Between 1987 and mid-1988, public dis-
course about Asian American admissions shifted from a focus on
charges of discrimination to a focus on issues of diversity and mer-
itocracy in admissions policy. University officials initiated this shift
in the course of responding to charges of discriminatory quotas and
ceilings against Asian American applicants. They made two broad
countercharges. First, many officials claimed that Asian American
students were overrepresented in U.S. universities. The New York
Times reported that a Princeton faculty member, after rejecting an
Asian American applicant, said to his colleagues, "You have to ad-
mit, there are a lot" ( Winerip 1985). Second, several key university
administrators charged that Asian American students, though quali-
fied, were not competitive enough to gain admission to the elite
schools. According to many officials, Asian American students were
"flat" and "not well rounded."

Although arguments from university officials rejecting Asian
American claims came at different times--for example, in 1983 at
Brown, in 1985 at Princeton, and in 1988 at Harvard--the main pub-
lic debate occurred in 1987 and 1988. Berkeley, where escalating ten-
sions between the task force and the administration drew national
attention, became the center of public debate.

University officials' claims about Asian American students
often borrowed rhetoric from general debates about the state of

-57-