In Saturday’s Washington Post, Michael Dobbs explored how approaches to diversity have… In Saturday’s Washington Post, Michael Dobbs explored how approaches to diversity have been affected by the Supreme Court’s ruling against the University of Michigan.

It’s a decision that is making things difficult for higher education, frustrating administrators nationwide. Worse yet, it violates the logic that applies all the way down to backyard sports – you can’t form rules in the middle of the game, especially when they favor the team that’s already dominating. That said, affirmative action’s opponents have made some reasonable – if not practical – points.

The changes they’ve inspired may make the system just a little bit sharper.

The argument against racial consideration in admissions is perfectly sensible on its surface, and it might be indisputable if everything were really as simple as black and white.

But whenever we approach this issue, we must remember that the United States spent a great deal of its history operating on a racial platform that we now reject. As a consequence of that platform, minority groups as a whole are left at a significant disadvantage. To brush history aside and discard race at this point amounts to little more than a lie.

To give a face to what I term “disadvantaged,” I would cite Jonathon Kozol’s “Savage Inequalities,” one of the few texts I’ve been assigned that is actually worth The University Book Center’s markup.

Kozol is a teacher-turned-author who analyzes discrepancies in American schools and illustrates why the college affirmative action issue begins before kids leave grade school. He examines a trend that is full of variations, but, in general, follows a set formula: white suburban communities have money, good schools, and opportunity, while minority communities and rural whites do not.

It’s a generalization we hear all the time, which makes it easy to disregard, but Kozol’s graphic descriptions make it undeniable. Predominantly white schools with cutting-edge technology and athletic facilities are contrasted with the aged, leaky, sometimes condemned buildings that many inner-city kids see every day.

When lawmakers decide that race must not be a consideration in admissions, it sounds like they are simply pulling for equality on both sides of the ball. But what they are really doing is assuming that all kids – regardless of race – have started from the same point with the same opportunity. If that were true, there would be no issue. But it isn’t true, and that leaves college administrators torn between law and conscience. In response, they simply try to find another way to do it.

In August, Michigan announced that it would scrap the point system – in which students could earn 20 of the 150 possible points simply by being a minority – in favor of a more personal, comprehensive plan.

In an Aug. 29 article, Post writer Robert Pierre described it: “Prospective students will be asked about their backgrounds and personal achievement and assigned to write essays about how they might fit in at a university where economic and racial diversity are a priority. Unlike the old system, the new one does not assign points based on race, though officials said they remain committed to recruiting a diverse student body.”

Michigan’s attitude on this issue is widely reflected by other institutions. Dobbs draws mostly from Amherst College in Massachusetts, but also makes reference to Boston University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton University and Carnegie Mellon University.

For them, a commitment to a diverse student body is a commitment to give minority applicants extra attention.

Critics will continue to call it unequal, an accusation that looks a little ridiculous in the grand scheme of things. While the affirmative action system will no longer exist as it has in the past, it will continue in more careful, less blatant ways, and so it should.

The new system will cost more and still not completely escape criticism, but it’s an intensive, necessary part of the push for equality. Aside from closer attention to ethnicity, many of the revamped admissions departments will also consider economic disparity, balancing any slant that may have existed between poor whites and wealthy blacks.

While an ideal world would eliminate the need for racial consideration, our world still has problems to work out, and denying that race is a factor on the college campus is a good way to perpetuate one of them.

Eric Miller was one of 9,843 white, male students at Oakland Campus last fall, compared to 802 black, male students. Discuss the discrepancy at [email protected].