|
By Cynthia Annett | January 26, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
Of course KU isn't vulnerable to lawsuits like the ones against the
University of Michigan. But that's hardly something to commemorate.
KU
won't be accused of practicing affirmative action to increase the
number of minority students, because KU doesn't practice affirmative
action and hasn't increased the number of minority students. In 1984,
the year in which most current KU freshmen were born, KU had a student
population that was 81.6 percent white. In 2002, KU's student
population was 81.6 percent white. No change in 18 years.
Affirmative
action is about "action." You have to actually do something to stop
discrimination and take into account the discrimination many children
face throughout their educations. But the U.S. Department of Labor has
at least twice faulted KU for not adequately practicing legal,
federally mandated affirmative action and for "underutilizing"
minorities in its work force.
When Robert Hemenway took over, he took
action to dismantle the programs designed to create a more egalitarian
campus. As a result, KU doesn't even have an office of affirmative
action anymore.
Yes, KU dodged potential "reverse" discrimination
lawsuits. Instead, KU has faced more than 40 "real" discrimination
lawsuits. Instead, the number of African-American students at KU
decreased from 798 in 1984 to 717 in 2002. Both of these conditions are
exactly the opposite results of what would happen if affirmative action
were no longer necessary.
Unlike KU, the University of Michigan has a
right to be proud to be a standard-bearer in the battle for adequate
remedial or "affirmative" action.
|
Originally published by the Lawrence Journal-World.
|
|
|
