The enrollment controversy*
Worries that efforts in the U.S. to limit enrollment of Asian students in top universities may migrate to Canada
The upshot is that race is defining Canadian university campuses in a way it did not 25 years ago. Diversity has enriched these schools, but it has also put them at risk of being increasingly fractured along ethnic lines. It’s a superficial form of multiculturalism that is expressed in the main through segregated, self-selecting, discrete communities. It would behoove the leadership of our universities to recognize these issues and take them seriously. And yet, that’s exactly what’s not happening. Indeed, discussions with Canada’s top university presidents reveal for the most part that they are in a state of denial.
“This is a non-issue,” wrote U of T president David Naylor in an email. “We’ve never had a student complain about this. In fact, this is a false stereotype, as we know that Asian students are fully engaged in extracurricular activities. So the whole concept is false.”
As Cheryl Misak, the U of T’s VP and provost, puts it: “We have a properly diverse mix, with no particular group extra prominent—we’re the rainbow nation and we’ve got every sort of student and everyone is on merit.” Waterloo president Feridun Hamdullahpur echoes a similar sentiment. “There is a great tendency in our society to learn more about other nations and other cultures,” he says. “Universities are the hotbed of these kind of activities. If you want to see more economic and political diversity, I think they star.”
These positions arguably represent a missed opportunity. Universities have the potential of establishing real cultural change. It makes sense that the head of the Canadian university with perhaps the highest number of Asian students is the most candid and the most concerned. Indeed, Stephen Toope has, since his arrival in 2006 as UBC president, made the issue central to his agenda—including outreach and newspaper op-ed pieces touting the importance of making the university campus a meeting place not only of diversity but also of dialogue.
Among Canadian universities, UBC is one of the few institutions that publishes the ethnic makeup of its student body. Toope says that the university’s Asian student population is not “widely out of whack with the community,” although the stats tell a slightly different story. According to a 2009 UBC report on direct undergraduate entrants, 43 per cent of its students self-identify as ethnically Chinese, Korean or Japanese, as compared to 38 per cent who self-identify as white. Although Vancouver is a richly diverse city, according to data from the 2006 census, just 21.5 per cent of its residents identify as a Chinese, Korean or Japanese visible minority.
Toope says drawing the various communities present on Canadian campuses into a common medium can be challenging. “Across Canada it isn’t always the case that you’re seeing as much engagement from the new communities as perhaps we should,” he says. Toope uses the experience of Turkish immigrants in Germany as a cautionary tale—“there are groups that never find a way to participate in the broader community.” Such circumstances persist precisely because the issue of race is not attacked head on. “I don’t want to pretend that just because you have people from different backgrounds they’re going to interact—they’re not,” Toope says. “We have to actually create mechanisms, programs and opportunities for people to interact. A university is one of the places that has the greatest capacity to work through demographic change.”
Toope points us in the right direction. It’s unfair to change the meritocratic entry system, so all universities can do—all they should do—is encourage groups to mingle. Though it’s true that universities—U of T and Waterloo included—do have diversity programs and policies for students, newer, fresher ways are needed to help pry the ethnic ghettos open so everyone hangs out together. Or at least they have the chance to. The white kids may not find it’s too Asian after all. Alexandra, who chose to go to Western for the party scene, found she “hated being away from home” and moved back to Toronto. In retrospect, she didn’t like the vibe. “Some people just want to drink 23 hours a day.” Alexandra says she still has friends at Western who live in an “all-blond house” and are “stick thin.” Rachel, Alexandra’s friend, says Western suits them—“they work hard, get good grades, then slap on their clubbing clothes.” But it didn’t suit Alexandra. She now studies at U of T.
Maybe the one that wrote this article is one of those failures that went to university for sex and beer. Failed out of school and couldn’t help but blame those who work hard.
Am I not reading it right or this artical is just full of confusion? White students go to other universities but U of T is because of there are way too many Asian students there. And yet you tell another story about Asian students tend to hangout with their own ethic group and not wanting to participate in other activities.
Unless you’re telling me that White kids are eager to make friends with Asian kids and they can’t do so because they only hangout with other Asian kids so they chose other universities but U of T otherwise I don’t understand you.
People just don’t like to see Asians everywhere, period. I bet you won’t find a article named “Too White?” about majority kids in a university are white and people don’t want to go there just because of it.
I definitely believe this article is making a mountain out of a molehill. If we have skilled academics immigrating to from Asia to Canada that is a GOOD thing. Who can complain about getting more skilled workers? Especially with the aging baby-boomers increasingly relying on social services.
This article I think is kinda missing the larger issue here. The larger issue is that we have too many people going to universities in Canada. There are many people that go to university who, quite frankly, do not belong in that environment and end up dropping out and losing a fortune in tuition fees. This is because in the last few decades universities have shifted from becoming the standard of education for theoretical, abstract and clinical professions to the standard for ALL professions. Right now virtually all mid to high income jobs want applicants to have a Bachelor degree at least. The problem is that universities are theoretical institutions and their primary purpose IS NOT teaching you applied that directly translates into a job. They are not meant to prepare you for working life, unless you plan on working in academics or going on to graduate programs like med school or law school that lead to a single well defined career (even then you will have to spend several years after school working as a resident at a hospital or a law clerk.) Look back in time 30 or 40 years and you can see that this was not the case. I am not saying that back then a university education was not useful when applying for certain jobs, but as many of the older people reading this will know, a university degree was not the be all and end all for all jobs that were not in the skilled trades the way they are now, and a college diploma went a lot further and in some cases was even preferred to a degree. (by the way people in the skilled trades can make huge amounts of money, so if you are reading this and in high school don’t over look them, I know a plumber who drives an Audi.) The more applied areas of the workforce are suffering as a result of this, because they are getting university students who have all sorts of theoretical knowledge which is useless in their profession, but none of the necessary practical knowledge. Case in point my mother just had to fire an employee in the IT sales sector who was fresh from getting his Phd, because he had no idea what he was doing, and had no prcatical knowledge of how to sell his product to other companies.
As too the Asian enrollment trend, I do not know why everyone is making such a big deal about it. I am a white, male who is in 2nd year life sciences at uoft I personally find that uoft (at least the downtown campus) is one of the most culturally and racially diverse schools I have ever seen, and I personally have seen absolutely no racial tension, I have white friend, black friends asian friends, it really makes no difference. I am not saying that there is or is not a disproportionate amount of asian students, but there are plenty of other university enrollment trends out there that no one seems to be panicking about (eg. 66% of university students are female) and I am not saying anyone should be panicking about them (I personally like the high proportion of women on campus-for obvious reasons.) but I do find it odd that this one has created such a stir.
Also you do not have to spend every waking hour studying to get into a top tier university like uoft. Many of their average acceptance grades range from a mid to high seventy to a low eighty and frankly if the work required to get that kind of grade is too stressful on your social life, perhaps university is not right for you. Remember top tier universities are referred to as top tier for a reason, and it is not because they admit people who just want to party.
By the way if you have any more detailed info on the above issues, particularly the changing role of universities please post it, because all the information I have posted is from my own experiences and I know of little hard data on the issue.
I have had the experience of observing an interesting phenomenon during my undergraduate degree in Computer Science and Engineering. What I noticed is that, while the Asians and Indians remained in the program after the “difficult” courses, the Caucasians had to switch to a much easier curriculum (Business, etc..). And thus …. I am calling this interesting phenomenon “white-out”!!
Example:
Alexandra: “Hey Rachel, how did you do in the engineering course?”
Rachel: “Oh I dropped out. Don’t you know, it’s a “white-out” class!
** And if you think generalizing a group to the drop-outs is racist, this is no different than generalizing all asians as being competent students.
University entrance is purely based on academic merit, and perhaps this can be tweaked. For the hard sciences (especially math, computers, engineering, physics, and chemistry)you do want to foster academic excellence to produce the next unidimensional brainiac like Bill Gates or Stephen Hawking. Who cares that these guys didn’t party all the time when they were in undergrad; they produced good work subsequently and broke new ground.
On the other hand, we have to produce the more generalized productive university grad. To me, this is the person who finished university, made friends, partied, played intramural sports, joined clubs or got involved in a non-academic aspect. To do this, perhaps a series of short 200 word responses to questions will give the university the ability to parse through their applicants. The obvious downside to this is the mountain of work it’ll create.
Medical schools have moved away from the heavily academic weighting of their entrance requirements, and have shifted to a more global requirement. What good is a technically smart physician who can’t communicate and connect with patients?
Doing well only academically doesn’t really help a graduate in the real world of interpersonal interaction, problem solving, etc.
So perhaps the crux of the problem is: What kind of graduate do universities want? A bunch of lab rats with no social skills? Or a more well rounded global citizen with a broad perspective of the social landscape of work life and everyday life?
Nice, Macleans, you’ve attempted to undo the past by changing the article’s title not once but twice. Stalin would have been proud.