A current lawsuit over affirmative action policies at the University of Michigan is bearing witness to a novel defense on the part of the University -- the result of which will likely set an important precedent on race-based admissions throughout the country.
The case, currently being heard in the U.S. District Court in Detroit, was filed in 1997 by two white students who were denied admission to Michigan. They claim the school's policy discriminated against them on the basis of their race. A verdict is expected this summer.
What separates Michigan's legal battle from others heard in California and Texas is the University's emphasis on the academic benefits of a diverse learning environment.
Most schools have defended their race-based preferences by claiming to be compensating for past societal discrimination, but Michigan is arguing that using affirmative action to achieve a diverse student body produces distinct academic benefits.
Because of the segregation and separation along racial lines in America, the University argues, there is a "compelling governmental interest" which justifies the consideration of race and ethnicity in the admission system.
According to Dean of Admission and Financial Aid Karl Furstenberg, Dartmouth College would probably not be affected by the outcome of the Michigan case.
Furstenberg explained that Dartmouth, unlike Michigan, does not look at race as a category in the admissions process, but rather as a factor in the candidate's overall profile.
"Dartmouth is a strong supporter of affirmative action, and we're pretty up front about it. But it's not a formulaic approach like at Michigan," Furstenberg said.
He added that much of Dartmouth's affirmative action takes place in the recruiting process.
"If you're effective in developing a large and diverse pool, then a lot of the other issues recede," he said. "Once we have the actual applications, we review each application individually."
Also different at Dartmouth is its evaluation of a student's race. While the Dartmouth application requests applicants to declare their race, the admission officers "almost never" look at that part of the application, according to Furstenberg.
"Racial involvement and potential involvement in the community is taken into account, and it's a significant factor because race informs a lot about the person's experience and where they come from," he said. "But it's not a 'plus factor' per se."
When the two plaintiffs applied to Michigan, the admission form required each applicant to disclose his or her race. As is the policy of the University, applicants from different racial groups were considered in separate pools.
If the U.S. District Court in Detroit rules in favor of the plaintiffs, the University would have to eliminate race-based admission preferences.
However, if the University is successful in its argument, federal district courts throughout the country will have made conflicting rulings on the same issue, and with different laws in place in different regions of the country, it is likely that the Supreme Court would hear an affirmative action case and establish a definitive admissions policy.
To buffer its case, the University is pointing to a national study conducted by a member of its faculty, professor of psychology Patricia Gurin.
Gurin concludes that minority and non-minority students alike learn more when their learning is facilitated in an environment of diverse student backgrounds.
According to Gurin, students who experience the most racial and ethnic diversity in classrooms and during informal interactions demonstrate better scores on a test used to measure complex thinking, greater self-confidence and engagement, and the highest level of interest in graduate degrees.
In addition, the Gurin study says, these students are more likely to have interaction with people of other races later in their lives.
The lawsuit, and subsequent debate, has divided the Ann Arbor campus between supporters and detractors of race-based admissions.
According to a poll conducted last year by The Michigan Daily student newspaper, opinion is divided roughly in half between those who support the University's admissions policy preference and those who oppose it.
To help generate a campus-wide dialogue, students, faculty and administrators have been sponsoring seminars, lectures, protests, academic courses and films to debate the value of the school's affirmative action policy.
This pro-active atmosphere, said Emily Ahonen, a junior at the University, has had a beneficial impact.
"People are getting less frightened that they're getting unfair treatment the more they learn about the way the admission policy actually works," she explained.
Ahonen said, though, that the lawsuit has sometimes had a divisive effect.
"There certainly are militant people on either side of the issue," she said.
Ahonen also noted that, perhaps similar to many other campuses -- there is a de facto racial polarization on campus.
"There definitely is grouping together of people of different races and ethnicities," she said. "But it's not as if people aren't going to mix."
Tom Weisskopf, who is both an administrator and a faculty member at the University, noted another consequence the lawsuit has had.
"The University administration is very committed to affirmative action, and they're almost in a sense welcoming the challenge," he continued. "They're investing a lot of time, money, and energy in the case ... they are willing to do whatever they can to prevail. They rightly see the University of Michigan as playing a leading national role."
At the faculty level, too, the issue is being debated heatedly. Weisskopf is an organizer for Faculty for Affirmative Action, a group that seeks to support affirmative action programs. The group generated the signatures of over 700 faculty members, a little over half of the teaching body.
Karl Cohen, a professor of philosophy, is an example of a faculty member who disagrees with the University's case.
"The matter is being discussed in a very thoughtful and respectful way. Though they don't like my view, I don't feel any hostility on the part of the administration, he said. "We all prize the diversity on the campus, the question is whether we are willing to use racial preferences to achieve that."
The current president of Michigan is Lee Bollinger, who served as provost of Dartmouth until he left for Ann Arbor in 1997.
