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
@@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"