley         554     631    1185     178
   17.7%   95.5%UCLA             520     597    1117     110
   35.5%   97.7%San Diego        510     600    1110     103
   44.9%   98.3%Davis            510     597    1107     100
   71.4%   99.0%Santa Cruz       520     563    1083      76
   66.5%   97.6%Santa Barbar     499     580    1079      72
   41.2%   96.7%Irvine           464     566    1030      23
   60.3%   97.1%Riverside        465     542    1007       0

Source: Fall 1995 Information Digest (UC Office of the President)
US News and Report America's Best Colleges 1990

\doc\96\03\UCTOPBOT.wk1


Black at Berkeley is at 8th percentile, at UCLA diversity admit is at
14th percentile, they would be at 40th percentile, or about average
at Riverside.

        Berkeley                                  16161
        NonEngineering                             6887
        490-790 800-990 1000-1191200-1391400-160Overall
Apply       653    2475    5907    5749    1377   17965
Accepted     72     584    1578    3375    1278    7178
Rate       11.0%   23.6%   26.7%   58.7%   92.8%   40.0%
Ac Pctile
        Engineering
        490-790 800-990 1000-1191200-1391400-160Overall
Apply        87     296     860    1120     400    3020
Accepted      1      12     166     614     368    1195
Rate        1.1%    4.1%   19.3%   54.8%   92.0%   39.6%
Ac Pctile
        490-790 800-990 1000-1191200-1391400-160Overall
Apply       740    2771    6767    6869    1777   20985
Accepted     73     596    1744    3989    1646    8373
Rate        9.9%   21.5%   25.8%   58.1%   92.6%   39.9%
% of cla    0.9%    7.1%   20.8%   47.6%   19.7%
pctile      0.9%    8.0%   28.8%   76.5%  100.0%
                Black/Hispanic  White/Asian
SAT  Averages by Race   W1256 B994  H1032 A1293


        UCLA                                      18833
        NonEngineering                            10038
        490-790 800-990 1000-1191200-1391400-160Overall
Apply      1234    4044    7327    5211    1017   21206
Accepted    219    1419    3182    4247     971   10393
Rate       17.7%   35.1%   43.4%   81.5%   95.5%   49.0%
Ac Pctile
        Engineering
        490-790 800-990 1000-1191200-1391400-160Overall
Apply       119     264     718     805     190    2349
Accepted      0       7     343     710     186    1252
Rate        0.0%    2.7%   47.8%   88.2%   97.9%   53.3%
Ac Pctile
        490-790 800-990 1000-1191200-1391400-160Overall
Apply      1353    4308    8045    6016    1207   23555
Accepted    219    1426    3525    4957    1157   11645
Rate       16.2%   33.1%   43.8%   82.4%   95.9%   49.4%
% of cla    1.9%   12.2%   30.3%   42.6%    9.9%
pctile      1.9%   14.1%   44.4%   87.0%  100.0%

Diversity SAT = Diversity = 14th percentile
is about the same as 1000 for black or Hispanic

Fall 1994 UCLA Office of Academic Planning and Budget
        Verbal  Math    Comb    GPA
Chinese 587     696        1283    4.15
White   578     658        1236    4.08
NatAm   518     583        1101    3.66
Mexican 465     536        1001    3.72
Black   474     525         999    3.57

        Riverside
        NonEngineering
        490-790 800-990 1000-1191200-1391400-160Overall
Apply       896    2339    2691    1060     105    9015
Accepted    540    1809    2337    1005     102    6244
Rate       60.3%   77.3%   86.8%   94.8%   97.1%   69.3%
Ac Pctile
        Engineering
        490-790 800-990 1000-1191200-1391400-160Overall
Apply        68     176     236     105      13     735
Accepted     53     131     194      96      13     530
Rate       77.9%   74.4%   82.2%   91.4%  100.0%   72.1%
Ac Pctile
        490-790 800-990 1000-1191200-1391400-160Overall
Apply       964    2515    2927    1165     118    9750
Accepted    593    1940    2531    1101     115    6774
Rate       61.5%   77.1%   86.5%   94.5%   97.5%   69.5%
% of cla    8.8%   28.6%   37.4%   16.3%    1.7%
pctile      8.8%   37.4%   74.8%   91.0%  100.0%

UC Berkeley Black  = UCLA Diversity admit = 38 percentile, near
Riverside average

\priv\96\04\UCDROP.HTM Minority applications to UC are down, while
Whites and Asians are up

\doc\96\02\ucb95.txt Asian Week Feb 23, 1996 p. 12 "More Asians,
Whites Applying to UC Berkeley" UCB freshmen are 37%Asian, 30%W
16%Latino 7%Black 2%NativeAm, Applications, A+10 W+8 L+3 B-1, comments
that proposed policy banning race may account for change.

>>\priv\96\02\wilsuc.txt Wilson re-enters fray over UC policy SJM
1/25/96 Governer tells UC president not to delay start of race-blind
admissions.

\priv\95\18\puffed.doc New Republic Nov 20, 1995 p. 7 Jorge Amselle
of the Center for Equal Opportunity points out 14% of blacks and 17%
of Hispanics had incomes over $75,000, with 3.4 vs. 4.0 GPA, 288
points lower GPA, grad rate of 51% vs. 81% for whites. Rosin counters
students have good GPA and are in top 15% (but not as good as whites
and Asians), and average income is only half that of whites (but still
very well off, why does anybody over $75,000 need affirmative
action?)


\doc\95\10\regafac.txt - official statement of Regents action to end
use of race as admissions criterion.

\doc\95\11\barexam.txt - UC Los Angeles 90% pass rate overall, but
only 30% pass rate for affirmative action groups in bar exam

\priv\95\09\takeall.txt - Time mag UC ends preferences

\priv\95\09\ucfallot.txt UC FACES fallout on affirmative action vote
SFE 7/24/95 Clinton administration threatens review of UC.

\priv\95\09\leted.txt SFC 7/25/95 Letters mostly supportive of decision
to end affirmative action at UC

\priv\95\09\sfsueuc.txt S.F. Plans To Sue UC Over Vote / Supervisors
denounce affirmative action ban (SFC 7/25/95) San Francisco
supervisors say that it's illegal to be color-blind.

\priv\95\09\ucthreat.txt  PAGE ONE -- White House Retreats on UC
Review / University won't move quickly, Peltason says (SFC 7/25/95)
White house threatens review because of UC ending of affirmative
action.

\priv\95\09\howadmit.txt How UC Admission Works / Process is murky,
complicated, competitive - Irvine and David admit all who are UC
eligible.

[[Virginia

U VA: 731 TO 1 ODDS FAVORING BLACK, 4 TO 1 FOR ASIAN, BUT NOT LATINO
z55\clip\2002\04\vapref.txt
The study itself is available at http://www.ceousa.org/html/valaw.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/clegg/clegg042502.asp
April 25, 2002 1:20 p.m.
Et Tu, Counselor?
Discriminating law schools.
"At UVa, the odds favoring a black candidate over an equally qualified
white candidate were an astonishing 731 to 1 in 1999 and 647 to 1 in
1998."
"it is interesting that there is no evidence that Latinos were given a
preference over whites at any of the three law schools. And there was
statistically significant evidence that Asians received preferences at
the three schools, although it was miniscule compared to the
preference given African Americans, and was never greater than 3.92 to
1."

CHANCES OF EQUAL ADMISSION WOULD BE 1 IN 10 ^ 28
La Griffe du Lion 26 Apr 2002 I can more accurately describe the
extent of discrimination practiced by Virginia (and other) law
schools. Nota bene: In 1998 UVA offered admission to 66 blacks and 648
whites. Given the number of applicants from each group, 244 and 2090,
respectively, the most probable number of blacks that would be
admitted on rank order of merit is ~19. The chances of admitting 66 or
more on merit is (hold your breath) approximately 1 in 10^28.  The
calculation, by the way, is conservative. It assumes 1 SD B/W gap in
the applicant pool. At this level the more realistic 1.1 SD gap yields
a ~1 in 10^38 chance.

 



\doc\95\08\favish.zip - zip file with documents

\priv\95\07\favish4.txt - compuserve location of Favish lawsuit
against UCLA. Claims that statement of nondiscrimination amounts to
consumer fraud since races figures very much in admissions

\doc\95\13\favish2.txt - more on favish, claims UC will weasel
their way around directive to drop diversity

ucla.dbf"> - Dbase file of actual
admission results and test scores for UCLA law school

uclalaw.wk1 - added percentile ranks
ucla1.wk1

Median accepted Med     White                           Admit
Group   LSAT    rejectedPercentiAdmit   Reject  Total   Rate
White      94.5    75.2   50.00%    764    2069    2833    27.0%
Black      70.7    32.9    0.26%    100     386     486    20.6%
Asian      92.3    66.1   30.00%    206     845    1051    19.6%
Asians have a slight, but not a large advantage over whites.

Only 7 Blacks scored equal or above white average 94.5 percentile,
2 were rejected with low GPA's

     	GPA   LSAT RACE ADMIT_STAT	LSAT_PRCNT
Accepted------------------------
2061 	3.07 	43 	B	A	94.5 
2586 	3.66 	43 	B	A	94.5 
877 	3.38 	47 	B	A	99.0 
3203 	3.05 	47 	B	A	99.0 
4991 	3.82 	48 	B	A	99.5 
Rejected-------------------------
3289 	2.69 	43 	B	R	94.5 
3794 	2.17 	44 	B	R	96.1 

Note - only two accepted whites had scores as low as black median Two
blacks with nearly perfect LSATs were rejected, some whites with
black median were accepted. No whites below the black median were
accepted. Only 5 out of 100 admitted blacks had test scores equal or
above the white median, compared to only 2 out 764 whites who scored
below the black median. 


http://www.arthurhu.com/index/afact.htm#umich

[[University of Michigan


z68\clip\2003\06\fuzzy.txt
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A28898-2003Jun24?language=printer
Want Diversity? Think Fuzzy By Michael Kinsley Wednesday, June 25,
2003; Page A23 Admission to a prestige institution such as the
University of Michigan or its law school is what computer types call a
"binary" decision.

DETROIT NEWS FINDS BLACKS GRADUATE AT LOW RATES
z50\clip\2001\07\blkrate.txt
http://www.detnews.com/2001/schools/0107/15/a01-247739.htm Sunday,
July 15, 2001 The Detroit News.  The Graduation Gap: A Detroit News
Special Report Colleges' retention of blacks dismal A Detroit News
investigation of seven Michigan universities shows that among black
students who were freshmen in 1994, just 40 percent got their
diplomas after six years, compared to 61 percent of white students
and 74 percent of Asians. Dropout figures show there's not much
racial diversity left, by the time students are upperclassmen.

MINORITIES GET 20 POINTS JUST FOR SKIN COLOR
z47\doc\web\2000\12\umich.txt
The NAS filed an amicus brief on the part of the student in the
MIchigan suit (available at our website, www.nas.org, and issued this
press release after the recent verdict, which said that previous
affirmative action policy at the school had been unconstitutional,
but present policy of adding 20 points out of a possible 150 to the
application score for a minority, is constitutional.  

RACE PREFS OK WITH FEDERAL JUDGE
z47\clip\2000\12\umich.txt
http://cnews.tribune.com/news/tribune/story/0,1235,tribune-nation-85311,00.html
Michigan affirmative action policy upheld By Jim Suhr The Associated
Press December 13, 2000 4:39 p.m. CST
DETROIT (AP) -- In a case that may wind up before the Supreme Court, a
federal judge today upheld the University of Michigan's use of
affirmative action in admissions, saying there is ``solid evidence''
that a racially diverse campus is good for education.

\clip\98\15\http://www.chronicle.com/weekly/v45/i10/10a03201.htm
Chronicle of Higher Education, 10/30/98 issue U. of Michigan Prepares
to Defend Admissions Policy in Court But lawsuits compel officials to
confront tough questions about actual educational benefits most of
the black residents are concentrated in mid-size, semi-industrial
cities such as Flint, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Lansing, and Saginaw.
although black freshmen were much more likely to have come from
integrated settings, the largest share, 42 per cent, attended high
schools where members of minorities were the majority.


\clip\97\24\michpref.txt NY times October 14, 1997 Group Suing
University of Michigan Over Diversity By ETHAN BRONNER The University
of Michigan, which has doubled its minority enrollment over the last
decade through a strenuous diversification effort, is the object of a
federal lawsuit to be filed on Tuesday asserting that its admissions
policies are unconstitutional because they discriminate against
whites. 

Center for Individual
Rights press materials. On October 14, 1997, CIR filed suit
against the University of Michigan, contending its affirmative action
policies illegally discriminate on the basis of race. According to
internal, UM documents, many admissions decisions are made on the
basis of grades and standardized test scores. During 1995 and 1996,
UM operated a "dual" system, according to which different numerical
criteria were applied based on race. Within certain combinations of
test score and grades, minority applicants were accepted whereas
majority candidates were automatically rejected. 

Examination of the 1996 grid reveals the following: 

          In ten cells in which the GPA was 3.2 and above but the SAT score was below 1000, minority applicants
          were accepted by clerks, whereas majority applicants were rejected. 

          In four cells in which the GPA was between 3.0 and 3.3 and the SAT scores were between 850 - 1000,
          minority applicants could be accepted whereas majority candidates were AUTOMATICALLY
          REJECTED BY CLERKS. 

          In nine mid-range cells in which the GPA was above 3.0 and
the SAT was above 1090, minority candidates were accepted, whereas
majority candidates were AUTOMATICALLY postponed for further review.

\clip\97\24\racebase.txt Copyright 1997 Associated Press. All rights
reserved.  10/14/1997 19:01 EST Race-Based Admissions Challenged (U
Michigan) By JIM SUHR Associated Press Writer 


CENTER FOR INDIV RIGHTS SUES U MICH FOR DISCRIMINATING AGAINST WHITES
clip\97\23\umich.txt
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19971014/V000956-101497-idx.html
Race-Based Admissions Challenged By Jim Suhr Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, October 14, 1997; 12:27 p.m. EDT DETROIT (AP) -- A federal
lawsuit filed today challenges race-based admissions at the
University of Michigan, saying the policy discriminates against
whites.



[[University of Texas, also Hopwood
affirmative-action.law-school.U-Texas

\priv\96b\06\racequot.txt Return-Path: 
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 09:07:04 -0400 Subject: [86] RACE QUOTA
EXEMPTIONS TO STAND

\priv\96b\06\reject.txt Supreme Court rejects U Texas program Nine
states and the District of Columbia also had supported Texas' appeal
in friend-of-the-court briefs.The nine states that also sided with
Texas are Arizona, Hawaii, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota,
New Mexico, Oklahoma and West Virginia.

\priv\96b\06\*.txt - search these for supreme court

\priv\96b\06\studmull.txt whites can't wait to reapply

\doc\96\03\usbarrac.txt "U.S. Court Bars Race As Admissions Factor"
David G. Savage Los Angeles Times March 20, 1996. Cheryl J. Hopwood
grew up poor in New Jersey and worked her way through college. With a
3.8 GPA and 83 percentile LSAT, she was rejected in 1992 even though
that was better than 3 of 4 admitted blacks and 52 out of 55 admitted
Latino students. Applicantions were color-coded by race, and put into
separate evaluation systems insulated from direct competition.
Faculty members even wrote memos which conceded that it amounted to a
quota system

\doc\96\02\texasrul.txt "Texas ruling could affect admissions
practices here" John Iwasaki Seattle Post Intelligencer march 21,
1996 p. B2. 5th Circuit Cout of Appeals rolled back the Bakke ruling
which allowed race to be a factor in admissions. It currently affects
only Texas, Louisiana and Mississipi, but sets a precedent which
could be used elsewhere. Officials fear it will bring back segregated
campuses.


d:\doc\95\05\utexas.wk1 - Analysis of

U Texas quotas and admissions
                             Median vs.      Approx 1991
 Admit rates by Race         White Percentil LSAT percentile
 White       34.70%           50.00%              70
 Black       87.50%            0.16%              39
 Hispanic    84.10%            0.70%              18

Nearly all Blacks and Hispanics are admitted, but they fall well
below or at the worst white admitted. The school is at the 75
percentile, but blacks are only at the 20th percentile in national
LSAT scores. The school was found guilty of discrimination against
whites, but will likely be allowed to keep similar standards with  a
change in procedure.



[[University of Washington, Seattle WA

The University of Washington boasts a number of departments that are
35-50% minority in a state that is only 13% nonwhite, yet is
committed to increasing numbers still further. Their policy wavers on
whether to increase all numbers of color, regardless of whether Asian
or even other minorities exceed the state population it serves. The
law school in 1997 was sued for for discrimination, it admitted 42%
minority in a state that is less than 15% minority, every race except
whites are over parity, only whites are under-represented.


NOT ENOUGH DIVERSITY AT UW? TOO MANY ASIANS, NOT ENOUGH WHITE!
Note- Anne Kim is Gates Scholarship winner, which is open to
overrepresented Asians like Koreans, but not whites.
article
Acting Affirmatively
Legislature must follow through on bill supporting academic diversity
Seattle Times 2/15/2005 By ANNE KIM

Anne Kim UW junior Acting affirmatively
z75\clipim\2004\02\17\annekim.efx,.jpg
Seattle Times Feb 15, 2004 D4
Should we restore affir action in college admissions 
  61 no 29 yes 10 conflicted
"the current level of racial diversity is still unacceptably low..
only see a handful of students of color (usually no black students)
in my classes.

U Wash freshmen vs state population
.
      UW    state vs pop  vs white
afam  2.85   3.2 -1.12   1.37
amind  .92   1.7 -1.84  -1.20
hisp  4.34   5.8 -1.33   1.15
asian 29.38  5.8  5.00   7.65      96
pi      .86
white 54.01  83.9 -1.53  1.00
none   5.14
intl   2.49

NO UNDERMINORITIES SIGNIFICANTLY LESS REPRESENTED THAN WHITES
ASIANS NEARLY 8 TIMES OVER EVERY OTHER GROUP
To "balance" the population, UW should reduce Asians by 7/8!!
next@seatlletimes.com

doc\web\2004\02\uwashfresh.wk1
NOT ENOUGH DIVERSITY AT UW? TOO MANY ASIANS, NOT ENOUGH WHITE!
Anne Kim UW junior Acting affirmatively
Seattle Times Feb 15, 2004 D4
Should we restore affir action in college admissions
  61 no 29 yes 10 conflicted

Comparison with population by Arthur Hu Feb 15, 2004
      UWUW      State    Pt Dif  VsState VsWhite
afam        2.85    3.20  0.35    0.89    1.30
amind       0.92    1.60  0.68    0.58   -1.19
hisp        4.34    7.50  3.16    0.58   -1.18
asian      29.38    6.00 -23.38   4.90    7.15
pi          0.86
white      54.01   78.90 24.89    0.68    1.00
none        5.14

Vs State = UW pop div by state pop
Vs White = Vs State div by white rate. -2.00 = 1/2

* No minority is off more than 3 percentage points.
* Blacks and native Americans within 1 point of correct
* Compared to white under-representation, American Indians and
Hispanic are within 20%. Blacks are 30% better represented than whites
* White under-representation of 25 points is almost exactly equal to
Asians over-representation of nearly 24 points.

2001 HIRING FORM NO LONGER SAYS RACE MATTERS
z54\clipim\2001\11\08\uwafacgif 2001 version of affirmative action
hiring form no longer says that your race / gender may affect the
.hiring decision.

Federal Judge Limits Scope of U. of Washington Affirmative-Action Suit
http://www.chronicle.com/daily/99/02/99021101n.htm By DOUGLAS LEDERMAN "A
federal judge on Wednesday narrowed the scope of an affirmative-action
lawsuit against the University of Washington's law school, ruling that a
voter-approved ban on racial preferences had made much of the case moot.
But the judge agreed to consider whether the university's now-abandoned
admissions policy illegally discriminated against three white applicants,
so the case still has significant national import. ... In his ruling
Wednesday, Judge Thomas S. Zilly declared that the passage of Initiative
200, a referendum approved by 59 per cent of Washington State voters in
November, had made moot the parts of the lawsuit seeking to insure that
the law school did not continue to use racial preferences in admission.
... Judge Zilly agreed, however, to decide whether the admissions policy
used to admit Ms. Smith and the two other named plaintiffs, Angela Rock
and Michael Pyle, was legal, and whether they were entitled to damages if
they were wronged."


Masugi truth about preferences

U
Wash Medical School by Jerry Cook, scatter graph of gpa/test
scores

\clip\97\14\uwrank.txt FACTS ABOUT THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
Seattle Times Sept 24, 1995 p. A1 MINORITIES AS PERCENTAGE OF
UNDERGRADUATE ENROLLMENT, 1994-95 28.3% (up from 19.8%, 1985-86) SAT
AVERAGE, INCOMING FRESHMEN, 1994-95: Verbal 480, Math 566 (down 2.4%
and up 0.9%, respectively, from 492 and 561 in 1984-85) .

"Reverse bias case going class
action"Seattle Times 5/30/97 Seattle p. B2 - A Seattle woman's
reverse-discrimination lawsuit against the University of Washington
Law School is being expanded into a class action suit to include two
more plaintiffs.  Meanwhile, UW lawyers filed papers in federal court
today disputing her claim that she was turned down for admission
because she is white. [UW said it was consistent with bakke, but
bakke is no longer operative]
 
U WASH LAW SCHOOL SUIT EXPANDED TO CLASS ACTION SUIT, UW COUNTERS
RACE "CONSISTENT" WITH SUPREME COURT RULINGS \clip\97\14\suit.txt
"Suit against UW Law School amended to class-action case" Seattle
Times May 31, 1997 p. A10 [Comment - the Supreme Court has never
supported affirmative action beyond population parity, UW law school
is well over WA state population for Asians, Blacks and Hispanics,
with classes over 42% in a state under 15% minority, only Whites are
under-represented]

__Katuria Smith sues U Wash Law School__ \clip\97\13\revbias.txt
http://www.seattletimes.com/sbin/iarecord?NS-search-set=/33850/aaaa004Gi85004c&NS-doc-offset=2&
The Seattle Times Company Local News : Friday, March 21, 1997
Reverse-bias lawsuit at UW could define role of race for all schools
by Marsha King Seattle Times staff reporter The
reverse-discrimination lawsuit filed against the University of
Washington Law School this month has become part of a coordinated
national campaign against affirmative-action admission practices.

Diversity rhetoric can't hide UW's discriminatory policy 

\clip\97\07\katur.txt
http://www.seattletimes.com/extra/browse/html97/malk_031197.html
Copyright © 1997 The Seattle Times Company Tuesday, March 11, 1997 by
Michelle Malkin Seattle Times editorial columnist Katuria Smith is
very disadvantaged, but didn't make it in because she is white, even
with 94th percentile test scores. Suing the law school with the
Center for Individual Rights.  

>>\priv\95\17\affifact.doc "Affirmative action supported by facts"
Seattle Post Intelligencer Nov 19, 1995 p. E2 Whites also benefit from
lower standards.

WHITES BENEFIT FROM PREFERENCES, BUT NOT BECAUSE OF RACE
\doc\95\14\whitbeni.txt - Students Admitted Under Special Admissions
in Washington 4 year colleges

W50.1%(1.00) B12.3%(6.85) H12.3%(4.83) N4.3%(4.37)

White have the largest percentage, but proportionally 7 times less
likely to benefit than blacks. Asians are nearly as equal, but are
not under-represented.

\priv\95\13\uwimport.htm - income, out of state at U Wash

\doc\95\11\uwminor.txt "UW's minority enrollment rises, but timely
graduation a problem" John Iwasaki Seattle Post Intelligencer July
21, 1995

- Only 26 qualified blacks in all Washington state

- HEC recommended enrollment proportional to population

- Graduation rates "unacceptable"

- Assumption that lowering admission standards would identify more
sucessful students was "incorrect"

Admitted below normal standards:
70% Black Native American
60% Hispanic
30% Asian

MANY UW PROGRAMS HAVE OVER-REPRESENTED MINORITIES, BUT STILL COMMITED
TO "INCREASING NUMBERS" \doc\97\03\uwmin.txt Office of Minority
Affairs People of Color and Diversity (report) University of
Washington March 1995 Departent of Sociology is 50% minority, but
report complains that they could not recruit enough minorites.
Department of social work is 43% minority in the Masters program.
Many departments use over-represented Asians in order to inflate
their claims of high numbers of minority students, there was no
attempt to identify where minorities were 

Pct  School
-------------------------------
50%  Sociology
43%  Social Work Undergrad
43%  Law School
35%  Dentistry
28%  Undergraduate
24%  Pharmacy
14%  State Minority Population
8.7%  Ladder Faculty

Non Asian minority
Pct  School
------------------------------
 16%  Law 1994
 11%  Medicine (1994) (2/3 WAMI region)
--- parity --------------------
 10%  State non-Asian minority
  9%  Business School non-Asian minority (parity)
 3.5% Dentistry

\doc\95\09\uwlaw35.txt - UW Law has increased from 10% to 35%
minoirity in 1990-95 even though state is only 14% minority, national
only 25% "U.W Dean Wallace Loh Accepts Colorado Position" Northwest
Asian Weekly June 10, 1995 p. 1

\priv\95\03\uwlaw.doc - UW law school justification for racial
preferences, letter cites inequities.

WHITES ARE THE ONLY UNDER-REPRESENTED RACE AT UW LAW SCHOOL 1994
9)\doc\94\12\uwashlaw.wk1 - whites only under-represented minority!
  1994 admissions University of Washington Law School

            white   black   hisp    asian   natAm   AsN Filipino    total
    Percent 0.64    0.07    0.04    0.21    0.05    0.17    0.03    1.00
    State   0.87    0.03    0.04    0.03    0.03    0.02    0.01    
    Index   0.74    2.91    1.23    9.63    2.03    11.71   5.01    
Index White index is vs. population, White=1.00 for other races

Minority = 13%
Under-represented minority = 10%

Asians and Filipinos are likely to be favored, since they are only
3% of national admissions or LSAT scores that high.

\doc\95\10\uwlawpf.wk1

\doc\95\10\uslawad.wk1
Admission rates


@@Legacy

Ann Coulter Law and Liberty
z63\clip\2003\01\constract.txt JANUARY 22 2003 Democrats don't have
the constitution for racial equality January 22, 2003
WorldNetDaily.com Biden: . how many people would get into Harvard,
Yale and the rest of these places if their father had not gone?" ...
SAT scores, 82 percent of legacies admitted to Harvard would have
been admitted to Harvard even if they were not legacies. Only 45
percent of blacks admitted to Harvard would have been admitted to
Harvard if they were not black. 

@@Living Groups

z63\doc\web\2002\12\colldorm.txt
http://www.nycivilrights.org/reports/index.jsp
New York Civil Rights Coalition Study
The Stigma of Inclusion: Racial Paternalism/ Separatism In Higher Education
By Ramin Afshar-Mohajer And Evelyn Sung
At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, there is " Chocolate
City, Oberlin has named one of its dorms " Third World House. "
Cornell' s Akwe: kon is taken from the Mohawk word for " all of us.  "
The primarily black dorm there is known by its Swahili name, Ujamaa,
Ki-Swahili --for " cooperative economics and family hood. " 90
Likewise, Stanford University names its Asian American dorm with the
Japanese word Okada, 91 notwithstanding the centuries-long hostility
between Japan and many other Asian countries.



@@LSAT 

\doc\95\13\lsat.wk1

1993-94 law school applicants
        White   Black   Hisp    Asian   NatAm   
Number  63,990  9,969   6,250   5,435   702     
Percent 71.4%   11.1%   7.0%    6.1%    0.8%    
US Pop  66.8%   15.0%   14.0%   3.5%    0.7%                        
Rate    1.07    0.74    0.50    1.73    1.12                        
Index   1.00    -1.44   -2.14   1.62    1.05                        


Group   Unknown Other   Total   Hisp    Chic    PuertoR
Number  94      2,320   89,633  2,974   1,543   1,733
Percent 0.1%    2.6%    100.0%  3.3%    1.7%    1.9%

\doc\95\0\lsat - LSAT score distribution
 \doc\95\13\lsat.wk1 1988-89 LSAT scores

 LSAT  scores 1988-89
 Source: Minority Databook, Law School Admissions Services
 P.O. Box 40 Newtown PA

 Number of persons in test score range
 Law School Admissions Test (LSAT)
 Score     total     White     Black     Asian     Mex
 10 13         1,864       330       698        69        36
 14 17         2,468       931       862        96        54
 18 21         4,498     2,478     1,087       179       100
 22 25         7,899     5,447     1,135       290       147
 26 29        12,332     9,725       912       399       176
 30 33        17,248    14,653       673       506       173
 34 37        18,301    16,039       419       561       123
 38 41        13,735    12,258       189       467        58
 42 45         6,430     5,688        52       262        30
 46 48         1,177     1,044         7        52         2
 No Score      1,275       520       124    #N/A68         7
 Total        87,227    69,113     6,158     2,949       906
 Total sco     85952     68593      6034      2881       899

Only 7 blacks in entire country scored as well
as top 1000 whites.

 Percentage of Total within range
           total     White     Black     Asian     Mex
 10 13         1,864    17.70%    37.45%     3.70%     1.93%
 14 17         2,468    37.72%    34.93%     3.89%     2.19%
 18 21         4,498    55.09%    24.17%     3.98%     2.22%
 22 25         7,899    68.96%    14.37%     3.67%     1.86%
 26 29        12,332    78.86%     7.40%     3.24%     1.43%
 30 33        17,248    84.95%     3.90%     2.93%     1.00%
 34 37        18,301    87.64%     2.29%     3.07%     0.67%
 38 41        13,735    89.25%     1.38%     3.40%     0.42%
 42 45         6,430    88.46%     0.81%     4.07%     0.47%
 46 48         1,177    88.70%     0.59%     4.42%     0.17%
 No Score      1,275    40.78%     9.73%     5.33%     0.55%
 Total        87,227    79.23%     7.06%     3.38%     1.04%
 1990 Pop       0.95      0.72      0.15      0.03      0.05
 Parity                   110%     -234%      102%     -530%
 Blacks down by 1/2, Mexican by 1/5
 Asians are NOT underrepresented in LSAT or new law students
 Blacks are 7% of all LSAT but only 1/2% at top range!

 Relative Distribution
 Percentage of group compared to white percentage
 Blacks are 24 times more likely to be at bottom, 5/12 at top
 Asians are 4.9 more at bottom, but also 1.2 at top
 Mexicans are 8 at bottom, 1/8 at top
           White               Black     Asian     Mex
               0.48% 10 13         23.74      4.90      8.32
               1.35% 14 17         10.39      2.42      4.42
               3.59% 18 21          4.92      1.69      3.08
               7.88% 22 25          2.34      1.25      2.06
              14.07% 26 29          1.05      0.96      1.38
              21.20% 30 33          0.52      0.81      0.90
              23.21% 34 37          0.29      0.82      0.59
              17.74% 38 41          0.17      0.89      0.36
               8.23% 42 45          0.10      1.08      0.40
               1.51% 46 48          0.08      1.17      0.15
              75.79% Vs. Pop      42.77%   102.41%    18.88%
               0.75% No Score       0.43      0.49      0.01
 Distribution
 Percentage divided by total in race (Asians 10-13 are 2% of all Asian)
           total     White     Black     Asian     Mex
 10 13         1,864     0.48%    11.33%     2.34%     3.97%
 14 17         2,468     1.35%    14.00%     3.26%     5.96%
 18 21         4,498     3.59%    17.65%     6.07%    11.04%
 22 25         7,899     7.88%    18.43%     9.83%    16.23%
 26 29        12,332    14.07%    14.81%    13.53%    19.43%
 30 33        17,248    21.20%    10.93%    17.16%    19.09%
 34 37        18,301    23.21%     6.80%    19.02%    13.58%
 38 41        13,735    17.74%     3.07%    15.84%     6.40%
 42 45         6,430     8.23%     0.84%     8.88%     3.31%
 46 48         1,177     1.51%     0.11%     1.76%     0.22%
 No Score      1,275     0.75%     2.01%     2.31%     0.77%
 Total        87,227   #REF!     #REF!     #REF!     #REF!

 Percentile
 48.93% of whites score above 34-37
 10 13     total     White     Black     Asian     Mex
 14 17         1,864     0.48%    11.57%     2.40%     4.00%
 18 21         2,468     1.84%    25.85%     5.73%    10.01%
 22 25         4,498     5.45%    43.87%    11.94%    21.13%
 26 29         7,899    13.39%    62.68%    22.01%    37.49%
 30 33        12,332    27.57%    77.79%    35.86%    57.06%
 34 37        17,248    48.93%    88.95%    53.42%    76.31%
 38 41        18,301    72.31%    95.89%    72.89%    89.99%
 42 45        13,735    90.19%    99.02%    89.10%    96.44%
 46 48         6,430    98.48%    99.88%    98.20%    99.78%
               1,177   100.00%   100.00%   100.00%   100.00%

 Race Norming Scores:
 To admit a class that has equal distribution of blacks and whites
 at all levels scores must be normalized. Thus at a score of 45 is
 better than 96.4% of whites, but 99.7% of blacks. To get 96.4% of
 blacks, we have to go down to a score of 39. Thus, to get equal
 the same number of whites and blacks as the LSAT pool as a
 whole, when admitting whites at the 96th percentile, blacks must
 be admitted at the 77th percentile. Note that a study done by the
 LSAS concluded that a 96th percentile black is as good as a
 96th percentile white, and a 77th black is in no way comparable
 to a 96th percentile white, even though he or she might still have
 a good chance of graduating. A survey of schools showed that
 blacks did not have a comparable graduation rate at schools
 were the black average score was significantly lower than whites
 (which was nearly all schools), but the graduation rate was
 comparable when test scores were comparable.  Most law
 schools do not claim to admit to equal academic standards -
 they proudly state that they seek diversity, and students with test
 scores far below average will be admitted if they "add to
 diversity".

 Score     Percentil R-Norm    Blacks will be admitted at LSAT score
           White     Black               Which is equivalent
                   1         1           to  white percentile
        48     99.5%    100.0%        44     94.3%
        47     99.0%     99.9%        42     90.2%
        46     98.5%     99.9%        41     85.7%
        45     96.4%     99.7%        39     76.8%
        44     94.3%     99.5%        37     66.5%
        43     92.3%     99.2%        36     60.6%
        42     90.2%     99.0%        35     54.8%
        41     85.7%     98.2%    #N/A
        40     81.3%     97.5%    #N/A
        39     76.8%     96.7%    #N/A
        38     72.3%     95.9%    #N/A
        37     66.5%     94.2%    #N/A
        36     60.6%     92.4%    #N/A
        35     54.8%     90.7%    #N/A
        34     48.9%     88.9%    #N/A


Decision Profile: Score needed for 99% chance of admission				
to at least 1 law school with 3.75+ GPA				
1988-89				
LSAT	White	Black	Mex		Asian
99%		48 		35.5 	35.5 	47 
97%		46 		35.5 	35.5 	42.5 
							
Approx.							
Pctile	White	Black	Mex		Asian			
99%		99 		54 		54 		98 			
97%		95 		54 		54 		92 			

White with 95-99 percentile score has same chance of admission by at
least one college as black or Mexican with a 54th percentile scores,
which matches up with 95/70 breakdown found at UCLA and U Texas. This
indicates this mismatch occurs at nearly all top law schools.

\priv\95\04\lawt1, lawt2.txt - LSAT ranked by college
US News

1995 ranking of Law Schools by U.S. News Survey
                                                             Employed  
                                                     Median   6 mos.  
                                                    '94 LSAT   after
Rank/School                                           score    grad
1    Yale University                                   171      98% 
2    Harvard University                                169      95% 
2    Stanford University                               168      97% 
4    University of Chicago                             169      98% 
5    Columbia University                               169      97% 
6    New York University                               167      97% 
7    University of Virginia                            166      97% 
8    Duke University                                   168      97% 
8    University of California at Berkeley              166      92% 
8    University of Michigan at Ann Arbor               166      87% 
11   Northwestern University                           164      93% 
11   University of Pennsylvania                        165      97% 
13   Georgetown University                             167      93% 
14   Cornell Law School                                165      93% 
15   University of Southern California                 164      93% 
16   Vanderbilt University                             164      97% 
17   University of Texas at Austin                     164      96% 
18   University of Minnesota at Twin Cities            163      97% 
19   University of Iowa                                161      93% 
20   University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign        162      94% 
21   Washington and Lee University                     164      91% 
22   George Washington University                      162      89% 
23   University of Wisconsin at Madison                161      89% 
24   University of California at Los Angeles           163      80% 
95th percentile ---------------------------------------------------
25   Emory University                                  163      89% 
26   Boston College                                    163      83% 
27   University of Georgia                             163      97% 
28   College of William & Mary (Marshall-Wythe)        164      92% 
29   Washington University                             162      95% 
30   University of California at Davis                 164      81% 
30   University of Arizona                             162      94% 
32   University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill       163      86% 
33   Fordham University                                163      94% 
34   University of Washington                          163      67% 
LSAT GPA 3.55 162 88 pct--------------------------------------------
35   Boston University                                 162      77% 
36   University of Utah                                161      90% 
37   Indiana University at Bloomington                 159      91% 
38   Ohio State University                             160      85% 
39   University of Notre Dame                          163      92% 
40   University of Oregon                              161      88% 
41   Rutgers University School of Law at Newark        158      89% 
42   University of Cincinnati                          161      90% 
42   University of Houston                             160      90% 
44   Wake Forest University                            162      85% 
45   University of California, Hastings                162      75% 
46   University of Connecticut                         160      77% 
47   University of Colorado at Boulder                 165      73% 
48   Brigham Young University (J. Reuben Clark)        160      82% 
49   University of Tennessee at Knoxville              159      89% 
50   Tulane University                                 160      71% 

A minority admitted to Stanford, Harvard or Yale
has the same test score as the average student from:
lawt2.txt

fourth tier (about 65-75th percentile)
UCLA 
Santa Clara University                                158       63% 
Seattle University                                    158       64% 
Seton Hall University                                 155       83% 
Southern Illinois University at Carbondale            155       82% 
Stetson University                                    155       81% 
Suffolk University                                    156       88% 
Syracuse University                                   154       78% 
Texas Tech University                                 158       90% 


@@Malaysia

Malaysia since the 1970s had quotas to guarantee that most spots
went to Malays instead of Chinese or Indians, but the government decided
to go to merit only in 2003.

CHRON OF HIGHER ED JUSTIFIES MALAYSIAN ANTI-CHINESE QUOTAS, NOW ABANDONED
z75\cd\clip\2004\03\Globalization of quotas.htm
\clip\2004\03\globquot.txt
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/ts20040310.shtml
Globalization of quotas
By Thomas Sowell
Chronicle of Higher Education had the front-page headline: "The global
debate over affirmative action.".. says it began because "ethnic
Malays held relatively little economic power" and because of a
"colonial legacy under which the country's more urbanized Chinese
inhabitants tended to prosper."  In reality, under colonial rule the
British provided free education to Malays, but the Chinese minority
had to provide their own. And the Chinese still completely
outperformed the Malays, in the 1960s, when university admissions were
based on academic performance, students from the Chinese minority
outnumbered students from the Malay majority. When it came to
engineering degrees, the Chinese outnumbered the Malays 404 to 4.
None of this was mentioned in the Chronicle of Higher Education.  ..
last year that admissions to the universities would now be by academic
records, with computers determining who gets in and who does not,
without regard to ethnicity.


z63\clip\2003\01\malay.txt
Subject: Malaysia ends university quotas
Wednesday, January 29, 2003
http://chronicle.com/daily/2003/01/2003012907n.htm

Malaysia Abolishes Ethnic Quota System at Universities
By DAVID COHEN 
"[after 31 years] admissions at all 17 public universities in the
Southeast Asian country would now be determined solely on the basis
of merit....end a system of racial quotas at the country's colleges,
which until now have generally favored ethnic Malay students over
Chinese Malaysians and those who trace their family origins to the
Indian subcontinent...academic institutions were required to set
aside a "reasonable proportion" of places in every entering class for
Malay students. A similar proportion of positions was saved for Malay
faculty members.  In practice, as many as three-quarters of places
were usually reserved for Malay candidates, regardless of their
qualifications.  "



@@medical school exam

\priv\95\04\usmed.txt  best medical schools

30-1 MINORITY PREFERNCE AT MED SCHOOLS, LOWER EXAM PASS RATE
http://gopusa.com/lindachavez/ z50\clip\2001\06\lowbar.txt Lowering
the Bar at Medical Schools all in the Name of Diversity By Linda
Chavez June 19, 2001 If you're a black or, to a lesser degree,
Hispanic applicant, your chances of being admitted to medical school
are far greater than whites or Asians with the same college grades
and Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores. At the University
of Washington School of Medicine in 1997, the odds ratio of a black
applicant being admitted over a white with the same grades and MCAT
scores were nearly 30-to-1. At every medical school CEO studied,
substantially larger numbers of black students than whites either did
not take or failed their initial licensing exams, and, in most
instances, failed their subsequent licensing tests as well. 


@@Merit

\clip\97\12\leo.txt Who said PC is passe?  BY JOHN LEO U.S. News &
World Report 5/12/97 Latino UCLA tutor was rejected because he didn't
see a lot of "institutional racism on campus" and would have been the
kind of person who stressed "learning" which is only 50% of the job
compared to "validating the feelings of students".


@@Military Academies

\clip\98\16\milacad.txt http://www.ncpa.org/pi/edu/june98a.html
National Center for Policy Analysis Nov 1998 Preferences at Military
Academies Opponents of racial preferences in college admissions are
turning their attention to admissions policies at the nation's
military service academies. The Center for Equal Opportunity has
released a study charging that both West Point and the U.S. Naval
Academy admit black and Hispanic students with grades and test scores
lower on average than those of the white students admitted.
According to the report, median SAT scores for white students
admitted to the Naval Academy in 1995 were 580 on verbal and 670 on
math -- versus 510 verbal and 590 math for blacks admitted.



@@MIT admissions

WOMEN 49% IN 2007 CLASS
Technology Review June 2003 p. 17 Men 51%, 44% 1st rank 93% in top 5%
SAT V721 M760 8% scored perfect 1600 on both, 61% one SAT 800

ASIANS STILL UNDER 30% IN 2002
z62\doc\web\2002\12\divmit.wk1
Diversity at MIT
Letter from the President Technology Review Dec 2002
MIT Student Body
        UndergraGrad    UndergraGrad
Black        256     126    6.1%    2.1%
Asian       1173     591   27.8%    9.9%
Hisp         472     119   11.2%    2.0%
NatAm         86      11    2.0%    0.2%
Women       1765    1692   41.8%   28.3%
Total       4220    5984  100.0%  100.0%
Minority    1987     847   47.1%   14.2%
Asians have not exceeded 30% level, but minorities nearly 50%

ASIANS STUCK AT 26-28% AT MIT SINCE 1992
chart at \clipim\98\01\mitasin.gif show that MIT admissions 
office data put MIT asian applicants peaking in 1995 at nearly 2,000
admits peaked at about 600 in 1992, and admits at about 300. By 
contrast, Asians increased from 30% at the late 1980s to nearly 
40-50% at UC Berkeley. When Asians hit a ceiling at UC in the
1980s, it was evidence of quotas. Could the same be at MIT?
CAMITALK (Chinese at MIT) Mar 1998 newsletter.

MIT SAYS WOMEN OK WITH LOWER MATH SAT SCORES
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/970901/1TEST.HTM
\clip\97\29\testmert.txt US News and World Report Sept 1, 1997 p. 95
The test of merit fails that standard The SAT disqualifies some
students who could make the grade BY THOMAS TOCH AND MARNA WALTHALL

UNDER-MINORITIES AT MIT GRADUATE AT A LOWER RATE, BUT 75%-80% ARE
SUCCESSFUL VS. 85% An Interview with Paul Gray '54 MIT News
Technology Review July 1997 MIT1 (F070297, text)

IN 1996, WHITES ARE THE MOST UNDER-REPRESENTED RACE VS US POPULATION 
\doc\96\04\mit95.wk1
All of the affirmative action groups have the highest admission
rates. By 1996, whites have become the most under-represented
minority due to affirmative action preferences and competition from
Asians. At 28%, MIT has the highest percentages of Asians for a
school which draws from a national pool.

Ranked by Admit Rate
Mexican       211    107     58   50.7%    1.92
PuertoRi       96     44     27   45.8%    1.74
AfAm          332    138     66   41.6%    1.58
NatAm          49     17      5   34.7%    1.32
Asian        1942    577    317   29.7%    1.13
SpanAm        141     38     16   27.0%    1.02
White/None   4060   1071    548   26.4%    1.00
All          7958   2013   1118   25.3%   -1.04
Internatio   1127    121     81   10.7%   -2.46

MIT 1996 Admits
          PercentUs Pop Parity
Asian       27.2%  11.54
NatAm        1.6%   3.47
PuertoRi     2.3%   3.07 
Mexican      6.5%   1.44
UnderMin    18.5%   1.24
AfAm         7.8%   1.06
White/None  48.5%   1.00 <- Whites most under-represented
-------------------------
White vs.pop        0.66

\doc\95\14\mit98.htm March 18, 1994 class of 1998 was 43% women, 14%
minority, 6% international, 28% Asian, 1% Spanish Am. 20% of men in
Elect Eng, but only 10% of women

\doc\95\14\mitwom40.htm 40%, highest ever admitted into class of 1998
"there were more women in the stronger part of the applicant pool."

\doc\95\14\mitwom45.htm - MIT admitted 45% women, minorities 9% of
applicant pool, 14% of admits  March 24, 1995.

\doc\95\14\mitadmis.htm 1995, minorities drop to 14%, Asians drop by 1
to 28%, women up to 42%, record high.

\doc\95\14\mitwomn.htm MIT women earned their admissions, 42% women in 1995

\doc\95\14\mitafac.htm MIT affirms affirmative action, notes that in
hiring staff, all groups are under-represented unlike over-represented
Asian students.

  \doc\95\05\MIT9394.wk1 - MIT registrations 93-94          
Noteable: Minorities were nearly 50% (46%) of freshme.          
Women were 1/3 of entering freshmen. Overall, including             
graduates, MIT is only 15% AsianAmerican, 25% minority          

  doc932\mit.xlw,mitrate MIT admissions

  doc\94\8\mit.xlw 1994 MIT admissions and history

  doc\census\state.wk1 - MIT compared with US states

   MIT projections 1988

   - undergrad 92-93 W56% B6% H9% A28% 1%NA 11-13Jewish?
  Tech Review April 95 - Boston Globe Jan 15, 1995 by John Powers
  undergrad 35% female, 30% Asian 15% BH or NA
    Math SAT average is 740, 90% in top 5% of class Asians are in "limbo"
    not under-represented, expected to succeed, other minorities aren't
    expected to succeed.


@@New Hampshire

\doc\web\98\10\unh.txt
Arthur Hu

NEW HAMPSHIRE DIVERSITY GOALS FOUNDED ON "DEFICIENCY OF COLOR", NOT
SIMPLY REFLECTING POPULATION

New Hampshire is a state that is 98% white, with only 2.7% minorities
and 0.6% blacks. Yet the university president has acceded to demands
that the university admit 3% blacks and 7.5% minorities by 2005
because "our most striking deficiency as a community is in students
and faculty of color". In other words, they seek to remedy the
state's sadly lacking "diversity" not just mirror it. This is a
"problem" faced by many overwhelmingly white states and cities.

1990 Population of New Hampshire:
               white  nhwhite   black  AmInd  As/PI  Other  Hispanic
 New Hampshire  98.0%     97.3%   0.6%   0.2%   0.8%   0.3%   1.0%

Goals and Current Status
                     Minority Undergraduate Students
                 Goals                  Current Status
          1995      3.0%      1994       3.0%      (312/10,268)
          2000      5.0%      1995       3.3%      (329/9,980)
          2005      7.5%      1996       3.4%      (342/10,057)
State Population    2.7%                

Black Student Union / President Goals:
1. A Black student population of 300 students by the year 2004, adding
approximately 50 students each year starting in the year 2000. (3% black)
vs. 0.6% population

@@Oaklahoma

z50\clip\2001\06\oakquot.htm University of
Oklahoma--6/15/01 The study by the
Center for Equal Opportunity concluded that OU and four other
colleges based some of their admissions on race.  "The University of
Oklahoma gives preference to American Indians, blacks and Hispanics
over whites in medical college admissions, "a non-Asian minority
applicant was four-and-a-half times more likely to be admitted over a
white applicant in 1996, all other things being equal, and was five
times more likely in 1999." [Officials say there are no quotas or
preferences]
http://www.oklahoman.com/cgi-bin/show_article?ID=702655&pic=none&TP=getarticle


@@Opinion

April 27, 2003, 9:26PM
Affirmative action in colleges draws mixed reaction
By STEVE GIEGERICH
Associated Press
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/1886420
58 percent of respondents to the Chronicle of Higher Education poll said 
affirmative action programs benefit society. 
But 64 percent of those surveyed said they thought minority students 
should not be admitted to a school if their grades and test scores didn't 
meet the level of other applicants
Telephone survey of 1000 adults



@@Percentage

Many states are adopting guaranteed admission to the top x percent of
the high school class to increase numbers of minorities. However, the
effect at University of California has been to increase every groups
EXCEPT African Americans.

10 PERCENT SOLUTION LOWERS ACADEMIC STANDARDS FOR MINORITIES
z63\clip\2003\03\tenno.txt
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/1842184
March 29, 2003, 11:51PM
10% no perfect solution to college admissions
By RON NISSIMOV

Freshman at U Texas with SAT scores below 1000
           1996  2001
Black      14      23
Hispanic   13      17
White       2       3
Asian       3       4

Note increase in minorities with low test scores!

z56\clip\2002\05\percent.txt
BLACKS DO WORSE UNDER TOP 4% ADMISSION UCALIF PLAN
U. of California's 4-Percent Plan Helps Hispanic and Rural
Applicants Most
By JEFFREY SELINGO
News bulletin from the Chronicle of Higher Education, 5/14/2002
Guaranteed admission under 4% rule vs statewide applicant pool
         GA    Overall
Rural    14.0   6.4
Hispanic 17.3  15.7
White    38.0  37.6
Black     2.8   4.7

A University of California program that automatically admits the top 4
percent of every high-school graduating class in the state has helped
Hispanic students and applicants from rural schools more than black
students in its first two years, according to an analysis that will be
reviewed by the university system's Board of Regents this week.


@@Purdue

\doc\95\13\purdue.txt - Purdue faculty and af-action policy
We currently have about 2000 tenure/tenure track faculty. Of that
group, about 146 are Asian/Asian American, 25 are black/African
American, 24 are Hispanic/Latino(a), and 4 are Indian/Native
American.  There are 178 women in that group.


@@Rice

http://riceinfo.rice.edu/~hunsaker/fbstudt.html

ETHNIC ENROLLMENT as of fall 1995 

                       Undergraduate        Graduate
Asian American           398   15.0%        39    2.6%
Black                    167    6.3%        29    2.0%
Hispanic                 263   10.0%        36    2.4%
International*            84    3.2%       373   25.3%
Multi-Racial              12    0.5%         0      0%
Native American           17    0.6%         3    0.2%
White                  1,715   64.6%       993   67.4%
Totals                 2,656  100%**     1,473  100%**

* Ethnicity not recorded
** May not add up to 100% due to rounding

@@SAT Gap

In 1991 the Northwester Review at Northwestern University claimed
that the median SAT score for black students was 100 to 150 pointw
beelow the NU undergraduate average, which was then about 1270.
Rebecca Dixwon says that NU's balck students can compete academically
and that 79 percent graduate. Newsweek affirmative action special,
1995


\doc\95\10\blaktest.txt "Colleges Luring Black Students" New York
Times Feb 28, 1993 p. 1 Fox Butterfield - Students treated like
royalty but their SAT scores fall in bottom 25 percent of student
body.


@@Riot

RIOT TO REINSTATE RACE PREFERENCES AT BERKELEY
z48\clip\2001\03\aariot.txt 100's of Pro-Affirmative Action
Protesters Loot Tennis Shoe Store
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/03/09/MNE217135.DTL
Berkeley -- About 2,000 high school and college students converged on
the University of California at Berkeley campus yesterday, calling on
UC regents to repeal their ban on affirmative action in admissions.
The rally at Sproul Plaza was marred by some looting and violence

@@Stanford


%%Admissions
[[Stanford University

In 1984, Buzel and Jeffrey K Au asked questions about Asian
admission, the result was a near doubling of the number of Asians and
a lame finding of "unconcious" discrimination. The office claimed
that there was no change in admissions policy! The school does NOT
release numbers of applications, so it is impossible to monitor the
admission rate, however their study claimed that there was a 15%
deficit before the study, and that there is no such deficit now.
Numbers of Asians in 1994-95 at 22% were still far lower than the
University of California or MIT, which are over 28%-30%.


http://portfolio.stanford.edu/105147 C-UAFA Annual Report 1994-95

----------------------------------------------------
PRELIMINARY PROFILE OF STANFORD'S NEW UNDERGRADUATES
----------------------------------------------------

September 19, 1995
James M. Montoya, Dean of Admission and Financial Aid


--FRESHMEN

     * Freshman Applicants   =  15,390
     * Freshman Admits       =  2,908
     * Freshman Entering     =  1,601

     Entering Freshmen
          * Males = 47%
          * Females = 53%
          * High Schools Represented = 991
          * Public = 67%     Private = 33%

     Geographic Diversity
          * States Represented = 50 (Largest State Representation:
            California (41%), followed by Texas, New York, Washington,
            Illinois, and Oregon)

          * 67 Freshmen from 38 Foreign Countries (Including Argentina,
            Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, England, France, Germany, Greece,
            Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Pakistan, Peoples
            Republic of China, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, S Africa,
            Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and Venezuela)

     Ethnic Diversity
          * African-American =   8%
          * Mexican-American =  12%
          * American Indian  =   2%
          * Asian American   =  22%
          * White            =  52%
          * International    =   4%

     Academic Achievement
          * High School Rank in Class [Does not include 18% not
            reporting class rank]

            Top Decile       =  87%
            Top Quintile     =  96%

          * High School GPA 3.8-4.0 = 74%
          * SAT's by Score Bands (%)

            Verbal SAT 700-800     =  29%
            Verbal SAT 600-699     =  46%
            Verbal SAT 500-599     =  20%
            Verbal SAT Below 500   =   5%

            Math SAT 700-800       =  64%
            Math SAT 600-699       =  29%
            Math SAT 500-599       =   7%
            Math SAT Below 500     =   0%


--TRANSFERS

     * Transfer Applicants   = 1,199
     * Transfer Admits       =   191
     * Transfer Enrolling    =   150

     Entering Transfers
          * Males = 47%
          * Females = 53%
          * Colleges Represented = 92
          * From Community Colleges = 20%

     Geographic Diversity
          * States Represented = 24 (Largest state representation:
            California (49%), followed by Washington, New York, Arizona,
            Missouri, Colorado, and Oregon)

          * 18 transfers from 14 foreign countries (Including Australia,
            Bosnia, Brazil, Denmark, France, Japan, Nigeria, Peoples
            Republic of China, and Spain)

     Ethnic Diversity
          * African-American =   5%
          * Mexican-American =   6%
          * American Indian  =   1%
          * Asian American   =  11%
          * White            =  61%
          * International    =  12%
          * Other            =   3%

     Academic Achievement
          * College GPA 3.6-4.0   =   7%
          * Combined SAT 1200+    =  86%
          * Combined SAT 1300+    =  68%

          * SAT's by Score Bands (%)

            Verbal SAT 700-800     =  23%
            Verbal SAT 600-699     =  53%
            Verbal SAT 500-599     =  19%
            Verbal SAT Below 500   =   5%

            Math SAT 700-800       =  51%
            Math SAT 600-699       =  39%
            Math SAT 500-599       =   7%
            Math SAT Below 500     =   3%

(Note:  All %'s are rounded.)



  doc936:staf93.txt

  doc940:stanquot.doc - class of 1997 46% minority W50% 9%B 10%Mx 24%A 2%NAm
    note if 10% Jewish, then only 40% non-Jew white vs. 72% popualation

  Educating Stanford Joan Walsh SF Focus May 1994 p. 54
    Incoming class: 55.2 W 26.8 A 9.4 Mx 7.5 B 1.1 NA
    Was 75.4 white in 80, now 53%

%%Hiring

RICE SAYS NO TO GOALS, PREFERENCES, US SAYS THAT'S A VIOLATION
\clip\99\05\rice.txt February 2, 1999, in the San Jose Mercury News
U.S. probes Stanford promotion policies BY MICHELLE LEVANDER Mercury
News Staff Writer Condoleezza Rice, the outgoing No. 2 figure in the
university administration and de facto chief affirmative action
officer, has repeatedly stated her reservations about the ``goals and
timetables'' traditionally at the heart of affirmative action.


@@University of California

%%Eligibility Rates

http://www.ucop.edu/sas/btn/btn06.html
doc922\ucelig90.wk1 UC eligibility rates
UC Eligibility by Race

Percentage of Graduates Fully Eligible 1990
         White    Black    Hispanic Asian    Nat Am
             12.7%     5.1%     3.9%    32.2%     5.0%
Relative to White
             1.00    -2.49    -3.26     2.54    -2.54

Percentage of High School Graduates 1990
         White    Black    Hispanic Asian    Nat Am
             55.0%     7.0%    23.0%    14.0%     1.0%

Race Breakdown of Eligible Students for University of California 1990
         White    Black    Hispanic Asian    Nat Am   Total
           0.0699   0.0036   0.0090   0.0451   0.0005   0.1280
             54.6%     2.8%     7.0%    35.2%     0.4%

Fall Enrollment 1995
         W44.1 B4.0 H13.7 A31.2 N1.0 Unk 3.9 Intl 2.1

Asians are 35% of UC student because that's the percentage that is
eligible! Only 2.8% of eligible students are black, despite goals
that were set at 8% high school graduate

U CALIF TARGETS TOP 12.5, BUT ADMITS IN TOP 20.5
z75\cd\clip\2004\03\ucmast.txt
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/02/27/MNGFF593II51.DTL
"the latest study of UC's Master Plan performance in 1996 showed it
had accepted many students beyond the top 12.5 percent. The study
found that UC selected from the top 20.5 percent of public high school
graduates, according the Legislative Analyst's office."
UC forced to reject qualified freshmen
Budget woes mean community colleges for some applicants
Charles Burress, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer
		Friday, February 27, 2004


%%general news


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/04/21/MNGRO681SD53.DTL
sf chron 4/21/04
Eligible students rejected by UC 
Rain checks offered to those who attend community college

  UC freshmen admissions by ethnicity
  In the wake of the state budget crisis, the University of California was 
forced to offer admission to fewer freshmen applicants this year. According to 
data released Tuesday, the cuts have affected African American students 
disproportionately.


  Total freshmen admissions
  2003: 50,291
  2004: 46,923
Year-over-year	     '03     '04	percentage decline
American Indian	     282     256        -9.2%
African American   1,731   1,469       -15.1% 
Chicano/Latino     7,922   7,669        -3.2%
Asian American    16,466  16,156        -1.9%
White             18,744  17,169        -8.4%
Other                833     859        +3.1%
Decline to state   4,313   3,345       -22.4%
Source: University of California Office of the President

At UC Berkeley, the number of African American freshmen admitted for
fall 2004 dropped 29.2 percent from 298 to 211. The number of Chicanos
and Latinos admitted fell 7.3 percent from 1,030 to 955. And the
number of American Indians admitted decreased 21.6 percent from 51 to
40. Meanwhile, admissions increased 10.6 percent for white students,
from 2,785 to 3,081, and 4.7 percent for Asian American students, from
3,380 to 3,538.

SYSTEMWIDE UC HAS MORE UNDERMINORITY, ASIANS NEARLY = WHITE
BLACKS 2.5 AT BERKELEY VS 3.1% SYSTEM WIDE
ASIANS OUTNUMBER WHITES AT UCLA, BERKELEY BY ~42 TO ~33
z78\CLIP\2004\04\ucfresh.txt
Los Angeles Times April 21, 2004
UC Cuts Freshman Class 7% for Fall
 For the first time in four decades, the system is unable to accept
all eligible students due to governor's request and budget reductions.
By Rebecca Trounson and Stuart Silverstein, Times Staff Writers

The drop was steepest at UC Berkeley, where African Americans
represent 2.5% of California high school seniors admitted for the
fall, down from 3.7% in 2003. At UCLA, black students constitute 2.3%
of admitted California students, off from 2.8% last year and 3.3% the
year before.
For the fall, the proportion of admitted underrepresented minorities
systemwide stands at 20%, up from 19.8% currently, and above the 18.8%
in 1997, when race and ethnicity were last allowed to be considered as
factors in admissions.
Overall, Latinos represent 16.3% of California students admitted this
year, African American constitute 3.1% and Native Americans 0.5%.
About 37% of admitted freshmen are white and 34.4% are Asian American

doc\web\2004\05\uwfresh.wk1
UC     UCLA UC Berkeley 
 systemwide        
 2001 2002 2003 2004 2004 2004 
 Totals 46,130 48,369 50,291 46,923 8,823 7,753 
 Native        
American 271 292 282 256 31 39 
 African        
American 1,508 1,620 1,731 1,469 199 194 
 Latino 6,801 7,316 7,922 7,669 1,152 916 
 Asian        
American 15,554 16,350 16,466 16,156 3,751 3,173 
 White 17,433 18,500 18,744 17,169 2,827 2,668 
 Other 826 752 833 859 109 102 

 Decline        
to state 3,737 3,539 4,313 3,345  754 661 
out-of-state, international and referral students are not included.
Source: University of California 
to state
UC                                       UCLA    UC Berkeley
systemwide
             2001    2002    2003    2004    2004    2004
Native       0.6%    0.6%    0.6%    0.5%    0.4%    0.5%
African      3.3%    3.3%    3.4%    3.1%    2.3%    2.5%
Latino      14.7%   15.1%   15.8%   16.3%   13.1%   11.8%
Asian       33.7%   33.8%   32.7%   34.4%   42.5%   40.9%
White       37.8%   38.2%   37.3%   36.6%   32.0%   34.4%
Other        1.8%    1.6%    1.7%    1.8%    1.2%    1.3%
Decline      0.0%    0.0%    0.0%    0.0%    0.0%    0.0%
             8.1%    7.3%    8.6%    7.1%    8.5%    8.5%

z78\clip\2004\04\berkdiv.txt
Alameda Times Star
UC Berkeley students fight for diversity
Groups angered by sharp drop in number of minority admissions take their demands to school administrators
By Michelle Maitre, STAFF WRITER
enrollments of several minority
groups dipped markedly at UC Berkeley. 
The number of African-American students admitted for fall 2004 dropped
29 percent, from 298 students in 2003 to 211 this fall.
American-Indian admissions dropped 22 percent, from 51 in 2003 to 40,
and the number of Latino students admitted fell 7 percent, from 1,030
students last year to 955. The numbers of Filipino and Southeast
Asian-Pacific Islander students also decreased.

8% IS ENOUGH BLACKS, BUT NOT 4%, FOOTNOTE: ASIANS OUTNUMBER WHITES 
Z75\clip\2004\03\ucban2.txt,.htm
"white and Asian-American students rose significantly at the top
campuses, with each comprising about one-third of admissions.
Students of Asian heritage outnumber white students at the Berkeley
and UCLA campuses. "
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN SCHOOL AND AT WORK: A more homogenized campus 
BY RUBY L. BAILEY 
DETROIT FREE PRESS WASHINGTON BUREAU 
March 19, 2004
CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY ADMISSIONS

"admissions of black and Hispanic students still lag at the two most
elite campuses -- Berekely and Los Angeles. A look at admissions
university-wide and at those two campuses:"

> University wide, eight campuses
      Black   Asian  Hisp    White
1995    4.4   24.6   15.8     40.8
1998    3.2   24.3   12.8     35.5
2002    3.5   25.2   15.0     39.4
      down    up     down     down

Berkeley
note that blacks were 2X system wide, now still = to system.
Even 7.2% leaves blacks a small minority, not significantly 
different from 3.2 
asians outnumber whites in 2002
1995    7.2   28.1   18.4     32.9
1998    3.2   31.5    8.4     32.4
2002    4.1   34.0   13.1     32.8

Los Angeles
Asians outnumbered whites by 1998
1995    6.6   29.7   20.0     28.6
1998    3.0   32.3    9.9     30.9
2002    3.5   34.9   13.9     31.1

Source University of California study / Detroit Free Press
SAN FRANCISCO -- Anica McKesey can't help but notice how few black and
Hispanic students there are in her classes at UCLA. 



LA GRIFFE FINDS SOME COMPLIANCE, BUT MOSTLY NOT
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/prop209.htm
La Griffe du Lion
Volume 2  Number 6 
June 2000 
THE DEATH OF MERITOCRACY 
UCLA EXPOSED The 1997 UCLA Medical School freshman class was its
first under Prop 209. That year the new law took effect in the
graduate and professional schools of the University. From the
beginning the UCLA Medical School was defiant. So blatant was its
disregard for the Civil Rights Initiative that we have yet to find
its match -- anywhere. 

              Race  Applied Accepted %
                                    Accepted Average
                                    GPA Average  MCAT 
Asian/White    4675         140  3.0% 3.79 11.6 
Black/Hispanic  489          51 10.4% 3.42  9.8 
Table 1. UCLA Medical School admissions in 1997, the first class
under Prop 209. Grade-point (GPA) and MCAT averages are shown for
admitted applicants.

HOPWOOD 1ST CLASS WAS IN COMPLIANCE, BUT NO LONGER
The first class to be admitted to the Law School under Hopwood entered in 1997. Table 6 shows enrollment data for that year and results from the meritocracy test.
Race  Applied Accepted Accepted( No Preferences Projection)
          %Accepted % Accepted ( No Preferences Projection) 
Asian/White           2824 1015 1019 35.9% 36.1 
Black/Hispanic         531   51   47  9.6%  8.9 
Table 6. First Post-Hopwood University of Texas Law School admissions (1997) 

The first year after Hopwood, despite strong faculty sentiment
supporting affirmative action, the Law School did what we expect of a
law school, it obeyed the law.

NO PARITY IN OUTCOME WITHOUT PARITY IN INPUTS. 
Comment from Arthur Hu: you missed my original method for detecting
quotas which I used in 1988 - compare the numbers admitted with their
stated quotas. Eyeball looks like UCLA admitted about 25% Blacks and
Hispanics. Compare that to population goals based on HS grads of 10%
black and 15% Hispanic - right on the button.
Prop 209 is useless without a way of measuring compliance, which the
article does give, in addition to my method of essentially outlawing
ANY parity in numbers in the absence of parity in qualifications.



TEST SCORES AND AP ARE RACE NEUTRAL, RACE IS NOT
\clip\99\06\points.txt http://www.asianweek.com/021199/opinion.html
February 11, 1999 Lee Cheng Missing the Points The lawyers and the
rejected applicants they represent assert that U.C. Berkeley's
admissions criteria is "stacked" against black, Latino and Filipino
American applicants because of the school's emphasis on SAT scores
and Advanced Placement classes.

\priv\95\17\ucpleg.txt - Minorities complain diversity pledge won't
preserve "diversity"

\doc\95\14\ucyoung.txt Daily Bruin October 4, 1995 From the
chancellor:support alternative action


\doc\95\14\studrevo.txt "Student Revolt on Affirmative Action" Wall Street Journal Oct 12,
1995 ed. by K.L. Billingsley the California Review staff decides that
race-based affirmative action must go

\priv\95\14\berkpost.txt - Berekely new policy reduced blacks from 12
to 6%, was relatively fair. The New Republic 10/23/95 BERKELEY
POSTCARD RACE MATTERS By Hanna Rosin

d:\priv\95\12\regtexam.txt New Republic 08/14/95 BERKELEY POSTCARD
REGENTS' EXAM By Peter Schrag. They prefer rich blacks with low test
scores because poor Asians with high test scores would cost more.

\priv\95\09\ucscrap.txt PAGE ONE -- UC Scraps Affirmative Action /
Regents' vote gives Wilson major victory SFC 7/21/95

\priv\95\09\enduc.txt - board of regents votes to end affirmative
action

\priv\95\04\afacpol3.txt - UC GPA averages by race "Initiative
Revives Debate on Affirmative Action" Los Angeles Daily News Jan 30,
1995 N1

According to University of California officials, the UC system admits
no student on race or ethnicity alone. All regularly admitted students
meet the eligibility requirements, usually with a high school grade
average of 3.3 or higher, a UC spokesman said.

According to UC figures, grade-point averages for 1993 freshmen at
all UC campuses were 3.48 for African-American students, 3.78 for
whites/others and 3.86 for Asians, with other ethnic groups at other
points within that range. (But minorities are granted automatic
admission to UCLA or Berkeley)

\doc\94\16\priv\uclatino.txt Call to admit more Latinos
into the University of California
%%Low scoring applicants

Overall, Race No Factor for Low-Scoring UC Applicants
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-uc3nov03,1,2546627.story?coll=la-home-leftrail
"Latinos with low SAT scores are admitted to the University of
California at rates only slightly higher than whites and Asians, while
blacks who score poorly are significantly less likely to get in,
according to a Times analysis. All told, the groups underrepresented
on UC campuses - African Americans, Latinos and Native Americans - are
admitted with below-average SAT scores at the same rates as whites and
Asians.


@@Berkeley
%%Berkeley, University of California at Berkeley

UC Berkeley dropped Asians to increase minorities in 1984, then
dropped whites too in 1985. They admitted Blacks and Hispanics in
parity with HS grad population in 1988, but have since fallen
somewhat short to avoid lawsuits. 

Filipinos were also dropped from Affirmative Action, and now have the
lowest admission rate of any ethnic group, including international
students at Berkeley. They have become under-represented for the first
time because of this new policy.

Only the fall admissions are "balanced". UC Berkeley and UCLA are
predominantly minority schools with barely one-third whites. Asians
are better represented than Whites because of better grades and test
scores, but Blacks are also better represented near parity with lower
grades and test scores.

-----------------------------------
Berkeley Statistics on the Web

Office of Student Research
(enrolled students, graduation rates)
New students
1992-1997

http://cois.chance.berkeley.edu/planning/characteristics.html

Undergrad 1985-1995

SAT distributions
Student enrollments at
various UC Campus

UC SYSTEM BACK TO PRE-AFAC, BUT NOT BERKELEY
z56\clip\2002\05\laird.txt Wed, 15 May 2002 Bending Admissions to
Political Ends By BOB LAIRD Chronice of Higher Education
[UC System] Students from Latino, black, or American Indian
backgrounds made up 19.1 percent of those admitted, up from 18.8
percent in 1997, the final year that the university system used racial
preferences.  But at Berkeley, where I was director of undergraduate
admissions from 1993 to 1999, the numbers don't paint nearly as rosy a
picture. Only 15.9 percent of the admitted students this year were
Latino, African-American, or American Indian, compared with 22 percent
in 1997.


 1997-2000 UCal Distr of new
freshman admit offers University wide stayed about the same, but
Berkeley, after an initial dip has risen to about the same as
university wide. 1997 = 25.3 is actually over-represented compared to
system wide, so actually acted to segregate blacks and hispanics.

Underrepresented minorities university wide and 
Berkeley
     UW   BK
1997 18.8 25.3
1998 16.7 11.0
1999 16.9 14.4
2000 17.6 16.4

1997-1999 UC System, Berkeley, Davis
Berkeley Admission Rates
33.6 EInd
32.7 Unknown
29.9 White
29.8 Asian Am
29.5 Overall
28.2 AfAm
28.1 Chicano
27.9 AmIndian
27.7 Other
27.4 Latino
-------- Still significantly lower than other groups ----
20.5 Filipino   vs. 15.0% in 1997

FILIPINOS NORMAL AFTER 1998, DISC FROM 1993-1997
z41\doc\web\2000\05\ucberk.txt
B.  New Freshman Admits by Ethnicity:  Fall 1991-1999Numbers                   
                          1999      1998*     1997     1996     1995     1994     1993     1992     1991
American Indian             40         31       69      113      142      100       86      104      123
Asian  Chinese            1522       1499     1453     1542     1459     1483     1316     1286     1077  
East Ind./Pak.             358        337      339      297      296      284      272      235      190  
Japanese                   155        178      134      169      171      148      139      170      131  
Korean                     472        504      509      437      465      504      521      529      416  
Pacific Islander            21         20       21       25       17       15       23       22       16  
Vietnamese*                264        219      158      194  
Other Asian                217        165      154      170      319      393      390      343      302
Asian                   (3009)     (2922)   (2768)   (2834)   (2727)   (2827)   (2661)   (2585)   (2132)
Filipino                   240        201      157      158      151      135      136      233      218
                           === normal ===     ------------- discrimination ------------   == normal ===
African American           308        247      562      605      621      562      529      560      671
Hispanic  Chicano          538        466     1045     1029     1171      970     1006     1034     1230  
Latino                     226        180      221      356      338      405      421      392      443
Hispanic                 (764)      (646)   (1266)   (1385)   (1509)   (1375)   (1427)   (1426)   (1673)
White                     2974       2780     2725     3027     2919     2719     2671     2952     2654
Other                      149        107      186      131      121       96       95      109       65
No Ethnic Data*            742       1291      496      524      401      383      467      505      445
Citizen + Imm             8226       8225     8229     8777     8591     8197     8072     8474     7981
International              218        218      221      243      234      222      180      226      250
TOTAL                     8444       8443     8450     9020     8825     8419     8252     8700     8231

RANKED BY WHITE PARITY IN 1996
Percent          Class   HS Grad Rate    Index
                                         1996
Asian  Chinese      18.7%    3.8%  493.3%    6.70
Korean               5.3%    1.4%  379.5%    5.16
East Ind./Pak.       3.6%    1.0%  361.1%    4.91
Asian               34.5%   15.2%  226.7%    3.08
Other Asian          2.1%    1.3%  159.0%    2.16
Vietnamese*          2.4%    1.5%  157.2%    2.14
Japanese             2.1%    1.7%  120.9%    1.64
Pacific Islander     0.3%    0.6%   50.7%   -1.45
Filipino             1.9%    3.9%   49.2%   -1.49

Note that Filipinos who are almost never under-represented on any
other campus in any other year in 1996 ranks BELOW Pacific Islanders,
which is further evidence of discrimination.

\DOC\WEB\98\07\berkgrad.wk1
MINORITY GRAD RATE IMPROVES BUT DROPOUT RATE REMAINS 2X WHITES
Office of Student Research UC Berkeley
source: http://osr.berkeley.edu/Public/STUDENT.DATA/PUBLICATIONS/GRAD.RATES/Grad1.html
this: http://www.arthurhu.com/98/07/berkgrad.wk1

Table 1. Percent of New Fall Freshmen Graduating within Six Years of Entry
Entered Fall     1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
African American 37.7 31.4 39.3 50.2 49.0 46.9 58.7 53.9 61.6 61.4 61.6 60.9
American Indian  20.0 50.0 30.0 36.8 57.7 53.6 60.0 63.5 68.9 61.8 69.0 57.4
Chicano          44.9 54.7 52.1 51.7 63.7 59.7 67.3 63.3 65.8 65.0 66.8 66.7
Latino           53.3 59.4 61.5 59.1 64.7 63.0 70.1 66.4 74.6 70.6 72.5 75.8
Asian            69.0 68.6 73.6 76.8 76.6 81.3 81.5 86.0 88.7 88.2 88.1 90.0
White            71.8 72.5 74.1 78.2 78.8 80.0 83.8 84.8 85.0 84.9 82.7 81.6

ALL FRESHMEN     67.3 67.9 70.6 74.6 74.4 76.4 78.6 77.7 80.4 79.4 80.2 80.5

Relative Drop Out Rates White=1.00
                 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
African American-2.21-2.49-2.34-2.28-2.41-2.66-2.55-3.03-2.56-2.56-2.22-2.13
American Indian -2.84-1.82-2.70-2.90-2.00-2.32-2.47-2.40-2.07-2.53-1.79-2.32
Chicano         -1.95-1.65-1.85-2.22-1.71-2.02-2.02-2.41-2.28-2.32-1.92-1.81
Latino          -1.66-1.48-1.49-1.88-1.67-1.85-1.85-2.21-1.69-1.95-1.59-1.32
Asian           -1.10-1.14-1.02-1.06-1.10 1.07-1.14 1.09 1.33 1.28 1.45 1.84
White            1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Asians have come from slightly higher drop out rate to dropping out at only 1/2 white rate
Blacks grad rates have improved from 38% to 61%, but drop out rate remains at about
double the white drop out rate as whites have also improved.

http://www.ideas.org/pressrel/fsheet/ocr.html
\clip\98\04\berk\berk.htm The UC's Dilemma: Manufacturing Equal
Outcomes in a World of Unequal Inputs by Michael Lynch, Public Policy
Fellow, May 1996 Thus we get to UCB's best kept secret. The only
ethnic group which is still under-represented is white.  Perhaps this
is why administrators use the term "historically under-represented"
in place of the term "under-represented." Using the UC eligibility
pool as a benchmark, whites were under-represented by 40 percent.
Asians were roughly proportional at 32 percent of the applicant pool
and 33 percent of those offered acceptances. Hispanics
(Chicano/Latino), however, were over-represented by more than 50
percent. African Americans were over-represented by 133 percent.

1996 - UCB STILL HAS VERY LOW FILIPINO ADMISSIONS RATES, NOT ONLY
ASIANS, BUT BLACKS, NATIVE AMERICANS OUT-REPRESENT WHITES DUE TO
RACIAL PREFERENCES. 40% ASIAN ONLY 30% WHITE REGISTERED.

\doc\web\97\03\udb1996.wk1

SOWELL: BLACKS DOWN AT BERKELEY, BUT UP AT OTHER UC CAMPUSES posted
for educational purposes at
http://www.leconsulting.com/97/17/sowell.txt BODY COUNT VERSUS
EDUCATION THOMAS SOWELL July 11, 1997

Crucial facts have been left out in much of the hysteria about
declining black enrollments at the University of California at
Berkeley, in the wake of the end of affirmative action policies
there. This compounds the misconceptions that existed before such
policies were ended.

Source: Walter Wong, Office of Undergraduate Admissions
University of California, Berkeley
Fall 1996 Freshman
Applied, Admitted, Registered
Ranked by Admission Rate
Number                               Rate    Reg     Index
             Applied Admit   RegisterAdmit   Rate    Admit
AmInd             169     113      52   66.9%   46.0%    1.86
Chicano          1930    1029     389   53.3%   37.8%    1.48
AfrAm            1221     605     233   49.5%   38.5%    1.38
---- HIGH PREFERENTIAL ADMISSION RATES -----------------------
Latino            895     356     160   39.8%   44.9%    1.11
No data          1358     524     196   38.6%   37.4%    1.07
Citz/Imm        23863    8777    3612   36.8%   41.2%    1.02
Total           25104    9020    3708   35.9%   41.1%    1.00
White            8430    3027    1090   35.9%   36.0%    1.00
Asian            9330    2992    1432   32.1%   47.9%   -1.12
Other             530     131      60   24.7%   45.8%   -1.45
International    1241     243      96   19.6%   39.5%   -1.83
---- LOWEST DISCRIMINATORY ADMISSION RATE --------------------
Filipino          979     158      76   16.1%   48.1%   -2.22

Filipinos are under-represented and have the lowest admission rate
again, even lower than international students. Those with NO ethnic
data fared better than whites, Filipinos would do better to not
specify any ethnic data.

Ranked by Under/Representation
Percent                              High SchHSG     HSG
             Applied Admit   RegisterGrad 94 Parity  Index
Asian           39.1%   34.1%   39.6%   12.1%   3.276    5.09
AmInd            0.7%    1.3%    1.4%    0.8%   1.800    2.80
AfrAm            5.1%    6.9%    6.5%    7.5%   0.860    1.34
Filipino         4.1%    1.8%    2.1%    3.1%   0.679    1.05
White           35.3%   34.5%   30.2%   46.9%   0.643    1.00
Chic/Latino     11.8%   15.8%   15.2%   29.6%   0.513   -1.25

Contrary to impression that blacks are grossly under-represented,
Blacks are nearly at parity at 86%, but whites and Filipinos are only
at 2/3 of parity. Filipinos are at or over parity system-wide and at
most other campuses, which suggests even more for the group

-----------------------------------------------------------------

UC BERKELEY ONLY ACCEPTS 33% WHITES
Comment - 33% white used to be the definition of a segregated school,
now it's just "diverse". Race preferences won't be dropped until next
year. Blacks are near parity, but whites are only half their state
population, and there are more Asians than whites.  "The new class is
expected to be 7 percent African American, 1 percent American Indian,
13 percent Chicano, 36 percent Asian American, 33 percent white and 3
percent Latino.  "

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/chronicle/chron.article.cgi?file=MN16096.DTL&directory=/chronicle/archive/1997/03/26
\clip\97\08\ucberk.txt Wednesday, March 26, 1997 · Page A18 ©1997 San
Francisco Chronicle UC Accepts 30% of Freshman Applicants Only 30
percent of a record number of freshman applicants have been accepted
to the University of California's flagship campus, officials said
yesterday.

\clip\97\04\ucberk96.txt Tuesday, May 16, 1995 · Page A1 San
Francisco Chronicle 
"Nearly 27 percent of the Chicano and Latino undergraduates and 30
percent of blacks come from families earning more than $70,000 a year
"Although statistically Berkeley is one of America's most
integrated campuses, " (comment - only blacks and hispanics are near
"correct" proportions)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/chronicle/article.cgi?file=MN55105.DTL&directory=/chronicle/archive/1995/05/16
PAGE ONE: UC Campus Debates Affirmative Action Some say success in
diversifying Berkeley student body backfired 

Ben Wildavsky, Chronicle Staff Writer

HEYMAN: APOLOGIES, BUT NO WE DID NOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ASIANS
z39\clipim\99\12\12\ucbapo.gif UC Berkeley Chancellor Apologizes to
Asians Jun 29, 1988 Asian week Ira Michael Heyman apologized for not
responding more sensitively to complaints of discrimination against
Asians in the admissions process, but would not admit to
discrimination.

\clip\96\12\berkclass.txt Source: U.S. News & World Report, 1996 Dec
23 UC Berkeley Confidential Study on Affirmative Action

Ethnic Breakdown of 89 Freshman Class
Hispanic	21%
Black	11%
Asians	24%
Whites	37%

Note that blacks exceeded 8% hs grad parity, and hispanics
also exceeded 20% hs grad parity, while whites were under-
represented. This class was the object of the complaint that
they reacted to because it conformed perfectly to the definition
of a quota.

Ethnic Breakdown of 94 Freshman Class
Hispanic	17%
Black	7%
Asians	36%
Whites	33%

Note that Blacks and Hispanics are still close to 8/20 parity, while
whites are even more under-represented.

\priv\96\19\BERKVIP.HTM UC BERKELEY PANEL HANDLES ADMISSION
REQUESTS BY VIPS; Thursday, April 11, 1996 Home Edition Section: PART
A Page: A-1 Berkeley has a system for admitting the VIP but otherwise
underqualified just like UCLA.

\priv\96\05\karabel.htm Karabel criticizes right wing on affirmative
action and color blindness. "Affirmative action' and UC's political
theater of the absurd" 7/19/95 San francisco Examiner editorial

\doc\96\05\probfind.txt Probe Finds No Reverse Discrimination at UC
Berkeley Report comes amid debate over preferences The San Francisco
Chronicle Thursday, March 21, 1996 · Page A13

*\doc\web\96\03\berkprob.htm
"Probe Finds No Bias in Admissions at Berkeley" (c) Los Angeles Times
March 21, 1996

\priv\95\17\guide.txt DC 10/26/95 College Guide Views Berkeley as
Dangerous, Sexist, But Diverse	"The only category in which UC
Berkeley ranked was number 11 out of 20 for the most diverse student
body. Harvard and Radcliff Colleges were ranked number one in the same
category"

\priv\95\17\debate.txt DC 10/23/95 Opinions Clash at Debate Over
Affirmative Action

\priv\95\17\delay.txt DC 10/17/95 Faculty May Ask For Delay in Ending
Affirmative Action

\priv\95\17\sproull.txt DC 10/16/95 Protesters Packed Sproul, But UC
Walkout Was No Shutout Some choose history class over history in the
making

\priv\95\17\walkout.txt DC "Thousands Expected to Join Walkout UC
Berkeley prepares for protest while Tien calls for 'positive action'"

\priv\95\17\faculty.txt DC 10/11/95 Faculty Panel Tells Why
Affirmative Action Works - Asians under-represented among graduates
and faculty

\priv\95\17\asuc.txt DC 10/11/95 ASUC OKs Affirmative Action Bills By
Apul Kirit Patel Contributing Writer

\priv\95\17\teachin.txt Daily Californian 9/29/95 Teach-In Promotes
Affirmative Action Songs and speeches express support

\priv\95\17\outreach.txt Daily Californian 9/28/95 Initiating Tien's
Student Outreach Program

\priv\95\17\afacclas.txt Daily Californian 9/25/95 Affirmative Action
Groups Clash Over Tactics Non-student participation raises hackles

\priv\95\17\afacgo.txt Daily Californian Sept 21, 1995 "Affirmative
Action Needed to Go" Editorial staff comes out against affirmative
preferences, for once.

\doc\95\14\celtic.txt	Dale Warner observes that Celtic origin are
only 5% of Berkeley admissions vs. 16% of state population.
the contacts were with undergrads, not just entering freshman.

d:\priv\95\08\howucdec.htm  San Francisco Chronicle "How UC Berkeley
Decides Who Gets In / Grades, test scores, `social diversity'" May 16,
1995

Difference in average high school grades among ethnic groups entering
UC Berkeley are largely mirrored in college grade point averages.
These figures are for 1994 graducates.

Ranked by UC GPA
                               HIGH SCHOOL  UC
                                 GPA        GPA
WHITE                            3.86      3.34
ASIAN                            3.99      3.26
LATINO                           3.58      3.12
AMERICAN INDIAN                  3.55      3.11
CHICANO                          3.58      3.06
AFERICAN AMERICANS               3.33      2.86

Note - Asians go in with higher gpa, graduate with lower gpa than
whites.

d:\priv\95\08\uccamp.htm  San Francisco Chronicle "UC Campus Debates
Affirmative Action / Some say success in diversifying Berkeley"
student body backfires " Date: May 16, 1995

       PARENTAL ANNUAL INCOME BY ETHNICITY
White    $75,000
Black    $38,266
Hispanic $40,000
Asian    $57,100
Source: UC Berkeley

\priv\95\07\nytberk.txt - NYT, black opposes, Asian chancellor 
support affirmative action at 

GPA of admitted students W3.86 B3.43 H3.65 A3.95
GPA percentile           W 30  B 7   H 11  A 33
SAT                      W1256 B994  H1032 A1293
SAT Percentile vs. reg   W 54  B 9   H  9  A 54
Grad Rates (6 yr)        W84   B59  H64    A88
Failure Rates            W16   B41  H36    A12
Index                     1.00 -2.56-2.25   1.33

Officials say minorities have high graduation rates, but blacks are
2.6 and Hispanics 2.3 times more likely to not graduate in 6 years.

They say test score standards have not fallen, but the gap
is among the largest of any college

1994 regular admit student profile - nonengineering
490-790 800-990 1000-1190 1200-1390 1400-1600 Overall
72      584     1578       3375     1278      7178

\priv\95\07\ucberk95.txt - wall street journal article

\doc\95\06\berknoaf.wk1 - Berkeley with No Affirmative Action
would be 50% Asian, 1% Black

"Campuses Mull Admissions Without Affirmative Action"
Wall Street Journal May 16, 1995

Source: UC Berkeley Office of Undergraduate Admissions
                                                  Max
                  FreshmenIf Admitted on          Factoring in
                  1994    Academics Alone         Econonomic
Race              EnrolledMin     Max     Average Status
Asian American       41.7%   51.6%   54.7%   53.2%   52.1%
Caucasian            29.8%   34.8%   37.3%   36.1%   37.3%
Hispanic             15.3%    0.3%    6.3%    3.3%   10.0%
African American      6.4%    0.5%    1.9%    1.2%    2.3%
Native American       1.2%    0.1%    1.0%    0.6%    0.7%
Other                 5.5%    5.3%    8.6%    6.9%    7.5%


                  Increase or Decrease
                  if changed to Academics
Race              Alone
Asian American       1.27
Caucasian            1.21
Hispanic            -4.64
African American    -5.33
Native American     -2.18
Other                1.26


  doc922:ucbstate.wk1 UC Berkeley vs. State population

  \college\uc\berkeley.xls
  doc941\berkeley.xls

  1993 admission rates
  admits     w35.6 b7.0 h19.0 a37.2
  admit rate w=1.0 b=1.3 h=1.6 a=-1.07 (non-fil -1.02 fil -2.07)

  Econ Sept 17 1994 p. 28 the ruling class: 36.6 Asian 34.5 White

Historical statistics

1995------------------------------------------------------

\doc\web\97\03\berkhist.wk1
\doc\96\02\ucblow.wk1      Low Admission Rates at UC Berkeley
White Admission Rate (Admit / Apply) = 1.00

Low Admi Rate - Racial / Reverse Discrimination if below -1.05
Year    1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987
Asian   ###############-1.17-1.08-1.06#########
Hispanic####################-1.67##############
Other   #######################################
Am India-2.05-1.71-1.44########################
Asian-F #####-1.07-1.06-1.25-1.18-1.15-1.13
Filipino#######################################
Other   -1.53-1.08#####-1.26-1.14-1.19-1.72
NA      #######################################
Foreign -2.56-4.56-3.32-2.30-2.24-2.18-1.54
Chinese ###############-1.30-1.18##############
Ind/Paki-1.32-1.33-1.26-1.16-1.15-1.07#########
Japan   ###############-1.08###################
Korean  -1.23-1.11-1.06-1.13-1.10-1.35-1.26
PacIs   -1.63-1.72##########-1.22-1.07-3.45
OtherAs -1.58-1.48-1.38-1.80-1.84-1.84-1.76

Low Admit Rates
Year     19881989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994  19951996
Total   ##############################-1.06#########
Asian   ##########-1.14#####-1.05-1.07-1.07-1.10
Asian-F -1.11-1.08-1.12#############################
Filipino##########-1.30-1.25-1.33-2.07-2.28-2.24
Other   -1.17-1.32-1.60-1.24-1.31##########-1.26
NA      ############################################
Foreign -1.95-1.73-1.78-1.85-2.09-2.39-1.84-1.81
Chinese ############################################
Ind/Paki#####-1.06##################################
Japan   -1.15-1.07##################################
Korean  -1.27-1.14-1.26#############################
PacIs   -3.00-2.31-1.99#############################
OtherAs -1.50-1.36-1.41#############################

=========================================================

University of California Affirmative Action Milestones
by admission rates

Admission rates are the only reliable way to tell which groups did an
did not get preferences or discriminatory treatment, as the
admissions office always refuses to disclose which groups are favored
and disfavored. Arthur Hu's analysis is the ONLY definitive study of
which groups were favored.

All years - Foreign -1.5 to -2.0
Other Asian - Disadvantaged 11.6 to -1.41 until 1991

1984 - AmIndians, Pacific Islanders lose disadvantaged rates
       Asians -1.17, Asians outraged at UCB and UCLA when
       admissions and admission rates fall. Chancellor
       openly states goal of parity with high school graduates
       Other races fall to -1.26
       Chinese fall to -1.30

1985 - Asian disparity falls to -1.08. White admissions
       fall by nearly same amount as Asians did in 1984,
       with no controversy. UC must conclude that there is
       no political cost to letting white admissions fall.
       Other races still low,
       Chinese disparity falls to -1.18
       Pacific Islanders disadvantaged again until 1991

1986 - Asian disparity falls to -1.06
       Chinese disparity disappears.

1987 - Other races falls to -1.72. Year before parity is
       reached.

1988 - UCB announces admissions reaches parity with    
       hs grad goals for black and Hispanic
       Japanese, Korean, PacIsland and Other Asians low. This
       is equivalent to a racial quota.

1989 - Arthur Hu submits complaint to education department,
       UCB orders re-evaluation of admissions policies
       Asians overall (except Chinese) still low

1990 - Only Koreans, PacIs, Other Asians still low
       Filipinos officially removed from preferences, -1.3
       Both UCB and UCLA implement overhauled policies, which
       co-incidentally address nearly every problem cited by Hu's
       complaint, no longer state that numerical parity is an
       explicit goal, reduce percentage of students not admitted by
       merit, eliminate fixed slots for minorities, admit fewer
       blacks and hispanics than 8% black and 20% hispanic parity.

1991 - For first time, Non-Fil Asians rates overall are equal to white

1993 - Filipino rate falls to -2.39, the lowest rate of any group which
       indicates discrimination. Filipino students chose to ask for
       racial preferences rather than claim that affirmative action
       discriminates against them, other Asians also chose to ignore
       this strong evidence of discrimination against Asian groups
       other than politically dominant Northeast Asians who succeeded
       in rolling back discrimination before.

1995 - UCLA drops discriminatory Filipino rate, but UCB retains it.

1996 - UCB and UCLA drop plans to end admission by race, UCB still
       has very low filipino rates. UCB passes federal investigation
       which upholds racial preferences, ignores filipino
       disparity.

1997 - UCB and UCLA to drop race as admissions criterion (hahaha)

WHEN AND WHO DID BERKELEY DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ASIANS AND OTHER
GROUPS?       

Conclusion - UC Berkeley has discriminated (as defined by admissions
rates lower than whites, any group higher than whites is "affirmative
action", and presumed to be legal) 
* against non-filipino Asians from 1982 to 1981, 
* against Asians overall from 1984-1986, 1990 and 1992-95
* against Filipinos from 1990 to 1996
* against "other" races and other Asians almost every year since 1981
when these numbers were made available. 

  
  \doc\web\97\03\berkhist.wk1 Admissions 1980 to 1996
  \doc\96\02\ucbhist.wk1 Admissions 1980 to 1995
  \doc\96\02\ucb95.wk1 - Fall '95
  Registered% W30.8 B6.7 H16.1 A38.4 N1.9
  Admit rate W1.00 B1.37 H1.65 A-1.10 N1.84 Fil -2.24

\doc\96\02\ucb91.wk1
University of California, Berkeley
Office of Undergraduate Admission Feb 1996
Fall 1995 Freshmen, Applied, Admitted, Registered
Analysis by Arthur Hu

                Applicant   Admit       RegistrationAdmit   ARate   Proj    Parity
                Count pct   Count pct   Count       Rate    Index   HSG
American Indian   204   0.9%  142   1.7%   63   1.9%   69.6%   1.84     0.8%  199.1%
Asian            8403  38.8% 2878  33.5% 1268  38.4%   34.2%  -1.10    14.7%  227.9%
African American 1204   5.6%  623   7.2%  222   6.7%   51.7%   1.37     6.7%  107.9%
Chicano          1884   8.7% 1172  13.6%  412  12.5%   62.2%   1.65
Latino            840   3.9%  338   3.9%  119   3.6%   40.2%   1.07
White            7731  35.7% 2919  34.0% 1018  30.8%   37.8%   1.00    43.4%   78.2%
Other             412   1.9%  123   1.4%   47   1.4%   29.9%  -1.26
No data           994   4.6%  400   4.7%  151   4.6%   40.2%   1.07
Cit & Imm       21672 100.0% 8595 100.0% 3300 100.0%   39.7%   1.05
International    1139         237         105          20.8%  -1.81
TOTAL           22811        8832        3405          38.7%   1.03
Hispanic         2724  12.6% 1510  17.6%  531  16.1%   55.4%   1.47    31.1%   56.5%
Filipino          895   4.1%  151   1.8%   58   1.8%   16.9%  -2.24     3.3%   53.7%
Asian-Fil        7508  34.6% 2727  31.7% 1210  36.7%   36.3%  -1.04    11.4%  277.8%

1995 UC Berkeley Admissions
Ranked by Admission Rate
                Admit ARate
                Rate  Index
American Indian  69.6% 1.84
Chicano          62.2% 1.65
African American 51.7% 1.37
No data          40.2% 1.07
Latino           40.2% 1.07
Citizens and Imm 39.7% 1.05
TOTAL            38.7% 1.03
White            37.8% 1.00
Asian-Fil        36.3%-1.04
Asian            34.2%-1.10
Other            29.9%-1.26
International    20.8%-1.81
Filipino         16.9%-2.24 <- still the lowest, unlike UCLA


Projection of K12 Public High School Graduates
by ethnicity
State of California Demographic Research Unit, 1989, 1995
Percent of total                        Actual
                1990-11994-51999-02004-5 1994
Af-Am            7.17  6.72  5.76  6.15   7.5
AmInd            0.83  0.83   0.8  0.93   0.8
Asian PI        11.53 11.42 13.62 16.26  12.1
Filipino         2.99  3.27  3.21  3.85   3.1
Chic/Latino     25.07 31.08 36.75 33.47  29.6
White           52.41 46.68 39.86 39.34  46.9

Ranked by Admitted Parity with 1994 HS Grad
                Admit Proj  ParityIndex
                pct   HSG
Asian-Fil        31.7% 12.1%262.2% 3.62
Asian Overall    33.5% 15.2%220.3% 3.04
American Indian   1.7%  0.8%206.5% 2.85
African American  7.2%  7.5% 96.6% 1.33
White            34.0% 46.9% 72.4% 1.00
Hispanic         17.6% 29.6% 59.4% 0.82
Filipino          1.8%  3.1% 56.7% 0.78

American Indians and African Americans are better represented than
whites. Only Hispanics and Filipinos are represented worse, Filipinos
were once given affirmative action preferences, these numbers
indicate they have likely been the victim of illegal discrimination
to increase other minorities since they have not complained.

At 96.6%, African Americans are _not_ under-represented again for the
first time since 1988 when they were guilty of implementing quotas.

Filipinos have the lowest admission rate, and the worst
representation of any racial group in 1995 This can only be explained
by discriminatory policies when their over-representation was
explained by affirmative action which was removed in 1990.


Berkeley Patterns Of Discrimination Legal and Otherwise
Relative Admit Rate (Compared to White)																								  

---- Less < White   - Discrimination
++++ Higher > White - Preference

Year        1981    1982    1983    1984    1985    1986    1987    1988   				  	   1980   																				  											  
White       1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00   				  	White     																				  											                                                                               																																	   
Black       1.22    1.05    1.03    1.35    1.45    2.15    2.69    2.68   				  	Black     																				  											                                                                               																																	   
            +++++                   +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++				  	          																				  											    
                                   This is period of increased affirmative action
Asian      -1.02   -1.04   -1.03   -1.17   -1.08   -1.06   -1.03   -1.02   				  	Asian     																				  											                                                                               																																	   
                                   ----------------------                  				  	          																				  											  -
                                   This is famous 1984-1986 anti-asian
                                   discrimination uncovered by controversy
Hispanic    1.43    1.20    1.18    1.49   -1.67    1.40    1.74    1.94   				  	Hispanic  																				  											                                                                               																																	   
            ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++									 				            																				  											  
Am Indian  -2.05   -1.71   -1.44    1.27    1.69    2.48    3.00    3.10   				  	          																				  											                                                                               																																	   
            ----   -----   -----    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++				  	          																				  											  
Asian-F    -1.02   -1.07   -1.06   -1.25   -1.18   -1.15   -1.13   -1.11   				  	          																				  											                                                                               																																	   
                                    ---------------------------------------				  	          																				  											          

>>Filipino  1.42    1.19    1.16    1.44    1.58    1.46    1.64    1.53   				  	          																				  											                                                                               																																	   
            +++++   ++++    ++++    ++++    ++++    ++++    ++++    +++++  				  	          																				  											                                                                      

Chicano     1.50    1.23    1.22    1.49    1.63    2.42    2.82    3.04   				  	          																				  											                                                                               																																	   
            +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++				  	          																				  											  
Latino      1.37    1.15    1.15    1.49    1.53    2.41    2.82    3.04   				  	          																				  											                                                                               																																	   
            +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++				  	          																				  											  
Other      -1.53   -1.08   -1.04   -1.26   -1.14   -1.19   -1.72   -1.17   				  	          																				  											                                                                               																																	   
            ------------           ----------------------------------------				  	          																				  											  
NA         -1.02    1.07    1.49    1.09    1.11    1.10    1.14    1.32   				  	          																				  											                                                                               																																	   
                           ++++++           +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++				  	          																				  											  
Foreign    -2.56   -4.56   -3.32   -2.30   -2.24   -2.18   -1.54   -1.95   				  	          																				  											                                                                               																																	   
            ---------------------------------------------------------------				  	          																				  											  
Chinese     1.09   -1.03   -1.02   -1.30   -1.18   -1.04   -1.04    1.01   				  	          																				    										                                                                                																																	   
            ++++                   -----   -----                           				  	          																				                     
Ind/Pakis  -1.32   -1.33   -1.26   -1.16   -1.15   -1.07   -1.01    1.00   				  	          																				    										                                                                                																																	   
            ----   -----   -----   -----   -----                           				  	          																				     
Japan      -1.05    1.03    1.01   -1.08    1.00   -1.03   -1.03   -1.15   				  	          																				    										                                                                                																																	   
                                                                           				  	          																				       
Korean     -1.23   -1.11   -1.06   -1.13   -1.10   -1.35   -1.26   -1.27   				  	          																				    										                                                                                																																	   
            ----                    ----           -----   -----   ------ -				  	          																				  
PacIs      -1.63   -1.72    1.02   -1.01   -1.22   -1.07   -3.45   -3.00   				  	          																				    										                                                                                																																	   
            -------------                   -----          ----------------				  	          																				  
OtherAs    -1.58   -1.48   -1.38   -1.80   -1.84   -1.84   -1.76   -1.50   				  	          																				                                                                                                                           																																	                          
           ----------------------------------------------------------------				  	          																				  



Year         1989    1990    1991    1992    1993    1994    1995    1996 981    1982    1983    1984    1985   1980   																								       1986    1987    1988    1989    1990    1991    1992    1993    1994    1995    1996
White        1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00 .00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00White     																								       1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00    1.00                                                                             																																	   
Black        2.49    1.97    1.73    1.38    1.31    1.31    1.37    1.38 .22    1.05    1.03    1.35    1.45Black     																								       2.15    2.69    2.68    2.49    1.97    1.73    1.38    1.31    1.31    1.37    1.38                                                                             																																	   
            +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++                   ++++++++++++          																								   ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++  
                             Admit rate fall below 2 times whites in 1991
Asian      - 1.03   -1.14   -1.03   -1.05   -1.07   -1.07   -1.10   -1.12 .02   -1.04   -1.03   -1.17   -1.08Asian     																								      -1.06   -1.03   -1.02    1.03   -1.14   -1.03   -1.05   -1.07   -1.07   -1.10   -1.12                                                                             																																	   
                    -----                                   -----   -----                       -------------          																								   ---------                          -----                                   -----   ------
Hispanic     2.48    2.06    2.20    1.58    1.61    1.45    1.47    2.00 .43    1.20    1.18    1.49   -1.67Hispanic  																								       1.40    1.74    1.94    2.48    2.06    2.20    1.58    1.61    1.45    1.47    2.00                                                                             																																	   
            				   											   ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++		             																								   
Am Indian  - 2.66    2.52    2.51    1.81    1.79    1.81    1.84    1.86 .05   -1.71   -1.44    1.27    1.69          																								       2.48    3.00    3.10    2.66    2.52    2.51    1.81    1.79    1.81    1.84    1.86                                                                             																																	   
            +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ---   -----   -----    ++++++++++++          																								   ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Asian-F    --1.08   -1.12   -1.01   -1.03   -1.02   -1.01   -1.04   -1.06 .02   -1.07   -1.06   -1.25   -1.18          																								      -1.15   -1.13   -1.11   -1.08   -1.12   -1.01   -1.03   -1.02   -1.01   -1.04   -1.06                                                                             																																	   
            -------------                                                                        ------------          																								   ----------------------------------------                                                        

>>Filipino   1.76   -1.30   -1.25   -1.33   -2.07   -2.28   -2.24   -2.22 .42    1.19    1.16    1.44    1.58          																								       1.46    1.64    1.53    1.76   -1.30   -1.25   -1.33   -2.07   -2.28   -2.24   -2.22                                                                             																																	   
             ++++   -----   -----   ------  -----!  -----!  -----!  ----! ++++   ++++    ++++    ++++    ++++          																								       ++++    ++++    +++++   ++++   -----   -----   ------  -----!  -----!  -----!  ----!                                                                    
                    ^Filipinos lose pref    ^Filipinos have worst admit rate
Chicano      2.71    2.17    2.35    1.71                    1.65    1.48 .50    1.23    1.22    1.49    1.63          																								       2.42    2.82    3.04    2.71    2.17    2.35    1.71                    1.65    1.48                                                                             																																	   
            +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++          																								   ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Latino       2.83    2.32    1.97    1.32                    1.07    1.11 .37    1.15    1.15    1.49    1.53          																								       2.41    2.82    3.04    2.83    2.32    1.97    1.32                    1.07    1.11                                                                             																																	   
            +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++          																								   ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Other      --1.32   -1.60   -1.24   -1.31                   -1.26   -1.45 .53   -1.08   -1.04   -1.26   -1.14          																								      -1.19   -1.72   -1.17   -1.32   -1.60   -1.24   -1.31                   -1.26   -1.45                                                                             																																	   
            ------------------------------------------------------------- -----------           -------------          																								   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NA         - 1.16    1.10    1.22    1.15    1.16    1.11    1.07    1.07 .02    1.07    1.49    1.09    1.11          																								       1.10    1.14    1.32    1.16    1.10    1.22    1.15    1.16    1.11    1.07    1.07                                                                             																																	   
            +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++               ++++++           ++++          																								   ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Foreign    --1.73   -1.78   -1.85   -2.09   -2.39   -1.84   -1.81   -1.83 .56   -4.56   -3.32   -2.30   -2.24          																								      -2.18   -1.54   -1.95   -1.73   -1.78   -1.85   -2.09   -2.39   -1.84   -1.81   -1.83                                                                             																																	   
            ------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------          																								   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Highlighting Filipino admission rates
at UC Berkeley

Filipino  
+ higher than whites (preferential)
- lower than whites (discriminatory)
---- Getting racial preferences
Year  Index Chart
1981  1.42  ++
1982  1.19  +
1983  1.16  +
---- 1994-89 Filipinos, other minorities boosted
1984  1.44  ++
1985  1.58  +++
1986  1.46  ++
1987  1.64  +++
1988  1.53  ++			  	          																				  											                                                                               																																	   
1989  1.76  +++
---- 1990-92 Taken off preferences, slightly < neutral
1990  -1.30 --
1991  -1.25 -
1992  -1.33 -
---- 1993-96 Discriminatory Rates, worse than foreign admits
1993  -2.07 -----
1994  -2.28 ------
1995  -2.24 ------
1996  -2.22 ------

  \doc\95\05\ucb.wk1 - Fall '94
  Registered%  W29.8 B6.4  H15.3 A 41.7 N 1.2
  Admit rate W1.00 B1.31 H1.45 A-1.07 N1.81 Fil -2.28

  \doc\95\05\ucbhist.wk1 - Long History 1970-94
  \doc\94\1\berkeley.xls - Long History 

  \doc\95\05\ucbias95.doc - complaint of bias against Filipino Am


%%Riverside, University of California at Riverside

As of 1997, Asians were 47% of the class, or nearly half of new
students. This makes it the 2nd campus after Irvine to become
predominantly Asian, at least among freshmen.

\doc\web\97\08\ucr97.wk1
Analysis by Arthur Hu
Data provided by Joe Virata director Asian American Programs

New Students (freshmen and Transfers) at UCR by Ethnic Category
(as of October 1)
                      Diff        %            State White
                Fall 9from 9% dif of claHSG '94ParityParity
African American   124     5  4.2%  4.3%   7.5% 57.9% 1.05
American Indian     14   -10-41.7%  0.5%   0.8% 61.3% 1.11
Asian American    1338   462 52.7% 46.8%  15.2%308.1% 5.60
All Hispanic       500    49 33.6% 17.5%  29.6% 59.1% 1.07
white              737    10  1.4% 25.8%  46.9% 55.0% 1.00

Whites, African Americans and Latinos are all EQUALLY under-represented (1.00 = parity)
Only Asians are over-represented.

New Asian Students (freshmen and Transfers) at UCR by Asian Ethnicity
(as of October 1, 1997)
                                                     White
                Fall 9Dif from F96%classHS GradParityParity
Vietnamese         274    85 45.0%  9.6%   1.5%  6.3911.62
Korean             196    79 67.5%  6.9%   1.4%  4.90 8.91
Chinese            406   176 76.5% 14.2%   3.8%  3.74 6.80
Indian/Pakistani   102    24 30.8%  3.6%   1.0%  3.57 6.49
Other Asian        109    17 18.5%  3.8%   1.3%  2.93 5.34
Pilipino           199    67 50.8%  7.0%   3.9%  1.79 3.25
Japanese            47    20 74.1%  1.6%   1.7%  0.97 1.76
Pacific Islander    13     5 62.5%  0.5%   0.6%  0.76 1.38
                  1346         473

Ranked by population parity, only the Pacific Islanders are under-represented,
Compared to whites, every Asian subgroup is over-represented, even the PI.
Probably because this is not the top UC campus, Vietnamese and Koreans
outnumber the Chinese and Indians who are normally on top of lists like this.

@@Selective Outcome

SELECTIVE COLLEGE DOES NOT PAY MORE, UNLESS STUDENT IS LOW INCOME.
\clip\2005\10\admitlevel.txt
  Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 20:30:18 -0400 (EDT)
Stacy Berg Dale and Alan B. Krueger, Estimating the Payoff to 
Attending a More Selective College: An Application of Selection on 
Observables and Unobservables
The Quarterly Journal of Economics 117 no4 1491-527 N 2002
ABSTRACT
Estimates of the effect of college selectivity on earnings may be
biased because elite colleges admit students, in part, based on
characteristics that are related to future earnings. We matched
students who applied to, and were accepted by, similar colleges to try
to eliminate this bias. Using the College and Beyond data set and
National Longitudinal Survey of the High School Class of 1972, we find
that students who attended more selective colleges earned about the
same as students of seemingly comparable ability who attended less
selective schools. Children from low-income families, however, earned
more if they attended selective colleges.

@@Striver

WEIGHTING SAT SCORE BY SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE $
http://interactive.wsj.com/archive/retrieve.cgi?id=SB936061265207782969.djm
zip36\clip\99\17\striver.txt New Weights Can Alter SAT Scores As
Family Factors Determine 'Strivers' By AMY DOCKSER MARCUS Staff
Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ""A combined score of 1000 on the
SATs is not always a 1000," Mr. Carnevale says. "When you look at a
Striver who gets a 1000, you're looking at someone who really
performs at a 1200. This is a way of measuring not just where
students are, but how far they've come." Upper-middle-class kids from
superior public high schools whose parents went to college will tend
be hurt by the Strivers scale if their SAT scores aren't exceptional.
"


@@System

\doc\web\98\08\acri.txt American Civil Rights Institute Sept 1998
issue The Egalitarian

Systemwide the proportion of minorities declined only 2.4 points from
17.6% in 1997 to 15.2% in 1998. [Only 10% of pool of eligible
students is black or hispanic!]


@@United States Naval Academy

DIVERSITY IS NUMBER ONE PRIORITY AT ACADEMY
http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2009/07/22/the_racism_of_diversity
July 22, 2009 The Racism of Diversity by Walter E. Williams The U.S.
Naval Academy's PowerPoint display explains diversity by saying,
"Diversity is all the different characteristics and attributes of
individual sailors and civilians which enhance the mission readiness
of the Navy," adding that: "Diversity is more than equal opportunity,
race, gender or religion. Diversity is the understanding of how each
of us brings different skills, talents and experiences to the fight --
and valuing those differences. Leveraging diversity creates an
environment of excellence and continuous improvement to remove
artificial achievement barriers and value the contribution of all
participants." Admiral Gary Roughead, chief of Naval Operations, says
that "diversity is the No. 1 priority" at the academy.
- article says that blacks held to lower standards, blacks admitted
by merit complain. Does not mention Asian preferenes.

"and now Asians"
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZd_BaQPgLcSZGZ0aHg3cTRfMTgxMGRwdDdtamR3
http://www.hometownannapolis.com/news/opn/2009/06/14-47/Guest-Column-The-cost-of-a-diverse-Naval-Academy.html
Guest Column: The cost of a diverse Naval Academy
By BRUCE FLEMING
Published 06/14/09
The Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead announced in Annapolis
recently that "diversity is the number one priority" at the Naval Academy.
... Fowler insisted recently that we needed to have Annapolis graduates who
"looked like" the Fleet, where enlisted people are about 42 percent
nonwhite, largely African American and Hispanic.

The stunning revelation last week was that the Naval Academy had an incoming
class that was "more diverse" than ever before: 35 percent minority.

.....

It means applicants checked a box on their application that says they are
Hispanic, African American, Native American, and now, since my time on the
Admissions Board of the Academy, where I've taught for 22 years, Asians.

Midshipmen are admitted by two tracks. White applicants out of high school
who are not also athletic recruits typically need grades of A and B and
minimum SAT scores of 600 on each part for the Board to vote them
"qualified." Athletics and leadership also count.

A vote of "qualified" for a white applicant doesn't mean s/he's coming, only
that he or she can compete to win the "slate" of up to 10 nominations that
(most typically) a Congress(wo)man draws up. That means that nine
"qualified" white applicants are rejected. SAT scores below 600 or C grades
almost always produce a vote of "not qualified" for white applicants.

Not so for an applicant who self-identifies as one of the minorities who are
our "number one priority." For them, another set of rules apply. Their cases
are briefed separately to the board, and SAT scores to the mid-500s with
quite a few Cs in classes (and no visible athletics or leadership) typically
produce a vote of "qualified" for them, with direct admission to Annapolis.
They're in, and are given a pro forma nomination to make it legit.

Minority applicants with scores and grades down to the 300s with Cs and Ds
(and no particular leadership or athletics) also come, though after a
remedial year at our taxpayer-supported remedial school, the Naval Academy
Preparatory School.

By using NAPS as a feeder, we've virtually eliminated all competition for
"diverse" candidates: in theory they have to get a C average at NAPS to come
to USNA, but this is regularly re-negotiated.

Once at Annapolis, "diverse" midshipmen are over-represented in our
pre-college classes, in lower-track courses, in mandatory tutoring programs
and less challenging majors. Many struggle to master basic concepts. (I
teach some of these courses.)

Of course, some minority students are stellar, but they're the exception.
Despite being dragged toward the finish line, minorities graduate at about a
10 percent lower rate than the whole class, which of course includes them
(so the real split is greater).

Don't want to believe me? Have a lawyer sit in on a year's worth of
Admissions Board deliberations. Or better still, pray that one of the
stellar white students rejected to give a seat to a "diverse" candidate sues
us. That's the only way taxpayers will ever fully understand the price to
them of "putting diversity first."
The writer is an English professor at the Naval Academy.


@@UC System
@@UCLA


%%UC System

BLACKS 3.4% OF SYSTEM, "ONLY" 2.8 UCLA. 
ASIANS 33 MAY OVERTAKE WHITES SYSTEMWIDE AT 37
z63\clip\2003\04\ucla.txt
Los Angeles Times April 17, 2003
Minority Admissions Rise in UC System but Fall at UCLA
"Across the eight campuses, Latinos represent 15.8% of California
students admitted this year, African Americans make up 3.4%, and
Native Americans 0.6%. About 37% of admitted freshmen are white and
nearly 33% are Asian."
"The drop was most significant at UCLA, where African Americans
represent 2.8% of California high school seniors admitted for the
fall, down from 3.3% last year. At UC Berkeley, black students make up
3.3% of admitted California students, off from 3.6% last year."

z56\clip\2002\07\ucadmit.txt
The Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB102642240213450520.djm,00.html
July 12, 2002
Barriers Students Faced Count
In University Admission Process
By DANIEL GOLDEN
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
IRVINE, Calif. -- But critics
are wondering if the university cares more about life challenges for some
students than for others, in violation of a 1996 state referendum that
barred giving preferences to racial or ethnic groups.


%%UCLA University of California Los Angeles


\doc\web\2003\07\ucla.pdf
Table by Richard A. Berk of UCLA shows

Odds of Admission increased by:
HSGPA    4.4  per .5 GPA
SAT1     1.38 per 100 pts
Asian    0.8
Black    3.6  (equal 0.5 GPA, or 300 pts SAT)
Hispanic 1.8

Chances of admission by Academic Rank:
          Ang  Asian Black
Rank 1.0  .94  .96   .93
Rank 3.0  .15  .24   .49
Rank 4.0  .05  .09   .28
Rank 5.0  .04  .05   .21

For UCLA Applicant SAT1 Means
          Angl Asian Black
Rank 1    1413 1432  1375
Rank 3    1247 1251  1202
Rank 5    1145 1118  1068

UCLA Freshmen Over 40% Asian American
\images\99\07\03\news\ucla.gif 
Asian Week June 24, 1999 p. 9 white 32.7% 16.6% black or hispanic vs
14.5 last year. Overall 13 Am Indians of 39 admit 137 Af Am of 317
admit, 47y9 Chicano Latino of 1025 admit, 1550 Asian of 4097 admit
1232 white of 3284 admit. 281 decline, 78 other , 67 international
GPA 4.15, SAT from 1272 to 1275.

\priv\96\08\contvip.txt - Raoul Contrares says it is shameful
hypocrisy that Wilson and Connerly have sponsored unqualified VIP
students to get into UCLA, but they are no worse than affirmative
action admits.

"UCLA Eased Entry Rules for the Rich, Well-Connected" Los Angeles
Times March 21, 1996 p. 1 UCLA has affirmative action for the rich
and connected, story shows academic standards are much lower, yet
story on same page says that there is no bias towards minorities,
even though the two groups are actually comparable in quality, and
the LA Time would have found exactly the same had they chosen to look
at minorities rather than the priviledged. This was the basis for
much criticism of the rich as "unqualified" in support of affirmative
action, though logically, minorities are just as unqualified.  paper:
f052996 full text: \priv\96\19\UCLAEASE.HTM

summary: \doc\96\03\uclaease.txt "UCLA Eased Entry Rules for the
Rich, Well Connected" Los Angeles Times March 21, 1996 p. 1. Ironic
that it appears on same page as article that claims there is no
racial bias at Berkeley and equal academic standards for minorities
when an equivalent study would have shown similar 70% admission rate
vs.  50% overall.

Category   GPA  SAT
Academic   4.22 1288
Diversity  3.53  979<- Same as UC Berkeley Black average
Exception  3.13  971
UCB Black  3.43  994

DONATIONS AND ADMISSIONS --IS THERE A TIE AT UCLA? Los Angeles Times
Monday, May 6, 1996 Home Edition Page: A-1 By RALPH FRAMMOLINO and
MARK GLADSTONE TIMES STAFF WRITERS Willard's daughter--listed on
internal fund-raising documents as an applicant who would be
"probably denied"--was admitted to the winter 1993 quarter with a 3.0
grade-point and a 1040 SAT, records show.  Those scores were lower
than those of about 4,000 other applicants who were turned away that
year. "she said all the students met minimum eligibility requirements
for the nine-campus UC system."

Comment: That's a higher SAT than than diversity admits, who
come in at 979. Minorities tend to have inflated grades relative to
their SAT scores. file: \priv\96\19\UCLADONO.HTM

C:\priv\96\19\UCLAREGT.HTM SOME REGENTS SEEK UCLA ADMISSIONS PRIORITY
FOR FRIENDS; Los Angeles Times Saturday, March 16, 1996 Home Edition
Section: PART A

"People who come from disadvantaged backgrounds, who are blacks and
Latinos, don't have that kind of weight to carry," said Carmona, who is a
supporter of affirmative action. "And we've got to recognize that."
Comment - judging by admissions standards, Blacks and Hispanics _do_
carry that weight because they routinely get in under the SAME low
standards as the rich and priviledged


\doc\95\14\uclaocr.htm October 27, 1995 Daily Bruin "Investigation
rules out admissions discrimination" No quotas were found against
Asians Americans, but they focused on 1990, after the most egregious
policies of 1984 and 1988. They did drop automatic admissions of
minorities.
  
  \DOC\95\11\BAREXAM.TXT url:
  http://rohan.sdsu.edu/home/elewis/aff-faq.html "A recent study
  showed ... that while nearly 90% of regularly admitted UCLA students
  now pass the California Bar exam, the passage rate is only about 30%
  for those who are admitted under a special prgram designated to
  attract minority and other educationally disadvantaged students."
  Source: Los Angeles Times, May 3, 1987

\doc\96\03\ucla.wk1 1982-1995 admissions big worksheet

Rank by 1986      Rank by 1995 parity								
Korean      5.14  Korean              7.24  					
Chinese     3.84  Chinese             7.08  					
Japan       2.95  E.Indian/Pak        5.80  					
Pilipino    2.08  Asian               4.24  					
Asian       2.04  Pilipino            1.96  					
E.Indian    2.04  Japan               1.94  					
Am India    1.29  Thai/OtherAsian     1.81  					
Black       1.22  Am Indian           1.45  					
White       0.99  Black               0.90  					
Thai/Oth    0.71  Pac Island          0.79  					
Hispanic    0.59  Hispanic            0.66  					
Pac Isla    0.16  White               0.66 <-- Lowest in 1995


\DOC\95\05\UCLA94.WK1  1994 ADMISSIONS

Ranked by Fall 1994 UCLA Admission Rate
(Higher rates associated with affirmative action preferences)
Group       Ad Rate Index
Am Ind         78.3%   1.59
Chicano        60.9%   1.24
All Latino     58.4%   1.18
African Am     57.7%   1.17
Unknown        55.8%   1.13
Asian Am       53.4%   1.08
Total US       52.2%   1.06
Latino         52.1%   1.06
Total          51.1%   1.04
All As/PI      51.0%   1.03
Caucasian      49.3%   1.00
Other          47.7%  -1.03
Pac Islander   36.4%  -1.36
Filipino       34.4%  -1.43<- Discrimination
Internationa   25.7%  -1.92

\DOC\95\07\UCLA95.WK1  1994/1995 ADMISSIONS



 UCLA 1994
Undergraduate Admissions Report
GPA, SATVERB, AND SATMATH FOR APPS, ADMITS AND REGS
                          APPLICANTS
                          NO.       AVG.      AVG.      AVG.
ETHNICITY                 APPS      GPA       VERB      MATH
---------                 ----                ----      ----
AMERICAN INDIAN                 129      3.52       502       571
AFRICAN AMERICAN               1248      3.29       433       482
CHICAND                        2477      3.46       425       491
LATINO                         1003      3.54       452       519
PACIFIC ISLANDER                 98      3.74       474       588
FILIPINO                       1075      3.73       474       549
JAPANESE AMERICAN               523      3.79       512       629
CHINESE AMERICAN               3708      3.87       502       651
KOREAN                         1547      3.80       517       654
THAI/OTHER ASIAN               1604      3.85       457       584
EAST INDIAN/PAKISTANI           678      3.89       534       635
CAUCASIAN                      7397      3.79       531       612
FILIPINO                       1075      3.73       474       549
PACIFIC ISLANDER                 98      3.74       474       588

Note - Filipinos comparable to Pac Islanders in
qualifications

\DOC\doc934\ucla92.xls 1992 UCLA admissions
\DOC\doc935\ucla93.xls 1983 UCLA admissions

\doc\college\uc\ucla.xls 8/31/92 1980 to 1992
\doc\college\uc\ucla2.wk1 8/26/92
    
Econ Sept 17 94 p. 28 38% Asian 30.5% white freshmen

%%San Diego


z41\doc\web\2000\05\ucsd.wk1
    ucsd guardian
    april 6,2000
                 1999     2000
    cauc         40.2     37.8
    asian        32.1     33.1
    otherdec     13.8     14.2
    mex           6.3      7.2
    fil           3.4      3.4
    lat           2.3      2.4
    afr           1.3      1.5
    native        0.4      0.4

\clip\98\16\ucsd.txt
http://www.ceousa.org/ucsd.html
 CENTER FOR EQUAL OPPORTUNITY Racial
Preferences in Undergraduate Admissions at the University of
California, San Diego, 1995 by Robert Lerner, Ph.D. and Althea K.
Nagai, Ph.D.  Lerner and Nagai Quantitative Consulting


UC San Diego Admissions Table 1991-92

Admissions analysis, Arthur Hu 
UC San Diego

Rank
Admit Rate     1991 Admit Rate     1992
AmIndian       1.47 AmIndian       1.40
Chicano        1.34 Chicano        1.14
Black          1.23 Asian          1.08
NA             1.13 NA             1.07
Asian          1.06 Total          1.03
Total          1.04 White          1.00
White          1.00 Black         -1.03
Filipino      -1.25 Filipino      -1.15
Latino        -1.44 Latino        -1.26

Blacks dumped in 1992?? 1.23-> -1.03
Filipinos and Latino are -1.25 to -1.44!
Most Asians about = white.

  \doc\college\uc\ucsd.wk1 UC San Diego

-------------------------------------------------------
[[Santa Cruz
  UC Santa Cruz still gave preferences to Filipinos in 1992


  1992 Admissions Table
  \doc\college\uc\ucscz.xls 10/8/92

UC Santa Cruz Admissions Study
Office of Admissions
Analysis by Arthur Hu 

Admit percent
Am Indian      1.5%    1.1%
Black          3.8%    3.0%
Asian         21.5%   18.5%
White         51.8%   55.8%
Mexican        9.4%    8.6%
Spanish        4.8%    4.2%
Pilipino       3.6%    2.9%
Minority      42.9%   37.4%
State population of Filipinos is 2%

Sorted
Admit Rate 1991                        1992
Pilipino       1.45        Pilipino    1.21
Spanish        1.35        Am India    1.14
Am Indian      1.34        Mexican     1.13
Black          1.31        Spanish     1.12
Mexican        1.31        Black       1.07
Minority       1.21        Unknown     1.05
Thai/Other     1.20        Minority    1.02
Asian          1.13        Thai/Oth    1.00
E.Indian/Pa    1.11        White       1.00
Chinese        1.11        Other      -1.04
Other          1.07        Asian      -1.05
Unknown        1.03        E.Indian   -1.06
Japan          1.03        Pac Isla   -1.06
White          1.00        Chinese    -1.08
Pac Island    -1.02        Japan      -1.10
Korean        -1.06        Korean     -1.26
Most Asians >= White in 1991, Most are < White in 1992
Because of this the Minority rate went from 1.2 (net > white) to 1.02
(implies affirmative action balanced by reduced Asians? )
1.0 = White (-2 means 1/2 or 0.5)

  doc923:admit92.doc Filipinos and Santa Cruz
  doc922:scutalk.wk1 Santa Clara Univ proposal
---------------------------------------------------------

[[System

\doc\96\04\ucelig.wk1
UC Eligibility of Pub HS Grads - W1.00  B-2.73 H-3.01 A1.97

The main problem of maintaining proportional representation, er,
diversity, is not discrimination, but that the rate of UC eligibility
is only 1/3 that of whites for Blacks and Hispanics, and about twice
for Asians.

Public High School Graduates by
Category of Eligibility for the University of California
1983, 1986, and 1990

Total   Percent                 Index White=1.00
            1983    1986    1990    1983    1986    1990
White      15.5%   15.8%   20.5%    1.00    1.00    1.00
Black       3.6%    4.5%    7.5%   -4.31   -3.51   -2.73
Hispanic    4.9%    2.9%    6.8%   -3.16   -5.45   -3.01
Asian      26.0%   32.8%   40.4%    1.68    2.08    1.97


@@University of Colorado

\clip\97\27\comin.txt http://www.insidedenver.com/news/1114reg6.html
Minority retention rates rising at CU, reports say 
Graduation rates also climb, but numbers lag behind rates for whites
By Bill Scanlon November 14, 1997 Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer

" Last year, minorities received 20.3 percent of degrees at UCD, 14.1
percent of degrees at CU and 22.1 percent of degrees at the CU Health
Sciences Center.  " (1990 pop was 20% minority)

@@University of Oregon

\clip\98\06\oresch.txt
http://www.oregonlive.com:80/todaysnews/9803/st03211.html March 21,
1998, The Oregonian Universities will end offers of scholarships
based on race Some students, citing the low numbers of minorities
currently enrolled in Oregon universities, call the changes insulting
By Romel Hernandez of The Oregonian staff


@@University of Michigan

HENTOFF: BLACKS AT U MICH LAW 40 TIMES EASIER TO GET IN THAN ASIANS.
Z68\clip\2003\07\leftout.txt
http://www.villagevoice.com/hentoff/
Nat Hentoff
What the Supreme Court Left Out
The Smoking Gun in Grutter v. Bollinger
July 11th, 2003 6:00 PM
n my March 14 Voice column ("Left Out of Affirmative Action"), I cited
reporter Jacques Steinberg's February 2 New York Times story, saying that in
1999, the University of Michigan Law School "accepted only one of the 61
Asian Americans, or 2 percent, who were ranked in the middle range of the
applicant pools, as defined by their grades and test scores, according to
court filings. The admission rate for whites with similar grades and scores
was 3 percent. But among black applicants with similar transcripts, 22 out
of 27, or 81 percent, were offered admission." (Emphasis added.)

2003 - most articles note that perfect score is worth 12 points,
being black or hispanic is worth 20 points.

z69\clip\2003\07\kennaf.txt
http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/comment/comment-iannone080103.asp
August 1, 2003, 10:10 a.m.
The Kennedy Dissent and the Abomination of Grutter
Overlooked but instructive.
By Carol Iannone
less conservative but ... instructive dissent by Justice Kennedy.
Unlike Justices Thomas and Scalia, Justice Kennedy supports Justice
Lewis Powell's opinion in Bakke... Kennedy emphasizes...
"demonstrates beyond question why the concept of [attaining a]
critical mass [of minorities] is a delusion used by the law school to
mask its attempt to make race an automatic factor in most instances
and to achieve numerical goals indistinguishable from quotas.""

z68\doc\web\2003\06\umlaw.txt
GRATZ ET AL. v. BOLLINGER ET AL. (Law School)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/02pdf/02-241.pdf Grutter v. Bollinger
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/02pdf/02-516.pdf Gratz v. Bollinger

z68\clip\2003\06\umtal.txt
Court Upholds Race-Based Admissions, Puts Time Limit On Affirmative
Action By Jimmy Moore Talon News June 24, 2003
"O'Connor..  "We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial
preferences will no longer be necessary," she wrote. 
Thomas.. race-based policy "an exclusionary admissions system that it
knows produces racially disproportionate results."

U MICHIGAN "QUOTAS" NOT UP TO STATE PARITY
Supreme Court to Revisit Colleges' Diversity Efforts
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
New York Times
December 2, 2002
At the law school today, 74 of 1,109 students are black (6.7 percent)
and 49 are Hispanic (4.4 percent). Students of Asian background are
not considered "underrepresented minorities" and do not benefit from
affirmative action programs at Michigan. Among undergraduate students,
8.4 percent are black and 4.7 percent are Hispanic.
1990 census: Michigan       83.4%     W82.2%  B13.9%   0.6%   1.1%   0.9%   2.2%

FIXED POINT PREFERENCE SYSTEM STRUCK DOWN, BUT NARROWS TAILORED OK
z68\clip\2003\06\umich2.txt Reuters June 23, 2003 Top Court Splits on
University Race Preferences 
By James Vicini 
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A closely divided U.S. Supreme Court (news -
web sites) ruled on Monday that racial preferences can be used in
university admission decisions, its first ruling on the important
civil rights issue in 25 years. 

http://www.geocities.com/nstix/bushquotas.html Bush: My Quotas Are
Better Than Yours!  By Nicholas Stix A Different Drummer [January,
23, 2003] "The current rigged game for undergraduate admissions has
the school giving black, Hispanic, and American Indian applicants 20
points out of a 150-point maximum, based solely on their race or
ethnicity"

RACE PREFS NOT LEGAL IN LAW SCHOOL, OK FOR UNDERGRAD??
z48\clip\2001\03\umlaw.txt Court Rules Against UM Law Admission by
JOSEPH ALTMAN Jr.  Associated Press Writer 03/27/01 DETROIT (AP) --
The University of Michigan law school's admissions standards are
unconstitutional because they use race as a factor in judging
applicants, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.
At the end of last year, another federal judge ruled the university's
undergraduate admissions policy, which also takes race into account, is
constitutional.

z48\clip\2001\03\cirumi.txt http://www.cir-usa.org.
You can view Judge Friedman's decision (as an adobe acrobat file) at
http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/JudgesOpinions/Friedman/baf97-cv-75928.pdf.
He called the University of Michigan system
"indistinguishable from a straight quota system."

@@University of Minnesota


University of Minnesota              ---------             9/9/99
  "University of Minnesota stands firm on affirmative action challenge."
..."On the Twin Cities campus, the odds of being admitted are almost 
seven times more favorable for Asian students than for white students, 
the report says. Hispanic students are about five times and black 
students about three times more likely to be admitted than white students."
"That, CEO (  http://www.ceousa.org/  )  says, is discrimination."
http://www2.startribune.com/stOnLine/cgi-bin/article?thisStory=80907042

@@University of Texas

HOPWOOD TEXAS UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL FALLS FROM 8->1->4 PERCENT
z63\clip\2003\01\tenp.txt
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/19/weekinreview/19LIPT.html?ex=1044008607&ei=1&en=c0137351cdc77999
Bush Solution on Affirmative Action Poses New Problems January 19,
2003 By ADAM LIPTAK 

in the 1996 Hopwood ruling, the percentage of black freshmen dropped
to 2.7 percent in 1997, after ranging from 4.1 to 5.6 percent in the
prior five years. After the percentage plan began in 1998, that
number rose to between 3.3 and 4.1 percent. Hispanic representation,
which peaked at 16.1 percent in 1993, stood at 14.3 percent in 2002. 

Blacks represented 8.1 percent of entering students at the
university's law school in 1992. That dropped to 0.9 percent - four
students - just after Hopwood and, since then, has not risen to more
than 4 percent.

Marsha K. Moss, director of the Austin campus Office of Institutional
Research, which compiles admissions and other data. "Top 10 percent
students tend to make better progress and have higher graduation
rates,"

@@University of Washington

%%Law

MINORITY LAW ADMISSIONS DOWN AT U WASH, BUT ASIANS STILL OVER-REP!
PROOF OF UNJUSTIFIED PREFERENCES FOR ASIAN LAW STUDENTS?
\doc\web\99\08\uwlaw.txt UW Law School minorities fall off.
\clip\99\12\uwlaw.txt 
http://www.seattletimes.com/news/education/html98/laww_19990619.html
June 19, 1999 Number of minority admissions at UW Law School fall off
by Roberto Sanchez Seattle Times staff reporter If current figures
hold, the University of Washington Law School will have its least
diverse class in three years next fall, including only two African
Americans among its 178 students.

Summary - Asians are down by 15 to 24 this year, or 13% (compared to
only 3% of state pop) 2 blacks = 1.1%, 3 filipino = 1.7% 5 hispanic =
2.8%. Overall 22 fewer admits due to i200 (but most losses are from
Asians who were never under-represented - most likeley any
preferences for Asians were never justified)

UW LAW ABOUT 30% MINORITY, 15% ASIAN DOWN FROM 40% 25% IN 1994
uwlaw.txt

WHITES ARE THE ONLY UNDER-REPRESENTED RACE AT UW LAW SCHOOL 1994
\doc\94\12\uwashlaw.wk1 - whites only under-represented minority!
  1994 admissions University of Washington Law School

            white   black   hisp    asian   natAm   AsN Filipino    total
    Percent 0.64    0.07    0.04    0.21    0.05    0.17    0.03    1.00
    State   0.87    0.03    0.04    0.03    0.03    0.02    0.01    
    Index   0.74    2.91    1.23    9.63    2.03    11.71   5.01    
Index White index is vs. population, White=1.00 for other races

\clip\98\14\uw200.txt
http://search.tribnet.com/archive/90days/1011a12.htm I-200: Beyond
the noise / How affirmative action works at UW Law School October 11,
1998 David Wickert; The News Tribune [Tacoma Wa]

Note that this article does not mention that in 1994, the ONLY
under-represented race compared to state population (85% white) in
the UW law school were the WHITES.

-Six of those 131 top applicants who enrolled were minorities.
-no diversity factor will "confer admission on an academically
unqualified candidate."
- "No racial 'quotas' or 'targets' were employed in this process,"
Kummert states in one court filing. "Minority and nonminority
applicants competed for the same seats at each stage of the process."
- In 1988, about 14 percent of students admitted to the law school
were minorities. But by 1996, 27 percent of students admitted were
minorities.  That dramatic change began in 1990 when Wallace Loh
became dean of the law school. In 1988, only 16 percent of applicants
were minorities. By 1996, more than 25 percent of applicants were
minorities.

%%Undergrad

Web summary:
http://www.wips.org/Studies/PBECP.htm
zip36\clipim\99\08\24\uw.efx
http://www.wips.org/wif.htm
Washington Institute Foundation
The Good News in the drop in minority Admissions Aug 1999
Fewer minority students enter top University of 
Washington campus, but more
are applying to other institutions like happened at 
University of California.

\clip\98\12\warp\warp.htm Center Eq Opp Study
Preferences in Washington Higher Education: Racial and Ethnic
Preferences in Undergraduate Admissions at the University of
Washington and Washington State University
http://www.ceousa.org/warp.html A system of racial and ethnic
preferences in admissions operates by establishing different
standards of admission for individuals based on their racial or
ethnic background, with some students held to a higher standard and
others admitted to a lower standard…. Both UW and WSU show a smaller
qualifications gap between white and Hispanic enrollees.  Differences
in verbal SATs are 30 points at UW and 40 points at WSU, differences
in math SATs are 70 points at UW and 25 points at WSU, and
differences in GPAs are 0.18 of a grade point at UW and 0.12 of a
grade point at WSU. There is little evidence that Asians receive
special preferences at either UW or WSU…."

UW 6 yr d/o rate         W30 B71 H48 A65   W1.00 B-2.36 H-1.73 A-1.16
UW Admit rate            W74.4 B96.6 H90.3 A78.5 B1.29 H1.21 A1.06
UW Math SAT percentile   W50 B<25 H28 A25
UW Verbal SAT percentile W50 B<25 H27 A50

(Asians seem to have significant math and ver lag too, but better
admit rate and lower graduation rate - this seems to indicate
significant, but not a great amount of preference, perhaps because of
Filipino and other specific groups)

U WASH HAS 2X GRAD RATE, .5 GPA, 220 SAT DIFFERENCE 
\clip\98\12\uwdisc.txt
http://www.seattletimes.com/news/local/html98/race_091698.html The
Seattle Times Company September 16, 1998 UW, WSU favor black
applicants, study says by Marsha King Seattle Times staff reporter
" At the UW, 70 percent of whites graduated in six years compared
with 29 percent of African Americans, according to the study.  At
WSU, whites graduated at a rate of 61 percent vs.  44 percent for
African Americans.  "
" Specifically, the differences between about 100 African Americans
and about 2,200 whites who enrolled at the UW were 0.47 of a point on
a 4.0 grade-point scale, and 220 points in combined median verbal and
math SAT scores (out of a possible 1600). At WSU, the differences
between 61 African-American and 2,000 white enrollees were 0.37 of a
grade point and 180 points on the combined SAT.  "

@@University of Massachusetts

\priv\95\19\masscoll.txt State colleges' threshold is raised for '97:
Dissenter worries for ones who'll be left out "Edmonds, who now runs
a consulting firm, cited preliminary statistics from UMass-Amherst
showing that 45 percent of this year's freshman class and 59 percent
of this year's minority freshmen had averages below 2.75. "
By Alice Dembner, Boston Globe 12/19/95 


@@University of Washington (undergraduate)

Affirmative Reaction Mark D. Fefer Seattle Weekly March 12, 1998 p. 7
New system may dumb standards for students of all races.  Seattle
Times reporter Marsha King pointed out that as a share of high school
graduates, WHITES are the most under-represented race. Until last
year, the UW has a two track system separating whites/asians and
other minorities that is legally dubious. New system may eliminate
admissions by academic index, and result in a lot more work. If there
is no "cultural diversity factor" because of I200, they could lose 30
more minority freshmen. "Do such shocking numbers really prove the
need for affirmative action, or show that we were just papering over
massive disparities in educational achievement?" Athletes need only
be "eligible" by NCAA standards.

\doc\95\11\uwash90.wk1, .txt - University of Washington
admissions and degrees. Graduates much smaller
than percent of campus.

\doc\95\04\uwash94.wk1 - University of Washington Undergrad
  Admissions 1994

         Summary - The admission rate for minorities is lower than Whites,
         rather than higher. Test scores and grades are somewhat lower, but
         not drastically so. Asians have equal grade point averages, but
         slightly lower test scores. This is actually not a bad example of
         affirmative action done correctly.

         University of Washington Admissions, Fall 1994
         Freshmen from High School
         Source: 
         Tim Washburn, Admissions Office, Analysis by Arthur Hu
                     Numbers                 Percent
                     Apply   Admit   Registe Apply   Admit   Register
         African Am     301     152      93    2.7%    2.1%    2.7%
         Native Am       86      46      33    0.8%    0.6%    1.0%
         Mexican Am     380     216     126    3.4%    3.0%    3.7%
         Asian Am      2086    1314     805   18.5%   18.4%   23.5%
         Total        12076    7315    3489  107.2%  102.3%  101.7%
         Internation    809     165      60    7.2%    2.3%    1.7%
         US           11267    7150    3429  100.0%  100.0%  100.0%
         White/Other   8414    5422    2372   74.7%   75.8%   69.2%


                                     Index
                     GPA     Test    GPA     Test    Admit   Index
                             Scores          Scores  Rate
         African Am    3.11     869   -1.15   -1.24   50.5%   -1.28
         Native Am     3.44     986   -1.04   -1.09   53.5%   -1.20
         Mexican Am    3.26     962   -1.10   -1.12   56.8%   -1.13
         Asian Am      3.58     997   -1.00   -1.08   63.0%   -1.02
         Total                                        60.6%   -1.06
         International                                20.4%   -3.16
         US                                           63.5%   -1.02
         White         3.59    1074    1.00    1.00   64.4%    1.00
         Other         3.61    1084    1.01    1.01


 %%college hiring

cdoc\95\10\tenure.txt - UC tenure hiring still mostly white

  DOC921:SJFINAL.WK1 San Jose State president finalists
  doc923:collpres.wk1 College president women
  doc932:sjsuper.doc

 %%campus race

 doc942\stcasper.txt - diversity and separatism


@@Virginia

\clip\99\03\vacoll.txt Hampton Roads Virginia Daily Press Internet
Edition Wednesday, Jan. 27, 1999 Va. colleges admit minorities with
lower scores than whites Schools dispute study from D.C. think tank


@@White

1994 ARTICLE CITES ASIAN, JEWISH OVER AND XTIAN WHITE UNDER
Z68\clipim\2003\07\27\stafquo.efx
"Stanford Stir Over Quota Remarks: Admissions policy questioned" Bill
Workman San Francisco Chronicle Jan 26, 1994 Stephen Krasner, Jewish
professor contends that Asians and Jews are "way over-represented",
and the University is not admitting enough "white Christian student"