HOME 
  


A Concrete Example of the Issue in this Debate:
The Advantage Given to Black and Hispanic Applicants in
the Competition for Admission to University of Michigan

The Civil Rights Initiative calls it Racial Preference, and seeks to end it.
The Civil Rights Commission calls it Affirmative Action, and wants to keep it.

The Size of the Advantage is measured by the Center for Equal Opportunity*, analyzing
admission statistics in UM's Undergraduate College, Law School, and Medical School

[Ed. Note: The nondiscrimination principle defended on this website bars intentional discrimination or preference based on race or ethnicity. A higher rate of admission for Blacks and Hispanics, than for Whites and Asians with the same test scores and grade point averages, shows different racial results. The question is whether such results were intended. They might have been an accident, caused by using additional admissions criteria that happened to favor Blacks and Hispanics. However, if obtaining these results was part of the reason for adopting the additional criteria, the racial difference in treatment was intentional.

The size of the racial/ethnic advantage measured by the CEO's statistical analysis, and its persistence over the years, constitute powerful evidence of intentional discrimination. The magnitude of the odds ratios, and of the probability ratios, is mind-boggling. If such facts were reversed, they would create a sensation. The public would demand to know why its state university was handing White and Asian applicants a huge advantage over Blacks and Hispanics with the same academic skills. The University of Michigan is the source of the data, but of course not of the analysis. If the analysis spurs a cogent rebuttal by the school, it will find a place in these pages. Curtis Crawford]


Racial and Ethnic Preferences in Undergraduate Admissions

Executive Summary

The University of Michigan awarded a very large degree of preference in undergraduate admissions to blacks over whites and Asians with the same credentials and background for every year analyzed (1999, 2003, 2004, and 2005).

In every year:
 •Black admittees had substantially lower SAT scores, ACT scores, and high school GPAs compared to Asians and whites.
 •The range of Hispanic admittees' test scores (SATs and ACTs) and high school GPAs fell between those for blacks and those for Asians and whites.
 •Asian admittees had higher median test scores (SATs and ACTs) compared to whites, but white admittees had higher high school GPAs.

In the most recent year (2005) for which data were provided, the median black admittee's SAT score was 1160, versus 1260 for Hispanics, 1350 for whites, and 1400 for Asians. High school GPAs were 3.4 for the median black, 3.6 for Hispanics, 3.8 for Asians, and 3.9 for whites.

In the years analyzed, UM rejected over 8,000 Hispanics, Asians, and whites who had higher SAT or ACT scores and GPAs than the median black admittee--including nearly 2,700 students in 2005, the most recent year, alone.

Based on logistic regression analyses, race and ethnicity are apparently more heavily weighted in admissions now than in 1999 (one of the years reviewed by the Supreme Court, which struck down the undergraduate admissions system as unconstitutional).

Odds ratios. As shown by odds ratios controlling for credentials and background, UM awarded a great deal of preference to black relative to white applicants for every year.
 •In 1999, 2003, and 2004, the odds were roughly 25 to 1 favoring blacks among students taking the SATs.
 •Using the ACTs, odds favoring black applicants were 48 to 1 in 1999, dropping to 29 to 1 in 2003, and 24 to 1 in 2004.
 •The odds favoring blacks increased significantly in 2005 regardless of what test one took. The black-to-white odds ratios were 70 to 1 using the SAT and 63 to 1 using the ACT. Thus, the most recent year analyzed showed the most severe discrimination.

Odds ratios showed that Hispanic applicants were also granted substantial preferences over whites, controlling for other factors, but the degree of preference was not as large. [2] The odds favoring Hispanics over whites were the highest in 2005, the most recent year analyzed - 46 to 1 with the SAT and 48 to 1 with the ACT.

Odds ratios also indicated that whites were favored over Asians, controlling for other factors and using the SATs, although the odds ratios were small. When using the ACTs, the white over Asian odds ratios were even smaller (2005) or not statistically significant (all other years).

Probabilities of admission. Converted into probabilities of admission, an in-state male candidate with no alumni connection, and with an SAT score and a GPA equal to the medians for black admittees for each year, would have significantly greater chances of admission if black or, to a lesser extent, if Hispanic compared to whites and Asians. The gap between blacks versus whites and Asians increases over time.

In 1999, the candidate would have the following probabilities:
 •a 28 percent chance of admission if black,
 • a 12 percent chance if Hispanic, and
 • a 1 percent chance if white or Asian.

The chances for admission if black or Hispanic rise steadily from 1999 to 2005. They remain basically the same if Asian or white. In 2005, a male Michigan resident with no parent ties to UM and with the same test scores and grades as the average black admittee would have the following chances of admission:
 •a 43 percent chance if black,
 • a 28 percent chance if Hispanic,
 •a 0 percent chance if Asian, and
 •a 1 percent chance if white.

For students with somewhat higher SAT scores and somewhat lower high school GPAs, the figures are perhaps even more dramatic. Blacks and Hispanics in 2005 with the same background described above but a 1240 SAT and 3.2 GPA had roughly a nine in ten chance of admissions (92 and 88 percent, respectively); Asians and whites with the same background and credentials, on the other hand, had only about a one in ten chance (10 and 14 percent, respectively).

Subsequent academic performance also displays gaps by race/ethnicity.

 •For every year, median cumulative GPAs for black and Hispanic students were significantly lower than those for Asians and whites.
 •Proportionately fewer blacks and Hispanics were in UM's honors program.
 •Proportionately more blacks and Hispanics were on academic probation at some point during their enrollment at UM. A greater percentage of Asians was on academic probation compared to whites.


Racial and Ethnic Preferences in the Law School

Executive Summary

The University of Michigan Law School awarded a very large degree of preference to blacks over whites and Asians with the same credentials and background for every year analyzed (1999, 2003, 2004, and 2005).

In every year:
 •Black admittees had lower LSAT scores and undergraduate GPAs than did the admittees of the other three ethnic groups.
 •The range of Hispanic admittees' LSAT scores and GPAs fell between those for blacks and those for Asians and whites.
 •Asian admittees' LSAT scores were roughly the same as their white counterparts, but their undergraduate GPAs were lower.

During the four years for which we received data, 4,415 Hispanic, Asian, and white students who earned higher undergraduate GPAs and scored higher on their LSATs than the median black admittee were nonetheless rejected.

Odds Ratios. Odds ratios favoring black over white candidates in admission--controlling for test scores, grades, Michigan residency, sex, and alumni connections--were very large.
 •In 1999, the odds favoring blacks over whites with the same background and credentials were 36 to 1.
 •While the black-white odds ratios were lower in subsequent years, they were still very high (18 to 1 in 2005).

The law school awarded much less preference to Hispanics over whites than to blacks. The odds ratios for all years are substantially smaller than those for blacks.
 •In 1999, odds favoring Hispanics over whites were almost 4 to 1.
 •They dropped in 2003 to 2 to 1, then rose to more than 3 to 1 in 2004 and 2005.

Odds ratios showed whites being somewhat favored over Asians with the same credentials and background for every year except 2005 (for which there was no statistically significant difference). [2]

Probabilities of Admission. These disparities can also be expressed in terms of probabilities of admission. The probabilities of admission in 1999 of an in-state male candidate, with no parents having attended the law school and with an LSAT score and a GPA equal to the black admittee median of that year, would be as follows:
 •79 percent chance of admission if black;
 •28 percent chance if Hispanic;
 •4 percent chance if Asian; and
 • 9 percent chance if white.

In 2005, the same candidate would have the following chances of admission:
 •68 percent if black;
 •28 percent if Hispanic;
 •8 percent if Asian; and
 • 10percent if white.


Racial and Ethnic Preferences in the Medical School

Executive Summary

The University of Michigan Medical School (UMMS) awarded a very large degree of preference to blacks over whites and Asians with the same credentials and background for every year analyzed (1999, 2003, 2004, and 2005).

In every year:
 •Black admittees had substantially lower MCAT scores and undergraduate science GPAs compared to other groups.
 •The range of Hispanic admittees' MCAT scores and grades fell between those for blacks and those for Asians and whites.
 •Asian admittees' MCAT scores were roughly the same as their white counterparts, but their science GPAs were slightly higher.

During the four years for which we received data, 11,647 Hispanic, Asian, and white students (or nearly 3000 students each year) who earned higher undergraduate science GPAs and scored higher on their MCATs than the median black admittee were nonetheless rejected.

Odds Ratios. Odds ratios favoring black over white candidates in admission--controlling for test scores, grades, Michigan residency, sex, and alumni connections--were very large. In 1999, the odds favoring blacks over whites with the same background and credentials were 38 to 1; they remained high (21 to 1) in 2005.

Odds favoring Hispanics over whites, all other things being equal, were large but significantly less so than the odds favoring blacks. In 1999, odds favoring Hispanics over whites were 3 to 1, increasing to more than 5 to 1 in 2005.

Odds of admission slightly favored whites over Asians with the same credentials and background for every year except 2004 (during which there was no difference).

Probabilities of Admission. Likewise, probabilities of admission favor blacks and to a lesser extent Hispanics over whites and Asians for every year. For instance, an in-state male candidate, with no parent connection to UMMS and with an MCAT score and science GPA equal to the medians for black admittees, in 1999 would have had the following probabilities of admission:

 •a 72 percent chance if black;
 •a 17 percent chance if Hispanic;
 •a 2 percent chance if Asian; and
 •a 6 percent chance if white.

Significant disparities between blacks and to a lesser extent Hispanics versus Asians and whites were found for 2003 and 2004, although the gaps were not as large as those in 1999.

In 2005, chances of admission for candidates with credentials of the average black admittee were greater for blacks than in 2004, while changing little for the other groups. The chance of admission for a male applicant from Michigan with no parent who attended UMMS and with the same test scores and science grades as the average black admittee in 2005:

 •rises to 23 percent if black;
 •drops to 7 percent if Hispanic; and
 •drops to 1 percent if Asian or white.

The disparities are perhaps even more dramatic as test scores and grades improve somewhat. In 2005, if a candidate had a total MCAT score of 41 and an undergraduate science GPA of 3.6, there was a three in four chance of admission if black, and a four in ten chance if Hispanic. If the candidate was white, the chances drop to roughly a one in ten chance, and if Asian, 6 percent. With a score of 43 and a science GPA of 3.8, chances rise to nine in ten if black and three in four if Hispanic, but only to one in three if white and one in five if Asian.

Gaps in USMLE Step 1 scores. This is a licensing exam taken after the first two years of medical school; gaps in performance here parallel racial/ethnic differences in entering qualifications. White and Asian median scores are substantially greater than the black scores at the 75th percentile.

* Ed note: the three CEO reports are available complete in pdf here.

Also available, on this website:
Racially Disparate Probabilities of Admission Computed from 1995 undergraduate admissions data provided by the University of Michigan to the Center for Equal Opportunity for its report, "Racial Preferences in Michigan Higher Education."

Racially Disparate Rates of Admission in the University of Michigan Law School. Compiled by Plaintiff's statistician, Dr. Kinley Larntz, in Grutter v. Bollinger, (Civil Action # 97-CV-75928-DT) U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, January 7, 2001.

 
Return to
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MICHIGAN DEBATES RACIAL PREFERENCE