In a comment to my post below criticizing a New York Times article on affirmative action, Edward Boyd of Zonitics provides a link to an impressive, even shocking, OpEd in the Indianapolis Star about preferences in admissions to the University of Indiana at Bloomington law school.
Robert Heidt, a law professor at Indiana and former member of the admissions committee, writes that
We differ in that to meet our de facto quota, we regularly lower our usual standards of admission more than our counterparts at Michigan lower theirs. For example, to meet our de facto quota of blacks in each first-year class, we deviate from our usual standards of admission more than any remotely comparable law school is willing to do. In fact, of all the law schools in the country approved by the American Bar Association, none regularly lowers its standards of admission for affirmative action purposes as much as we do….
Such is the affirmative action admissions policy we at the IU Bloomington Law School have followed for more than 30 years. We follow a similarly heavy-handed affirmative action policy for financial aid and faculty recruitment.
A policy however well-meaning in the abstract can feel foul to those given the job of implementing it. And in my four years on the admissions committee, routinely leapfrogging minority applicants over so many dramatically more qualified non-minority applicants, foul is how our affirmative action policy came to feel. Seeing the photographs and reading the record and personal statements of non-minority applicants whom we rejected in order to admit the far less qualified left me feeling as though I should wash. Eventually, I could not acquiesce in this policy any longer….
Roughly speaking, to meet our de facto quotas, we must leapfrog less qualified minority applicants over approximately 330 more qualified non-minority applicants each year, many of whom, of course, will be Indiana residents.
Heidt claims that the discriminatory policy is so entrenched at Indiana that he doubts the faculty and administration will abandon it even if the Supremes reject Michigan’s milder form of preferences.
I believe that bringing a colorblind admissions policy to IU will require the determination of state legislators who are not afraid to use their control of our purse strings and who are savvy enough not to expect good-faith compliance from the faculty and administration.
But no court, not even the Supreme Court, can light such a fire under our state legislators. The match for that fire can only be struck by the people of Indiana.
All in all, Heidt’s article is both impressive and depressing.
I am interested in what the repsonse to this statement has been / will be. I would assume that the usual advocacy groups will shortly begin an attack on this professor. Any updates?
Okay, it’s a minor point, but it makes me cringe: Indiana University, *not* University of Indiana. Thanks.
Haven’t seen any responses yet; let me know if anyone sees anything. Re my mistake in calling Indiana University the University of Indiana: sorry, my fault. It was correct in the article. I’m tempted to say, “Hoosier cares?” but that would be wrong, and unjustifiably snide. Universities, like people and everything else, should be called by their proper names, and I didn’t. I certainly would object upon hearing “the University of Stanaford”….
Here is the response from the black student union. It was an email sent to the entire student body today. There have been other responses from the adminstration over the last few weeks.
BLSA Response to Heidt Editorial
One of the many benefits of graduate study is the existence of an
atmosphere that fosters healthy debate and intelligent discussion.
Everyone is certainly entitled to his or her own opinion on the various
controversial issues that affect our society. However, in the open
expression of those opinions, there exists a civil and professional
responsibility to refrain from the use of erroneous, misguided and
derogatory information. That responsibility was purposely neglected on
December 27, 2002, when Indiana University Bloomington School of Law
Professor Robert Heidt’s op-ed article appeared in the Indianapolis Star.
To place such an inflammatory article in a newspaper while the University
was on Christmas vacation was a calculated, cowardly move. Given the
offensive nature of the article, the Black Law Students Association of
the Indiana University School of Law-Bloomington felt that it was
necessary to publicly respond in opposition to Professor Heidt’s
unfounded assertions.
Through the statements made in his article, Professor Heidt has
simply revealed the fact that he does not fully understand the true
meaning and purpose of affirmative action. Heidt repeatedly asserts that
through affirmative action, the “unqualified” Black applicant, “routinely
leapfrogs the dramatically more qualified” white applicant. To the
contrary, standards and qualifications are not lowered for minority
applicants through affirmative action. Rather, affirmative action
ensures that qualified minority applicants, historically confined to the
sidelines of American society, are not overlooked. It is ironic that
affirmative action is not challenged when it is disguised and used to the
advantage of groups such as athletes, legacies, and children of wealthy
school donors. Does their status somehow make them more qualified for
legal study?
Professor Heidt makes numerous references to what it means to be
“qualified” under Indiana University School of Law standards or generally
in law school admissions. Heidt measures the quality of an applicant
based on high grades, a high LSAT score and, to a lesser extent,
extracurricular activities. Unfortunately, Professor Heidt fails to
recognize that the qualifications of individuals cannot fully be measured
by focusing solely on a GPA and LSAT score. Countless studies have shown
that disparities in LSAT scores across racial lines are a direct result
of cultural, social, and economic biases that African Americans and other
minorities have long been forced to endure in this country. Furthermore,
other studies have shown that standardized tests examine only one of the
many skill sets necessary to predict success in the study and practice of
law.
We believe that an applicant’s qualifications are best determined
by examining the totality of that individual’s life, educational and work
experience, and the ways in which the presence of that applicant will
enrich the educational environment of the institution. In fact, most (if
not all) institutions of higher learning admit both minority and
non-minority students in this way. For instance, colleges and
universities generally consider factors such as an applicant’s geographic
residence, whether the applicant is a student leader, an athlete or child
of alumni in admissions practices. Parental monetary contributions to
the institution are also considered, as well as whether the applicant is
disabled or a traditional or non-traditional student. Furthermore, work
experience, and socio-economic background are also determining factors
for admission.
It is truly unfortunate that Blacks and other minorities, unlike
our non-minority colleagues, must wear our achievements as badges of
approval for people like Professor Heidt. Despite the many social,
cultural and economic challenges that Blacks consistently face in
American society, several of us have achieved high LSAT scores and GPAs.
These achievements are illustrated by the fact that our Black students
have graduated from their respective undergraduate institutions with
honors and are members of honor societies such as Phi Beta Kappa, Mortar
Board, and Pi Sigma Alpha. These achievements were made while majoring
in a variety of challenging areas including biology, computer science,
political science, accounting, business, and economics. Moreover, we have
excelled in extracurricular activities, held extensive leadership
positions, founded student organizations, and spent countless hours
volunteering for community organizations. Furthermore, Black students at
IU School of Law gained admission to many prestigious, comparable, or
higher-ranked law schools such as Georgetown University, Vanderbilt
University, Boston College, The University of North Carolina Chapel Hill,
and University of California- Berkley, and chose to come to Indiana
University. Additionally, many of us entered law school having already
received a variety of master’s degrees including M.B.A.s and M.P.A.s, as
well as M.D.s.
Further evidence of the fallacious nature of Heidt’s comment that
Black students are not qualified to be at Indiana University School of
Law in Bloomington, is the fact that we maintain the grades which enable
us to remain at the school while excelling in the traditional benchmarks
of success such as law journal, moot court, and trial team. We have
almost fifty percent of eligible Black second and third year law students
on journal, three top oralists for Moot Court, two top brief writers for
Moot Court, and one Moot Court Octofinalist. Furthermore, two of the six
students who will be representing the law school at the National Trial
Competition are Black students. We further extend our professional
experience through internships at federal and state agencies, judicial
clerkships, and internships at law firms. Finally, we consistently pass
the bar exam and become gainfully employed in all facets of the legal
profession. Of course, Professor Heidt conveniently failed to include the
accomplishments and overall success rate of Black students in his
analysis as to whether we were as qualified as white students to be at
Indiana University School of Law-Bloomington.
Professor Heidt continued his attack on the qualifications of Blacks
students when he stated “Black applicants whose low grades, LSAT scores
and extracurricular record would otherwise win admission only to Howard
Law School in Washington, D.C., regularly win admission from us.” Howard
is far from being the second-rate law school Heidt makes it out to be.
HU’s admissions office receives over 1,400 applications each year and
enrolls about 150 first-year students each fall. These numbers are
indicative of a competitive admissions process, instead of a “come one,
come all” law school. Howard Law’s alumni roster includes: Thurgood
Marshall, the first African-American to serve as a justice on the United
States Supreme Court; Vernon Jordan, former presidential advisor to Bill
Clinton; Sharon Pratt Kelly, the first woman Mayor of Washington, D.C.;
and Rep. Gregory Meeks, now serving with distinction in the Congress of
the United States.
Professor Heidt’s deliberate misrepresentation of the integrity of the
Howard University School of Law demonstrates his baseless belief about
the quality of education provided at Historically Black Colleges and
Universities. Several IU alumni and current Blacks students are products
of these wonderful institutions and are excelling within the law school
as well as in the legal community.
Professor Heidt followed up his editorial with a response stating that he
swells with pride when he thinks of all students, past and present. Only
a few days earlier, the admittance of many Blacks students to the law
school made him feel as though he should “wash.” Professor Heidt
undoubtedly swells with feelings for Black law students. Pride certainly
isn’t one of them.
Robert Heidt’s editorial has, without a doubt, stirred up the fighting
spirit in the many Black students and we will continue to enroll and
excel in his courses at the law school. It is inevitable, however, that
there will be a significant number of Black students that will refuse to
be placed in a course taught by Professor Heidt. Despite the purported
trust and honor of the blind grading system the law school employs, many
students will likely choose not to leave anything to chance by taking a
class with Heidt.
As stated in many of the responses to the editorial, Professor Heidt is
entitled to hold any position he pleases concerning affirmative action.
The First Amendment to our Constitution and standards of academic freedom
undeniably protect his views and his expression of such. However, the
misleading and insulting line of reasoning relied on by Professor Heidt
should not be protected. His actions were contrary to the ethical
aspirations of a lawyer, let alone a tenured faculty member of an
institution such as the Indiana University School of Law.
Well said! You know, when I hear ignorant whites who still propagate Black “inferiority”, it only strengthens my resolve to prove them wrong. Like Michael Jordan once said, “I discovered I might be pretty good at this basketball stuff once I saw how much other players feared me; they didn’t even want to guard me because they could sense that I detested losing more than they did.” Blacks in America have a fighting spirit that, in all we have overcome, demonstrates that we will not lose; someday we will receive the respect we deserve. Whites have tried to “look down” at us for so long out of fear for our intelligence…and they know it! What else can they do, we started civilization; we were the ones GOD started with, so we have as much right as any human beings to live on Earth and experience ALL of its fruits, no matter what anyone says.