PRINCETON, NJ -- The National Association of Scholars released a detailed study on April
4, 2001 titled Is Campus Racial Diversity Correlated with Educational
Benefits? The NAS study proves that the University of Michigan has
misrepresented critical research findings in order to defend its racially discriminatory
The University of Michigan is attempting to defend race-based student admissions -- racial
quotas -- in Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger, two high-profile cases
challenging the constitutionality of racial preferences in public university
admissions. The University contends that its database shows a positive connection
between a racially diverse student body and positive educational outcomes. In fact,
as the National Association of Scholars' study reveals, the higher education database
Michigan used actually demonstrates the contrary -- there is no connection between
campus racial diversity and the supposed educational benefits.
"The University's analysis is simply based on a sleight of hand," said Thomas
Wood, coauthor of the NAS report. "Unable to show a connection between the
racial diversity of a student body and alleged educational benefits, the University
resorts to a methodological confusion, arguing first that racial diversity is positively
related to four intermediate "campus experience variables" (i.e., enrollment in
ethnic studies courses, attendance at a racial/intercultural workshop, discussion of
racial issues, and interracial socialization) and, next, that these are in turn, (though
rather weakly and inconsistently), related to the claimed educational benefits."
"The University falsely concludes from this that a positive relationship has been
established between racial diversity and supposedly beneficial educational outcomes,"
said Mr. Wood, "but because the Cooperative Institutional Research Program database
(CIRP) on which the University relies took account of the four intermediate variables and
still found no relationship between racial diversity and educational outcomes, the
inference is patently false, as the University and its spokesmen should know."
"It is unfortunate," said Malcolm Sherman, Professor of Mathematics at the State
University of New York/Albany and the report's other author, "that a world-class
university like the University of Michigan would twist data that refute its own claims
about the educational value of diversity."
Among the other points made in the NAS study are:
The failure of the CIRP database
to be made available to critics of racial preferences and quotas
The trivial nature of the
correlations Gurin does report, and...
The inadequacy of her measures of
NAS President Stephen H. Balch observed that "the consequence of this issue for
America's future is so great that anything short of a fully candid treatment of the
relevant facts is a profound disservice to the public interest. Our report clarifies the
terms of debate."
This National Association of Scholars' study enlarges on the methodological critique of
the University of Michigan's case first made in the brief filed by the NAS in July 2000 in
Gratz v. Bollinger.
NAS Refutation of University of
Michigan Diversity Theory (Is Campus Racial Diversity Correlated with Educational
Download The Full CAS/NAS Diversity
Report (in PDF format)
Download The CAS/NAS Executive Summary
(in PDF format)
For Further Info:
Contact Stephen H.
Balch, President, National Association of Scholars at:
The National Association of
221 Witherspoon Street, Second Floor
Princeton, NJ 08542-3215
Phone: (609) 683-7878
Fax: (609) 683-0316
The National Association of Scholars is America's foremost higher education reform group.
Located in Princeton, it has forty-five state affiliates and more than four thousand
professors, graduate students, college and university administrators and trustees as
improve education. Not even a little bit. (04/04/01)
National Review: "The recent split decision on the University of Michigan's
race-based admissions - one judge allowed them for undergraduates, another barred them for
the law school - is another example of racial preferences standing on their last leg. And
today the National Association of Scholars gave it a good, hard kick to the shin.
"There appears to be a single argument for racial preferences in admissions that the
courts will now consider: The argument that a diverse student body improves education for
all students because it is diverse.
"Except that the evidence isn't at all solid."
The National Association of Scholars (NAS) analyzed the same data that Michigan
used. Thomas E. Wood, director of the California Association of Scholars, and
SUNY-Albany statistician Malcolm J. Sherman revealed how Michigan selectively ignored
information devastating to their "diversity" cause. Wood and Sherman get right
to the point in describing what Michigan did:
"It is quite possible that the University of
Michigan has been deliberately misrepresenting the data. The alternative hypothesis, of
course, is that the University's own researchers are misrepresenting the data out of
simple methodological confusion and error. Neither hypothesis does credit to the
"Wood and Sherman conclude that there is no correlation between racial diversity and
(Based on the 04/04/01 National Review article by
John J. Miller & Ramesh Ponnuru)
[Last known link: http://www.nationalreview.com/daily/nrprint040401.html]
END: Forced Diversity Has NO Educational