Staff Editorial: Admissions changes positive

This week, the School of Medicine announced it will change its admissions policy to conform to a June ruling by the United States Supreme Court in Gratz v. Bollinger, which struck down admission policies that specifically quantified race. Duke had previoulsy used a points system in the initial stage of admissions that gave additional points to minority and economically-disadvantaged applicants.

The ruling in Gratz v. Bollinger outlawed admissions policies such as points systems that attached a numerical value to race. However, the Supreme Court stressed that race, and more importantly diversity, should be an important factor in shaping incoming college classes. Currently, it seems that the medical school was the only area of the University whose application process was at odds with the decision. Medical school officials proceeded to remove the slight advantage given to minority applicants or to applicants who demonstrate economic hardship. The initial screening process will still make use of a numerical template to evaluate each applicant's qualifications. Although economic status and race will have a smaller role in the initial stages of admission, admissions officials should take heed of the entirety of the Supreme Court's decision, and continue to admit a diverse array of students. Diversity inside and outside of the classroom is integral to any university because it enhances the educational experience.

As a private institution, Duke is not obligated to tailor its admissions policies to adhere to the Bollinger decision, which ruled only on such policies at tax-supported public institutions. Nonetheless, we feel that Duke should strive to shape its policies in accordance with constitutional standards resulting from the decision. Although the University is not entirely publically funded, there is no logical reason for it to be excluded from abiding by the principles of equality upon which the country was founded. One could make the argument that since Duke receives large amounts of money from the federal government in the form of financial aid, that it should be subject to more or less the same restrictions as public institutions. While this argument would not necessarily be accepted in the courts, we feel that it has merit nonetheless.

Duke, like the University of Michigan, has a primary responsibility to educate America's future generation in order to better our society. It is only natural that the two should be held to a similar standard, regardless of the major funding source.