I disagree with Hannah Shtein's article ("UW making big mistake with quota" Oct. 9) because I think that decreasing the quota disadvantages Wisconsin students and does nothing to increase diversity, as she believes. Her argument is that by decreasing the quota, there will be more diversity in the student body and that it will decrease the number of Wisconsin students who supposedly don't deserve to go here, and that it will increase funding for the university.

I agree that out-of-state tuition helps UW and continues to help once those students are alumni. This is because the only people who can afford out-of-state tuition are well-off, not to mention, typically, rich white kids. Yes, the minority population from out of state exists, but this is often due to academic or athletic scholarships. It is true that these people will donate to the university, too, but increasing the number of people who pay the full out-of-state tuition is advancing another homogenous population, not a diverse one. If America was as diverse as it claims and race was not a factor, Ms. Shtein might be right. However, the color line exists, and there are nowhere near as many minorities above the poverty line as there are whites.

The argument that there are a lot of Wisconsinites who do not deserve to go here is completely out of line. I went to a Wisconsin high school, and the only kids from my graduating class who got in here had a GPA of at least 3.7 and those "average" ACT scores of 27 and up. I was under the impression that those are extremely high standards, and whoever can achieve them, deserves to go this dignified, award-winning school. Ms. Shtein wrote that "one has only to look around to see that there are plenty of options within the UW System." While this is true, they are not quite as equal as she may think. Yes, they are all within the UW System and should have equal standards. However, to get into those other schools, a high school senior usually only needs a GPA of 2.5 or a 3.0, and a minimum ACT score of 21; much different than UW-Madison. It is true that all of the UW schools should be held to the same standard of excellence, but it is also true that a degree from UW-Madison is much more respected and esteemed than a degree from UW-Stout or UW-Platteville. It not only looks better in applying for a job after graduation, but it also looks better on a grad school application. Anyone can argue that there shouldn't be this big a discrepancy, but it's hard to argue that there isn't one.

Ms. Shtein also argues that, due to a largely Wisconsinite student population, this is more like a "repeat of high school" than a new and challenging environment. The UW does not admit the popular cliques of high schools around the state; it admits qualified individuals who then seek each other out because of similar interests or locations. While I did not experience dorm life here, it is the common experience of the "unknowns" of collegiate life that brings people together. This may also explain the divide between "coasties" and "sconnies"; they tend to have similar pasts, presents and futures, so it is easier to forge bonds than it might be with people way outside your socioeconomic class, or lifestyle choices. If you care about what brand your boots are, chances are your friends do, too. A repeat of high school is probably more likely in a sorority/fraternity setting than it is anywhere else on campus, no matter what state your "sisters" and "brothers" come from.

Diversity doesn't go up by admitting more upper-middle class whites from out-of-state suburbs, but it might go up if we offered more scholarships and financial aid to those in impoverished areas who truly deserve a chance. Wisconsin students are not getting in because they don't deserve it; they're getting in because they performed well in high school and on standardized tests.

Katie Luebke

[email protected]