H -°, L 7° | Tomorrow: 
H 17°, L 4°
The prevailing strategy behind UW-Madison’s more than 40-year effort to increase the presence of “targeted minority” students remains as confusing as ever.
Campus officials regularly lament the low graduation rates of targeted minority students. In the same breath, they say “diversity” is about more than numbers. Yet, the chancellor took great pride in announcing to the Faculty Senate that minority freshmen enrollment reached an all-time high of 11 percent this year.
The persistent gap in graduation rates leads campus officials to call for improved retention programs to help targeted minority students make more rapid and successful progress toward their degrees. These calls ignore the obvious fact that UW-Madison admissions policies, in an effort to increase minority enrollment numbers, admit substantial numbers of these students whose prospects of graduating in a timely fashion are statistically known to be small.
If diversity is all about numbers, the solution is obvious. Simply admit all students, whatever their race and ethnicity, based on their academic qualifications and their likelihood of graduating within six years. Making this determination does not require sophisticated research. The data needed to make such decisions are readily available.
But, if diversity is not about numbers, what is it about? That is difficult to say because of UW-Madison’s “flavor of the day” approach. This year it is something called “inclusive excellence.” The words may create a warm glow and have superficial appeal. But even Chancellor Martin at the recent Diversity Forum seemed perplexed by the term and its meaning. If she is perplexed, what about the rest of us?
This new term can be viewed as the latest rhetorical effort to hide the failure of campus diversity programs to achieve their goals. When programs fail repeatedly, an institution should have the courage to do something more than giving them new names.
We have seen this tactic used time after time. Recall the sequence of labels. It began back in the late 1960s when “equal opportunity” quickly turned into “affirmative action,” then into “diversity,” followed in 1988 by former Chancellor Donna Shalala’s “Madison Plan” and former UW System President Buzz Shaw’s “Design for Diversity.”
Next came “The Madison Commitment” advanced by former Chancellor David Ward and then Associate Vice Chancellor Gary Sandefur, who is now Dean of the College of Letters and Science. Several years later, the UW System Board of Regents concocted its “Plan 2008.” That plan proved to be nothing more than a grab bag of existing initiatives that prompted former Chancellor Wiley to clothe them in the magic words of “diversity and climate.”
Though widely heralded when adopted, Plan 2008 is generally viewed as a failure — it died a quiet, lingering death more than a year ago. To now, under Martin’s new banner of “inclusive excellence,” continuing what the campus has been doing for so many years but expecting the results to change, is a form of insanity.
Why continue down the blind alleys of the past when a simple remedy is at hand? Admit and enroll students, whatever their race or ethnicity, based on the likelihood of their graduating in timely fashion. Why not abide by both federal and state laws that prohibit discrimination based on, among other important characteristics, race and ethnicity? A quick instruction to the Office of Admissions from the chancellor, or better yet from the Board of Regents, would resolve the matter.
W. Lee Hansen
Professor Emeritus Economics
(608) 238-4819
IP hash: 5db1c193
They’d have to recruit from out of state to make US-Madison as diverse as they want it to be. And bashing white people just for being white won’t help either.
IP hash: 14bd2705
Fashion is architecture: it is a matter of proportions. http://twurl.nl/76im7l
IP hash: 65f29daa
I dont think they bash white people for being white people. I think they recognize the importance of diversity in order to be called a true world class university. But that being said they shouldnt let in students who just wont cut it in 4 years. Nobody wins when that happens.
IP hash: 02b872d5
Good article, Professor!
IP hash: e0f1e619
Agreed. Glad to know there’s someone who actually gets it within the ranks of the UW.
IP hash: 70a092fc
There are a few things I would like to touch on. 1. Diversity is the child. Inclusivity is the teenager. Diversity, in simple terms, means that I want a seat at the table. Inclusivity suggests that you want other groups…other people who do not necessarily look like you, sound like you to participate in the conversation. Notice that diversity is simply a seat (non-participatory other than presence). Inclusivity moves horizontally (more and different people sitting at the table) and vertically (shared conversation). 2. That the Chancellor used the, somewhat questionable, data; “all-time high of 11 percent this year,” is actually quite understandable. It is a benchmark. It is an early benchmark. It keeps the wolves at bay. All it does is offer us some degrees of freedom to do the work. Now if she starts pulling balloons and cake and having a party on this…Houston, we have a problem. 3. Four key goals have been forwarded through/by the Borad of Regents. These four goals “will serve as the centerpiece of our diversity agenda.” Ignore for a second the mis-use of the term “diversity” here. These four goals are beautiful. Now - get about the business of involving ALL OF US to move this university forward.
There are a number of ways you may be supportive: (a) Stand should to shoulder in the effort to move this university forward. (b) Hold the lantern so that we might see where the pitfalls are. (c) Place obstacles in our path so that we may gain strength and knowledge in having to go around, under, or over. (d) Step out the way.
IP hash: f151ec33
It’s hard to tell whether this is satire or someone from the “diversity” department. That’s the real tragedy - these people are a satire of themselves.
Just watch to 2009 Diversity Forum for an example:
http://www.diversity.wisc.edu/forums.php
IP hash: f151ec33
Great letter!
“Why not abide by both federal and state laws that prohibit discrimination based on, among other important characteristics, race and ethnicity?”
The reason was cited by Chancellor Martin at the 2009 Diversity Forum. She said that part of the reason for adopting the new “inclusive excellence” terminology is to comply with the law - that is, to disguise the fact that what they’re really doing is discriminating on the basis of race and sex.
The issue is this: racism is immoral and cannot lead to anything good. As long as “diversity” departments continue the practice of discriminating based on race, sex, ethnicity, etc. (I.e., practicing racism, sexism, etc.) no amount of fluffy terminology will change the destructive nature of these departments.
IP hash: c2119a5e
The bottom line is that Wisconsin simply doesn’t have a large enough pool of minorities who are capable of passing a college admissions exam, let alone an interest in earning a college degree.
IP hash: e9c91c41
Wisconsin does, the reality is that a number of people of color don’t want to be in Wisconsin for whatever reason (weather, job opportunities, new experiences). When the diversity discussion starts to center on keeping the in-state people of color here who can succeed, then you can not have one.
As far a graduating on time, I think people have to respect students unique educational journeys, regardless of race. Some students can finish in 3 1/2 years, some need 6 years. If we started keeping students who could not pass in 4 yrs, a lot of students here now would have been turned away.
IP hash: 39898a49
Wrong. The poster you are responding to said Wisconsin does not have a sufficient number of minorities that are adequately prepared for college. Also, if you look at stats for technical colleges such as MATC, you’ll find that significantly more minorities are drawn to schools that will teach them useful skills that they can use, rather than trying for a four-year degree that costs more and offers no more of a chance of finding work after graduation.
IP hash: b045f88d
Thank you! Since when did graduating in 4+ years become a crime?
IP hash: 51564633
“White Folk’s Greed Runs a World In Need.” Barack Obama in Dreams of My Father
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdLX3aRNaNk
IP hash: d15b4ae1
Dude thats a a quote by Jeremiah Wright. Obama didnt say that he was merely telling a story of the pastor saying that. Context! And your comment have nothing to do with the article
IP hash: 4e3d7eba
Wait, I thought Barry HO was completely unconscious during his attendance at the 20 years of hate-filled racist, anti-Semitic, anti-American sermons by Wright.
IP hash: 306caa23
If u believe in such backward politics, then why sign as anonymous? Is it because u use Palin, Dobbs, etc.logic? If we follow the professors wayward thou�hts, then seniors, handicapped, and women would also be excluded.
IP hash: 44b0afbc
Why would seniors handicapped and women be excluded? Professor Hansen is simply saying that people who have an equal shot of success should have an equal shot at admissions. By saying that women would be excluded from this, you are saying that men are inherently better able to graduate from this university.
IP hash: dd7a1705
Do you not know the history of your predecessors?
IP hash: 7d47454d
Fantastic article, professor.
IP hash: 8cc1ce44
I applaud your strength in character for writing this piece and putting your name to it. Most of us hide behind “anonymous” for fear of retribution and public scrutiny. Thank you, professor, for showing us what American life used to be like when real men had the courage to speak openly and thoughtfully. The “herd mentality” of policial correctness is stifling. With regard to your article, it might benefit everyone to research “self-fulfilling prophecy” within the context of diversity. The thought process is altruistic in nature, but ulitmatley unfair to the minorities it aims to protect. Why promote an unqualified person solely based on ethnicity alone? It sets them up to fail and for the rest of the population to say, “See, I told you so.”
IP hash: 323e62c7
To help minorities graduate, we should lower their standards on tests and assignments. After all, we’ve already lowered their admissions standards.
IP hash: 50987a6a
If we adopted this approach, UW-Madison would go back to being a much more high-society, man-dominated, white institution. I am convinced of this. It’s not because people of color don’t want a degree; HBCU’s around the country like Howard and Grambling belie this fallacy. It’s in part because the system of verifying qualification is essentially classist, patriarchial and white supremacist. It focuses on certain school skills passed down from rich white patriarchial family to white rich patriarchial family. (Standardized test taking among them)
This doesn’t mean some people of color, some poor folks, some women and queer people won’t get in. There will still be those who beat the odds, but these outliers doesn’t mean the odds are not against them.
So, to me, this is a letter less about getting qualified folks in, but about going back to the ages of Jim Crow and beyond, where only the elite, privileged people among us, who were rich white straight men, would get into school, get white collar jobs, and run things. That’s what this article is about. Note how there is NO remedy for the loss of marginalized and underrepresented groups at the campus if this were to be admissions policy. Interesting, isn’t it?
IP hash: 4e3d7eba
Women are over-represented now and I doubt that will change unless there is affirmative action for men. I suspect that women work harder on their studies than men and therefore get better grades - I doubt this will change.
Maybe minorities should try that “work harder” idea?
IP hash: f151ec33
“It focuses on certain school skills passed down from rich white patriarchial family to white rich patriarchial family. (Standardized test taking among them)”
If you don’t think the skills and testing standards are appropriate, then argue for new skills and testing standards. What kinds of skills and standards would you like to see?
The whole point is to not go back to Jim Crow. Let anyone in who is qualified and stop categorizing people as “rich white straight men.” In other words, stop being racist.
IP hash: 4e3d7eba
“certain school skills passed down from rich white patriarchial family”
What? Like studying and doing your homework? Working instead of whining? Spending more time reading than rapping?
IP hash: 0e92cc4b
Hey, all this stuff about diversity in the UW System is nothing but a scam perpetrated by UW System President Riley. They come up with these elaborate bogus programs on paper, hire a few diversity vice president with huge salaries but everything stays the same. If they were really serious about diversity why does the UW System and Madison fire so many African Americans? UW Madison canned Barrows for nothing, Whitewater canned two African Americans deans on bogus audit charges, settled on out of court and all of their allegations against the other deans were dismissed by Federaljudge, UW Greenbay fired an African American female dean, so diversity is bogus and a scam.