Opinion

JENNIFER CALFAS

EDITOR IN CHIEF

AARICA MARSH 

and DEREK WOLFE 

EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS

LEV FACHER

MANAGING EDITOR

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at 

the University of Michigan since 1890.

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s editorial board. 

All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 —Tuesday, January 13, 2015

T

welve years ago, “student 
ghetto” meant Greenwood 
Avenue 
— 
the 
one-way 

street 
home 
to 

hanging sneakers 
and the Ann Arbor 
Police 
Depart-

ment’s 
favorite 

block party. Even 
former 
Mayor 

John 
Hieftje 

agreed with the 
label, telling the 
Daily 
in 
2003, 

“That’s what it’s 
called, 
and 
it’s 

part of being in a 
university town.”

More than a decade later, Hief-

tje still sees symptoms of a student 
ghetto at Greenwood, but recently 
shifting real estate trends could 
change this. What were previously 
student neighborhoods, Hieftje told 
me, are beginning to see families 
and non-students move in. In Ann 
Arbor, the term “student ghetto” 
may only last as long it takes to build 
a luxury high rise.

In the last decade, the area sur-

rounding Central Campus has seen 
a development boom, as lofts like 
Zaragon, Landmark and Varsity 
have elbowed their way into the Ann 
Arbor skyline. Ann Arbor Blu, cur-
rently a hole in the ground next to 
Pizza House, should be finished and 
open for business in the fall of 2015. 
Given the increasingly wealthy 
makeup of Michigan’s student body, 
it’s hard to see the number of lofts 
staying stagnant for long, especially 
as the University continues to reno-
vate dorms potentially, creating 
short-term housing shortages.

Many residents of Ann Arbor, 

including less wealthy students, 
supported the development of these 
monstrous 
apartment 
buildings, 

largely in the hopes of lowering rent 
costs. For non-student residents, 
this hope may soon be realized.

As wealthier students move into 

high rises, landlords owning mod-
erately expensive housing shift 

their focus from the remaining stu-
dent renters (who would require 
reduced prices) to new families or 
young professionals. These non-stu-
dents can afford rent close to cam-
pus, which is lower than a house 
or an apartment near Main Street. 
As these neighborhoods become 
increasingly non-student, value-
lowering factors like trash, noise 
and poor maintenance will peter 
out, raising overall prices.

For now, low-income students 

can still afford a limited amount 
of housing near campus, often by 
splitting rooms, packing houses, or 
accepting shoddy living conditions. 
If the above prediction plays out, it 
will limit options for low-income 
students even more, pushing them 
as far away from campus as Ypsi-
lanti (from where some low-income 
and otherwise frugal University 
students are already commuting).

In the big picture, these trends 

are troubling for several reasons. 
One issue that has already begun to 
play out is greater campus segrega-
tion and polarization. For poorer 
students, this means living only 
near other low-income students 
while being forced to commute to 
campus by car or bus. Conversely, 
lofts like Landmark concentrate 
large numbers of wealthy students 
all in one place, while their close 
proximity to campus means that 
residents rarely leave their comfort 
zone for much of anything.

This residential polarization also 

has snowball-like political conse-
quences. According to Ann Arbor’s 
City Charter, City Council wards 
are to be drawn like slices of a pie, 
with the pieces converging near the 
center of the city, i.e., the center of 
campus. This layout divides the stu-
dent vote across each ward, mean-
ing no single district is likely to elect 
a student or a candidate focused on 
student issues. With heavier con-
centration in the city center, this 
problem may only become worse.

Rather than a diabolical ger-

rymandering scheme (my original 

theory), Kestenbaum believes the 
city wanted to avoid creating one 
ward with only a few likely voters. 
According to Kestenbaum, who is 
also an attorney and history blog-
ger, the layout of the city wards 
was decided before the voting age 
was reduced to 18, meaning most 
students couldn’t vote anyway. The 
fear, Kestenbaum explained, is of 
a ward with so little voting activ-
ity that its elections could be easily 
manipulated.

Given the current boundaries of 

City Council wards, the student vote 
is set up to be watered down for any 
City Council election. If wealthy 
students continue to crowd even 
closer around the center of the city 
while poorer students are forced 
into the outskirts or out of the city 
completely, the student voice may 
suffer even more, especially for 
those who need it the most. And as 
student voices dissipate, city gov-
ernment will have fewer and fewer 
incentives to craft policy favorable 
to both students and non-students.

Many of the necessary pieces for 

the above scenario are already in 
place. For future low-income stu-
dents, their time on campus does 
not look particularly promising 
— and let’s not forget that the only 
important City Council elections in 
Ann Arbor, the Democratic prima-
ries, are held in August, when most 
students are gone.

However, there is one glimmer of 

hope: general elections, which are 
held in November, include ballot 
proposals. Hieftje noted that many 
candidates won office running on 
hugely popular issues in the 1970s 
thanks to students. What kind of 
issues galvanized the student vote 
forty years ago? According to Hief-
tje, it was decriminalizing marijua-
na possession to a $5 (now $25) fine.

The student ghetto may soon be a 

thing of the past, but in Ann Arbor, 
some things may never change.

 — James Brennan can be 

reached at jmbthree@umich.edu.

Gentrifying the student ghetto

Edvinas Berzanskis, Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Devin Eggert, David Harris, 

Rachel John, Jordyn Kay, Aarica Marsh, Victoria Noble, Michael Paul, Allison 

Raeck, Melissa Scholke, Michael Schramm, Matthew Seligman, Mary Kate Winn, 

Jenny Wang, Derek Wolfe

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

I

t was a new semester. New 
professors and new classmates 
and new subjects and greater 

enlightenment 
waited 
ahead. 

I filed into my 
500-person 
lec-

ture early, eager 
to 
make 
new 

friends as the term 
started anew, and 
anxious to pro-
ceed through the 
course with a new 
study buddy.

Luckily, 
a 

plain-looking guy 
plopped this bags next to mine, and 
we easily struck up a conversation. 
He was amiable, eloquent in speech 
and seemingly open-minded. We 
were all Michigan liberals in a Race 
and Ethnicity requirement class that 
heightened a sense of progressivism 
inside us all.

He started by asking about the 

classes I was taking — standard. 
I was taking blah, blah, blah and 
Working Women’s Class Literature 
— the one class that stuck out to him.

“Oh, so you’re a feminist,” he sud-

denly chuckled — scoffed.

Confused, I rebutted with waver-

ing confidence, “Yeah … Yes. I am.”

I probed further. “Is that bad?” 
 

I asked.

“Well, I guess not. But you’re 

a feminist. You’re one of those,” 
he answered, as if the title was 
 

a disease.

Reflecting 
in 
retrospect, 
he 

turned what is, at the core, sim-
ply the support of gender equality 
into a pejorative concept that the 
media often portrays negatively. 
His understanding of feminism 
was based on the rants of Tumblr 
extremists, the angry Facebook 
posts of his “feminist friends” 
and radical perspectives brought 
to light by the news. Feminism to 
him only had one degree: extreme. 
It equated to a hatred of men and 
a disavowal of anyone who dis-
agreed. Feminism has now become 
a concept people love to hate — an 
idea stigmatized by people’s igno-
rance on the subject.

As shocked as I was by his lack 

of understanding, I realize that as 

a feminist, labeling or condemning 
people for being “dumb” or despi-
cable is neither a solution to the 
problem nor a way to demonstrate 
my support for feminism. That day 
in lecture, I could have berated him 
for his gross misconceptions, and 
then indoctrinated him with what 
I believe to be correct. However, I 
most likely wouldn’t have inspired 
him to change his outlook by belit-
tling his intelligence. In his eyes, I 
probably would’ve exemplified the 
exact social-media radical feminist 
that he envisions.

Rather, it is important to under-

stand that some people are simply 
misled about the subject of feminism. 
Thus, where better to implement 
this education than in college? It is 
becoming increasingly necessary for 
universities — namely, Michigan — 
 

to have a gender studies requirement 
as part of the core distribution.

Historically, racial progress has 

typically come before progress of 
gender equality. Most prominently, 
African-American men were ini-
tially granted the right to vote in 
1865, about 55 years before the 19th 
Amendment was ratified. This is not 
to overshadow the significance of 
any civil rights advancement. How-
ever, in similar fashion to the prec-
edent history has set, it seems like 
an appropriate progression to extend 
the University’s Race and Ethnic-
ity requirement to a Gender Studies 
course as well.

The University currently requires 

every student to take at least one 
Race and Ethnicity course for a min-
imum of three credits. As the LSA 
page explains, an approved Race 
and Ethnicity requirement discusses 
“the meaning of race, ethnicity, and 
racism; racial and ethnic intolerance 
and resulting inequality as it occurs 
in the United States or elsewhere; 
(and) comparisons of discrimination 
based on race, ethnicity, religion, 
social class, or gender.”

Even though the University’s 

Curriculum Committee requires 
courses to be re-certified as a Race 
and Ethnicity requirement every 
five years, there is a reason these 
courses are labeled as they are, 
where discussion of gender study 
is limited. Though many Race and 

Ethnicity requirement classes do 
sometimes address feminism, stu-
dents can only be provided with a 
fractional understanding — super-
ficially 
glazing 
over 
women’s 
 

rights 
and 
skimming 
over 
 

transgender issues.

Just as with accepting racial and 

ethnic equality, gender equality 
is not — or should not be — a revo-
lutionary concept. Especially at a 
college that prides itself on its diver-
sity, we must reflect that through 
our academic courses. As students, 
we learn about the oppression, the 
history and the gradual improve-
ment of different cultures in our 
country. Yet we often overlook the 
struggles of half of our population. 
Essentially, discrimination to differ-
ent ethnicities feels different from 
oppression of different sexes. Every 
identity feels social struggle and 
social advancement differently.

Our society is becoming increas-

ingly aware of feminist issues, 
especially with recent campaigns 
promoting female equality, such 
as the United Nations He for She 
and the White House’s It’s On Us 
this past September. We are college 
students with malleable mindsets 
before the real world hardens us; 
we are young adults at the peak of 
fighting for what we are passionate 
about. It is the prime opportunity to 
teach us about injustices, inequali-
ties — or simply, diversity — in the 
world so we have the opportunity to 
ameliorate them in our lifetime.

Even as students at a reputable 

college such as Michigan, there is 
still so much we do not understand. 
We represent some of the “leaders 
and best” in the nation, yet not all 
of us are equipped with a complete 
understanding of all facets of the 
society we will soon lead.

We are all uneducated about our 

own respective topics. We can’t all 
be radical feminists who will lead 
to the reform of the entire system 
of societal thinking. But we can at 
least equip students with the litera-
ture and tools to develop their own 
opinions, which hopefully will be for 
greater equality in our society.

— Karen Hua can be reached 

at khua@umich.edu.

KAREN 
HUA

Improving the pre-med curriculum 

The University offers over 75 majors and 

over 100 minors — and that’s just in its Col-
lege of Literature, Sciences, and the Arts. 
Ranging from majors in English and micro-
biology to minors in oceanography and eco-
nomics, the University has everything. Well, 
almost everything. While 40 LSA programs 
rank among the top 10 in their field, the Uni-
versity lacks a degree program that caters 
to its future doctors. Instead, the University 
encourages its future doctors to acquire a 
balanced and challenging liberal arts educa-
tion. The liberal arts education that lies at 
the core of the University’s LSA graduation 
requirements includes courses focused in the 
humanities, race and ethnicity, and quantita-
tive reasoning.

Students who aspire to become doctors 

must take courses toward a major, courses 
toward the distribution requirements and the 
medical school prerequisite courses. Many 
of the classes required to apply to medical 
school, such as introductory science courses, 
count merely as prerequisites toward LSA 
degree programs.

Being in LSA is awesome; I get to major 

in Spanish, while also completing minors in 
biochemistry and business through the Ste-
phen M. Ross School of Business. While I love 
the diversity of my education, the breadth of 
knowledge comes with vast requirements, 
forcing many premedical students to take 
courses during spring and/or summer terms. 
To better serve its pre-medical students, 
while also maintaining its integrity as a com-
prehensive liberal arts education, LSA should 
create a program designed for pre-medical 
students. Ideally, this program would allow 

the required courses needed to apply to medi-
cal school to count toward a degree. In this 
fashion, pre-medical students would be able 
to both learn everything they need to know 
to apply to medical school and take advantage 
of the wide variety of programs ranked so 
highly. Just as being a doctor requires more 
than just medical and scientific knowledge, 
so should being a pre-medical student. A 
well-rounded education would produce doc-
tors who are better able to connect with and 
holistically treat patients.

The course requirements for applying to 

medical school continue to increase for class-
es applying after 2016. New requirements, 
which are also tested on the new Medical Col-
lege Admission Test beginning in April 2015, 
include sociology, psychology and biochemis-
try, an extra 11 to 12 credits designed to cre-
ate future doctors with broad knowledge. The 
American Association of Medical Colleges, the 
governing body of medical schools and admis-
sion, has also created a list of 15 core compe-
tencies to evaluate potential doctors. Among 
these competencies are scientific inquiry, 
teamwork and social skills. As the landscape 
changes regarding what courses and experi-
ences medical school admissions committees 
desire and expect, so too should the under-
graduate education of the future doctors.

Pre-medical students at the University of 

Michigan look like elementary students con-
torting their bodies while playing a game 
of Twister. At times, the balancing act is 
impressive. At other times, students collapse 
to the floor.

Marc Schlessel is an LSA junior.

Expanding gender education 

MARC SCHLESSEL | VIEWPOINT

ARE YOU EXCITED TO HEAR THAT MITT ROMNEY IS LIKELY RUNNING FOR PRESI-

DENT IN 2016 AND NEED AN OUTLET TO TALK ABOUT IT? ARE YOU SO READY 

FOR HILLARY THAT STRANGERS SHOULD HEAR WHY?

 

Check out The Michigan Daily’s editorial board meetings. Every Monday and Wednesday 

at 6 p.m., the Daily’s opinion staff meets to discuss both University and national affairs 

and write editorials. Also, you might meet people who like Dick Cheney. But probably not. 

E-mail opinioneditors@michigandaily.com to join in the debate. 

FROM THE DAILY

T

he Michigan Department of Education announced on 
Jan. 7 that starting in spring 2016, the state will require 
high school juniors to take the SAT instead of the ACT, 

the state’s college-entrance test of choice since 2007. The College 
Board, a nonprofit organization that administers the SAT, and 
ACT, Inc. engaged in a competitive bidding process to decide 
which test would be administered to students. The College Board’s 
bid of $17.1 million over the course of three years was chosen 
over the ACT’s $32.5-million bid. While the shift could prove to 
be beneficial in saving the state money and creating uniformity 
throughout the education system, the suddenness of the change 
raises questions about the MDE’s motivations and potentially 
adverse effects.

According to the College Board, more than 

3.6 million students take the PSAT, the SAT 
preparatory exam, each year. Therefore, 
high schools administering the SAT ensure 
consistency of students’ learning trajectories. 
Most prominently, the change saves the 
state money, potentially allowing for more 
investment in resources — including teachers 
and curriculums — to continue to prepare 
students for the SAT. Similarly, Michigan 
high schools will retain one important aspect 
of the old system: the ACT’s WorkKeys 
exam, which holds a $12.2 million three-
year contract. The exams tests general job 
skills for all high school juniors, including 
assessments in applied mathematics, locating 
information and reading for information. 

According to University spokesperson Rick 

Fitzgerald, “the University has accepted both 
tests for many years, so this will not have a 
significant change.” While this change may 
not affect University applicants directly, 
several challenges could present themselves 
to high school students during the transition 
process between tests. Michigan’s short, 
three-year contract with the SAT could create 
future difficulties, as there’s no guarantee 
the state will not switch back to the ACT or 
another exam. These switches have potential 
detrimental effects for both schools’ and 
students’ test preparation prior to the exam.

The switch from the ACT to the SAT also 

presents challenges for long-term educational 
data collection in Michigan. It will be difficult 
to compare SAT exam scores, as the state 
collected data on the ACT for eight years. The 

decision was seemingly made for monetary 
reasons, without much input from students 
and educators. “They just pulled the rug out 
from under us, with absolutely no warning,” 
Michael Boulus, Executive Director of 
the Presidents Council, State Universities 
of Michigan, told the Detroit Free Press. 
“It’s very clear from the news release that 
this was done purely out of cost savings, 
with little concern for the students and the 
 

admissions 
process 
we’ve 
been 
using 

for years.”

Currently, 
there 
are 
many 
resources 

dedicated to ACT preparation, including 
courses and tutors. However, there are 
virtually no state-issued or curriculum-
based preparation resources for the SAT. The 
transition process for tutors and students to 
learn a whole new test and set of strategies 
presents must be monitored closely in order to 
avoid creating a learning gap between tests.

Despite possible benefits to this switch, the 

decision to switch to the SAT was first and 
foremost for the state’s economic benefit; it 
was a decision that seemingly did not take into 
account the difficulties families and students 
will face during the transition process. While 
the switch saves the state money that could 
potentially be invested in bettering elementary 
and secondary education, Michigan should 
have been more transparent in its decision 
and included community input in the process. 
However, since the state has already decided 
to move forward with this change, close 
monitoring of schools should be the next step in 
the transition process.

A questionable ACT

Change to SAT in Michigan brings both positives and negatives 

JAMES 
BRENNAN

