Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Proposal 2 and UofMich  (Read 29357 times)

molaw

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2213
  • it rubs the lotion on its skin
    • View Profile
Proposal 2 and UofMich
« on: October 25, 2006, 01:06:04 PM »
For anyone who lives in Michigan...how would the passage of Proposal 2 affect UofM's admissions?  Or does their Supreme Court ruling over-rule any law that may be passed in the state?  If they  stick to their Supreme Court ruling over State law could that affect their standing as a Public university and state-funding?
MSU 2010

mae8

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal 2 and UofMich
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2006, 01:28:43 AM »
passage would mean umich could not use racial preferences. the supreme court ruled their program was constitutional, it did not mandate any such programs. california passed a smilar law a couple years ago and it's in full effect.
Emory '09

hereshopin

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 819
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal 2 and UofMich
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2006, 01:12:10 AM »
It's now official...U of M cannot use Affirmative Action.
DeVry Tech '10

Ever

  • Guest
Re: Proposal 2 and UofMich
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2006, 10:47:37 AM »
Expect to see massive scholarships to any minority student who applies and gains entry on the numbers/soft factors.

hereshopin

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 819
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal 2 and UofMich
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2006, 11:37:42 PM »
I think we'll see a lot of URM acceptances before the law goes into effect in December.

Honestly, I think we're going to continue to see the exact same number of urm acceptances at the law school.

To the best of my knowledge, unlike the UG, the law school doesnt use a specific formula, so its literally impossible to prove that they're accepting/rejecting someone because of race.
DeVry Tech '10

parsley

  • Guest
Re: Proposal 2 and UofMich
« Reply #5 on: November 09, 2006, 09:59:49 AM »
There will be a temporary drop, and then it will climb back up but applicant quality will be higher.  That's what happened at UCBerkeley, no?

People tend to achieve at the bar you set for them.   

And diversity will still be present -- you'll have the cellist who studied at Julliard and the 4.0 student who has won statewide recognition as a painter instead of somebody who checked "African American" or "Hispanic" in a box. 


redemption

  • Guest
Re: Proposal 2 and UofMich
« Reply #6 on: November 09, 2006, 10:02:40 AM »
And diversity will still be present -- you'll have the cellist who studied at Julliard and the 4.0 student who has won statewide recognition as a painter instead of somebody who checked "African American" or "Hispanic" in a box. 

This paragraph is lazy. Why is it a choice?

parsley

  • Guest
Re: Proposal 2 and UofMich
« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2006, 10:07:08 AM »
Well, Red, sorry to disappoint with my lazy paragraphs.

But in Michigan they can no longer use ethnicity as an admissions factor.  So they'll have to look for other ways to develop a diverse class, and I believe that can still be accomplished with an admissions process that doesn't use a check in an ethnicity box for decisions.



redemption

  • Guest
Re: Proposal 2 and UofMich
« Reply #8 on: November 09, 2006, 10:12:22 AM »
I'm not disappointed. You said this:

And diversity will still be present -- you'll have the cellist who studied at Julliard and the 4.0 student who has won statewide recognition as a painter instead of somebody who checked "African American" or "Hispanic" in a box. 


What makes you think that the person who won statewide recognition didn't check Af Am or Hispanic in a box, or vice versa?

bandaidstick

  • Guest
Re: Proposal 2 and UofMich
« Reply #9 on: November 09, 2006, 10:14:53 AM »
you've angered the AA gods. Prepare for attack!