Pierpont helped struggling ICC
I was saddened to read of Wilbur K. Pierponts death in the Jan. 25 issue of the Ann Arbor News. During my 34 years as the executive secretary of the nonprofit Inter-Cooperative Council (ICC) at the University of Michigan, I found him very sympathetic to the councils goal to provide low-cost room and board to needy students. In the early 60s, in his position as vice president and chief financial officer of the U-M, Dr. Pierpont was supportive of the ICCs purchase of land on North Campus to construct the North Campus Cooperatives to house and feed 200 students. He influenced U-M officials to approve the project. He helped convince Washington, D.C., Housing and Urban Development to provide the $2 million loan from the College Housing Program.
On another occasion, unbeknownst to me, the U-M Student Government Council (SGC) became concerned that the ICC didnt deserve free space in the Michigan Union. They sent the Student Government Council president to visit Dr. Pierpont to ask that we be evicted because we owned about 15 houses in Ann Arbor and had a large yearly income from rentals. Several years later I was surprised when the same SGC president came to my office and confessed what he had done, saying that he concluded from his visit to Dr. Pierpont that the ICC was untouchable. He said that in response to his request to move the ICC from the Michigan Union, Wilbur K. Pierpont had firmly replied, Young man, the Inter-Cooperative Council is the only student organization that gives a hang about helping poor students!
Three years ago, much to my disappointment, the ICC was asked to vacate their third-floor office space at the Michigan Union. In the next breath, I must express the ICCs deep gratitude to the U-M for helping the struggling ICC to launch a successful nonprofit student cooperative housing program at the University of Michigan by providing us with free office space for over 45 years.
Luther Buchele, ICC executive secretary emeritus
Stereotype threat a reason not to consider race in admissions
Steele and Aronson (1995) found that the performance of African American students on test items was adversely affected when they were asked about their ethnicity. In her recent Rackham presentation on race relations (Schools must continue to use race as admissions factor, speakers say, Record, Jan. 31), Prof. Shana Levin relied upon this notion of stereotype threat to conclude (as correctly reported in the Record) that when African American students are tested in an environment in which they think their race is not an issue, they do far better on the same test than if they think their race is taken into account.
This claim is contested by Stricker (1998) whose more extended inquiry yielded the clear and consistent finding that there was a general absence of effects, negative or positive, of inquiring about ethnicity and sex.
But suppose that Stricker is wrong and that Prof. Levin, relying upon Steele and Aronson, is proved right in the end. One inference strongly suggested by such results is that race-conscious admissions programs, like those adopted by our University, tend to promote precisely what Steele and Aronson feared: performance disrupted by students concerns about fulfilling negative stereotypes. Stereotype threat, if it is a concept to be taken seriously, gives good reason not to take race into account.
Carl Cohen, professor of philosophy