CSM: Confronting a new era of diversity

[asteriskea]

<p>Mark A. Emmert, president of the University of Washington, weighs in on the recent introduction of “labor intensive” holistic admissions review at UW and why colleges need to find new ways of ensuring diversity. </p>

<p>

And because the US has gone from a national policy to a set of disparate solutions, it faces a conundrum: Even as university leaders in post-affirmative-action states support the goals of a highly diversified student body, they must show that without the tool of affirmative action, they can still build a diverse, talented, highly competitive student population…What we discovered in Washington was that there are other ways to ensure diversity and access to higher education, particularly by taking socioeconomic factors into account…The more we can know about each individual student who applies, the better informed our admissions decisions are. The results so far are promising: The academic level of our entering students is as good as it had been prior to holistic review, and the student body is more diverse…

</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0806/p09s01-coop.html[/url]”>http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0806/p09s01-coop.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[ses]

<p>I’ve read several articles like this. If you admit more students from the lowest income brackets than by default you seem to admit more students of color. which is a win win for the university because it’s satisfying TWO kinds of diversity.</p>

[NewHope33]

<p>Now I happen to think this is a good approach, but I’m pretty sure that not far down the road will be protests of “favorable treatment for the poor” or even worse “it’s still affirmative action since it benefits the same group.” Still I hope it survives, because my view is that the country is better off with educated taxpayers than under-educated workers (many of whom contribute little in income taxes due to lower income).</p>

[asteriskea]

<p>The UW along with the University of Michigan, UC-Berkeley, and the University of Texas met last February to swap ideas about how to advance admissions models with the laudable goal of enhancing diversity on college campuses. The University of Michigan has released several articles to publicize its use of the CB demographic software program Descriptor PLUS. This program uses a combination of census and College Board data so that colleges can better locate and target prospective students from disadvantaged or underrepresented neighborhoods and high schools. The software targets groups defined by Descriptor data on the percentage of “nonminority” students in the area, as well as family income, and parents’ educational level. About 40 U.S. colleges - many of them private - such as Brandeis and Williams- use this software program as part of their holistic review process and diversity initiatives.</p>

<p>

…recent research by Williams economists Gordon Winston and Cappy Hill reveals that Williams, like many other highly selective colleges and universities, could do a better job of including the most under-resourced and under-served students in the nation. Only about 10 percent of our students come from families in the lowest two quintiles of the national income distribution, while more than 70 percent come from the highest quintile.</p>

<p>In response to this disturbing revelation, the Admission Office has undertaken several initiatives, beginning in the 2004-05 admission cycle, to identify and recruit more high-ability, low-income applicants:</p>

<pre><code>* Geo-demographic data provided by the College Board through its Descriptor Plus service made it possible to target students from low-income “neighborhood clusters.” Students so identified received specially tailored letters emphasizing affordability and financial aid opportunities…

</code></pre>

<p><a href=“http://www.williams.edu/home/diversity/admission.php[/url]”>http://www.williams.edu/home/diversity/admission.php&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;