Affirmative action: “A bitter, but necessary pill.” Diverse campuses are more interesting campuses.
We had a rollicking debate over whether race should be a factor in college admissions, tied to the recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit the issue this year.
I am not sure if the debate was that fruitful, given how few people understand that colleges do not now and will never admit students solely on highest GPAs and test scores. Colleges seek a diverse student body because they believe that a wide range of backgrounds and experiences enriches their campuses and their students. And few students want to be surrounded by classmates who look, sound and act just like them.
Here is an inside view of the issue from Stephen Joel Trachtenberg, president emeritus and university professor at George Washington University. I thought he made some interesting points that were worth sharing.
This is an excerpt from his piece on Bloomberg: (Before commenting, try to read his full essay.)
Using only high-school grades and standardized tests would give us a freshman class with far more women than men. Therefore, some balancing will be necessary to ensure gender equity (except at Barnard, Smith and Mount Holyoke). Geographical representation (for non-state-supported schools) will be sought. The major field of study will become more significant in choosing applicants than is currently the case: There will be room for chemists, yes, but also linguists. It is hard to predict if this system would be better or worse, more or less equitable than the present system.
Affirmative action has been a bitter, but necessary, pill. Designed to right a wrong, it began to provide opportunities for a portion of the population that has been unjustly denied access to education and opportunity. What began as a remedy for one group — black Americans — was later broadened to include a wide selection of others: women, Latinos, American Indians, people with disabilities and special needs, veterans and several other groups.
The current special set-asides in college admissions serve two very different purposes: to improve access for under- represented groups, as noted; but also to deliberately build a diverse multidimensional class because a diversity of gender, ethnicity, geographical origin and talents is good for its own sake, irrespective of whether a wrong is to be righted.
How does one define merit in admissions? Standardized tests have their own problems and are often criticized for perceived biases against disadvantaged students who have received an inferior k-12 education or who lack experience in taking such exams. Letters of recommendation are subjective and often tell us as much about the writers as about the candidates. High-school grades and, by extension, class standings are increasingly subject to a subtle gaming of the ranking system. School districts want to be known as places where their graduates go on to excellent colleges and universities. Since students with high grades tend to be admitted more easily than those with lower ones, there has been an inflation of grades over recent years. Today’s B plus is yesterday’s B minus, and hardly anyone in college-bound classes ever flunks. High-school students are not always held to rigorous standards, and colleges often have a difficult time equating the grades from one school to another.
Merit measured solely by grades would bring us a class of students who were one-dimensional in some ways and uneven in others. Harvard could fill its class with high-school seniors with near-perfect SATs, all valedictorians. Who wants to go to college to meet fellow freshmen from only Newton, Scarsdale, Bethesda, Shaker Heights or Palo Alto — the tried and true upper-middle-class communities?
Colleges are going to look for ways to continue economic diversity, cultural pluralism, gender equity and geographic distribution because it makes a far more interesting group of students to study with and learn from. The purpose of the admissions officer is not to attract to his or her campus a group of students who are uniformly consistent. It is to take from some large pool of applicants a reduced number with a cross section of characteristics.
In the end, the view of merit in students and the concept of what makes up a high-quality entering class have evolved in the past 25 years. A multicultural community is at the heart of every campus from New York University to the University of Mississippi.
For generations colleges were most inventive in finding ways to keep Jews and blacks out. Now they may have an opportunity to use their wits to find the legal means to admit and enroll multicultural classes without the use of affirmative action. My money is on the universities, which were, after all, open for business before the Constitution was drafted.
–from Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
177 comments Add your comment
Maureen Downey
February 29th, 2012
8:28 pm
@lee, So, the counterbalance to the president of a top U.S. university is a former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan? Wow.
Maureen
Jack
February 29th, 2012
8:31 pm
Enrichment. Seems the only enrichment our young people get today is from a hand-held device.
Sarah Coulter
February 29th, 2012
8:33 pm
I have always supported Affirmative Action in principle, but I admit that I feel less support for it when it applies to my family personally. For example, my sister, who has three kids and whose husband lost his job due to a reduction in force, was once interviewed by a panel, selected for the job, and notified by one of the panelists in advance of the formal notification. She was later non-selected by the approval authority who told my sister, in person, that she would not approve her selection because “she wasn’t what they were looking for.” The job was given to a Caucasian woman–who did a fine job I am sure. Likewise, college admissions were eye opening for my daughter, a fine student who had exceptional credentials, and received many nice acceptances and some money for college. We were surprised however to learn that all of her white peers with much lower grades and scores received acceptances and generous scholarships to colleges she could only dream of because their parents were donors, trustees, or board members.
Sarah Coulter
February 29th, 2012
8:37 pm
Here’s a little known tip if you are the parent of a white male student who may be on the bubble for college acceptance into a competitive school. Just have him declare his major in “Women’s Studies”, he will definitely be a hit with the ladies. Or “Sociology” which is one of the “hack programs” predominately populated by athletes. Your son will be by far the most qualified of the applicants and once accepted he can simply change majors after the first semester.
Jack
February 29th, 2012
8:37 pm
Lee’s messin’ with you, Ms Maureen.
td
February 29th, 2012
8:55 pm
I keep seeing these posters talk about affirmative action action for woman in acceptance to college. You people do realize that women make up almost 60% of all college students? It appears to me that they do not need any preferential treatment because the market is taking care of the situation.
catlady
February 29th, 2012
9:00 pm
It seems to me that to maximize our investment, each college needs to admit students with a very good chance of graduating from that college. That means that UGA would admit students whose profiles indicate they have a high chance of graduating within 5-6 years. Same for Tech (except they might require higher GPAs and credit for Calc 1, for example). It is a simple waste of money to bring students on campus that have little or no hope of persisting to graduation.
Each institution should determine, from its recent historical data, what factors make it most likely that a perspective student will graduate. We should also continue to have institutions that are pretty much open admission–a proving ground for students who might not be predicted to graduate at a four year university.
Would that change the composition of UGA? Yes, probably so–even more white upper middle class kids from Gwinnett, for example. But, for maximum ROI, shouldn’t we target admissions to those who have a good chance of “making it?”
D
February 29th, 2012
9:03 pm
Not sure if anyone has ever tried this before, but how about taking the names, gender info and any other identifiers off the applications and look at the QUALIFICATIONS only!! Wouldn’t this simplify things greatly?? Wouldn’t this allow for true apples to apples comparisons of students and lead to a more fair system of admissions? Wouldn’t this be the best way to reward merit and truly be race neutral??
Dan
February 29th, 2012
9:06 pm
“For generations colleges were most inventive in finding ways to keep Jews and blacks out. Now they may have an opportunity to use their wits to find the legal means to admit and enroll multicultural classes without the use of affirmative action. My money is on the universities, which were, after all, open for business before the Constitution was drafted” This post just underlines the ignorance of the essay, affirmative action is not about the search for diversity, it is about the pandering for voting blocks. The government forcing a set of quotas on universities today is not any different from keeping out blacks and jews of the past, both claim a rightous scientifically backed reason for doin so, and both are equally wrong. All a university need do is remain truly private and they can fill their ranks with whomever they choose. Governmental influence on such things is simply manipulation of a different flavor. They need to get out of the way and if diversity is truly a benefit it will happen
D
February 29th, 2012
9:10 pm
@Dan, I agree completely and that’s why forced diversity hasn’t worked to integrate anything.
catlady
February 29th, 2012
9:31 pm
BTW, I am happy to see that my scores in 1969 on the SAT and ACT would make me eligible for admission to Harvard today. Of course, in 1969 it was not available to me, because I am female (was then, too). I also could not go to Duke (my dad’s alma mater) unless I went into nursing. At the time, it was the only way young women could get in. Quite a few “selective” schools were that way.
Sarah Coulter
February 29th, 2012
10:02 pm
All a university need do is remain truly private and they can fill their ranks with whomever they choose.
***************************************************************************************************
So Dan, you wouldn’t have any problem with them not accepting any white males? Why not accept all Asians since they are hard-working and will bring the collective grades, etc. up? Or are you assuming that all of these institutions would naturally choose all white males?
Lee
February 29th, 2012
10:05 pm
“@lee, So, the counterbalance to the president of a top U.S. university is a former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan? Wow. Maureen”
Let’s see:
- Trachtenberg is a Doctor. Duke is a Doctor.
- Trachtenberg is an author. Duke is an author. Although Duke’s books have probably far surpassed Trachtenberg’s in sales.
- Trachtenberg has lectured students. Duke has lectured students.
- Trachtenberg has been president of a college. Duke has been a US Representative.
- Trachtenberg is a thirty-third degree Mason, a well known fraternal organization. Duke was a former Grand Wizard of a well known fraternal organization.
- I never heard of Trachtenberg before today. Duke’s videos have been viewed millions of times.
So yes, Maureen, I think a counterpoint by Duke would be a great idea. What are you scared of? I mean, diversity of ideas. Isn’t that what the politically correct preach as they shove affirmative action down everyone’s throat?
Dr. Proud Black Man
February 29th, 2012
10:17 pm
@Lee
He also served time for mail fraud.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-12-18-david-duke_x.
“- I never heard of Trachtenberg before today. Duke’s videos have been viewed millions of times.”
By the usual knuckle draggers and inbred cast from Deliverance. Btw popularity doesn’t indicate that your cause is right now does it?
Lee
February 29th, 2012
10:20 pm
“@ Lee. I guess you haven’t been to college lately…… The admission process of schools, competitive or otherwise, doesn’t include any request for the applicant to declare a major; and usually majors aren’t declared until after the freshman year.”
In 2009, the following questions were on my daughter’s college application:
- What degree do you intend to earn?
- What is your intended major?
@Prof, I know you use the moniker of being a professor, but it appears you don’t know crap about college admissions.
Lee
February 29th, 2012
10:37 pm
“@Lee, He [Duke] also served time for mail fraud.”
So, you’re saying we shouldn’t allow Duke to offer a counterpoint because he spent time in jail? Correct?
BTW, how many times did MLK spend time in jail?
Dr. Proud Black Man
February 29th, 2012
10:41 pm
MLK went to jail for a cause, Duke went to jail for tax and mail fraud. Weak analogy.
waterstim
February 29th, 2012
10:49 pm
We need to run you left-wing clowns out of the country. I’m sick of everyone of you. You have ruined this country.
Dr. Proud Black Man
February 29th, 2012
10:54 pm
@waterstim
“we?”
td
February 29th, 2012
10:57 pm
Dr. Proud Black Man
February 29th, 2012
10:54 pm
I think waterstim means it is time for another Joesph McCarthy to appears and have another purging of the communist and send them back underground.
Old Physics Teacher
February 29th, 2012
11:06 pm
Another Comment,
You, as an engineer, are not seriously letting a school councilor decide for your child what major to select, right? Geeze, Lady, do you not know what actual skills a school councilor has? No one but my children, me and their mother helped pick a college major for our children. One changed his major 5 times before he graduated. That was OK. He had no idea what he wanted to do. he was successful in all his college course.
A typical AAA high school has 1000-1200 students and is served by two, that’s 1 + 1, councilors! Most of them make very good mothers and have very broad sholders for kids to cry on from teen-age angst, but ou don’t really think they’re qualified to discuss and evaluate STEM students, do you? Really???!!
Let me say this again. Parents are responsible for their children. Quit trying to put off their faults or lack of basic skills on an educator, policeman, judge, or jury. The first, and best educator, of any child is their parents. Take control of their lives until they are qualified, BY YOU, to make such decisions.
William Casey
February 29th, 2012
11:15 pm
I’ve known some nice counselors but would not have allowed any of them to even discuss major choice with my son. That was his mom’s and my job. He’s doing dual degrees in Math & Philosophy. His choice. We’re happy.
Bill Nabstedt
February 29th, 2012
11:19 pm
“It’s amazing how easy it is to decide that a “bitter pill” is “necessary” when it’s being swallowed by someone ELSE.”
How true, Lakeisha…how true.
Atlanta Mom
February 29th, 2012
11:28 pm
“It seems to me that to maximize our investment, each college needs to admit students with a very good chance of graduating from that college. ”
So, catlady, I guess you’d like to see our school over run by out of country students? The good news is, they pay their way.
Atlanta Mom
February 29th, 2012
11:31 pm
William, how is the math/philosphy going? My daughter wanted to do physics/philosophy. She tried to explain how they are related, but her poor old mom could never get it. She also ended up in physics/computer science.
Mandella1099
February 29th, 2012
11:35 pm
“If you post to the topic and make relative sense, your comments will stay up. If you attack or sputter racist drivel, they won’t.”
If you say so…..
biaknabato
March 1st, 2012
12:44 am
@ Maureen Downey
Meaningless piece of nonsense, in 2009 there were 3.2k applicants to Harvard with a perfect score of 800 in the Math portion of the SAT .The average size of the entering class at Harvard is 1600-1700. So why is it that there are only 400 students in the 2011 freshman class of Harvard who scored a perfect score of 800 in the Math portion of the SAT? Bottomline is this: The overwhelming majority of applicants to Harvard with perfect SAT scores are denied admission because they will ask for money. If Harvard admitted all 3.2 k applicants with perfect SAT scores way back in 2009 it will be a formula , recipe , prescription for financial disaster. The whole school will simply close down and every other private school in this country is no different from Harvard. ” 180k….” , naturally with a tuition of 57k even families earning 200k per annum are going to ask for financial aid. The 10% corkage ( tuition ) fee is just an attempt by Harvard to retain a sizable number of middle class students from fleeing to a less expensive public university . Harvard students graduate with a higher debt load than graduates of Berkeley and UCLA and other public universities. The debt load of Harvard grads is just in the middle of the pack among universities according to the Washington Times rankings.Depending on what source you want to believe the percentage of students at Harvard eligible who are eligible for Pell grants ( a proxy for poverty ) is either 13 % or 17 % . At Berkeley, 35 % of 2010 undergraduates are eligible for Pell grants.. The median family income of Asian Berkeley undergrads in 2010 was 70k for white Berkeley undergrads it was 107k, you can imagine what it would be for white Harvard undergrads. The average percentage of poor students in the Ivy League is about 14 % hardly a recommendation for a poor student to attend them .. Oh yes, they have quotas on the poor, on Asians in the Ivies you know.. According to the Arcidiacono study 30 % of black undergrads at Duke come from families making over 100k a year (2002 nominal dollars ). At the rate of inflation , I wonder what it would be now. According to the same study less than 30 % of black undergrads at Duke come from families making less than 50k a year (2002 nominal dollars). And Duke is a proxy for Harvard Hardly a case of also calling black Duke undergrads as a proxy for the ghetto. And Tractenberg would never want a system of admisson based on SAT scores , grades and socioeconomic preferences alone for it would spell financial disaster at GWU. After all he is one of the best paid university presidents in America.
Catlady wants to profile students?
March 1st, 2012
4:43 am
Catlady “That means that UGA would admit students whose profiles indicate they have a high chance of graduating within 5-6 years.”
I can hardly believe my eyes. Profiling students? I wouldn’t have fit the profile, lady. I graduated. It took my longer than four years becasue I worked full time while in college. I was poor and didn’t make anyone’s profile list.
We don’t need to profile students. What we need to do is more simple than that:
1.Provide GA’s children with a good k-12 education so they will be ready for college.
2. Make college affordable to all Georgians who want to do the work. (Notice I didn’t say children. We older folks have a right to college too.
We need to stop treating college like it is only the right of a selected few individuals. Higher education is for everyone and in the right world, I mean everyone. :With the economy focused on jobs right now I understand the urgent desire to get kids money-maker ready but college is so much more than that It opened my mind to things I never knew. It opened a world I never knew existed. I became a better human being because I went to a real college.
GM
catlady
March 1st, 2012
6:55 am
Atlanta mom: No, our foremost responsibility is to educate OUR OWN students. Our country, our state. Should there be room for exceptional “others?” Yes. But we should focus our efforts (as the university is funded by the state taxpayers to a great extent) on our Georgia students.
BTW, I am thinking that most of our out of country students here in Georgia are grad students (who frequently get assistantships). I don’t think we get many undergrads from China, for example. The IR office at USG/BOR could fill us in on that, I am sure.
catlady
March 1st, 2012
6:58 am
We DO get a lot of American children of Asian descent, however. They frequently just blow the socks off our Anglo and African American students.
Interesting and Dam* Good Looking?
March 1st, 2012
7:24 am
Since when is nteresting important?
If we want interesting recuits for campuses then let’s recruit all the good-looking, fit men with chiseled facial features and wash board abs. That’ will attract all the good looking females and we could have a very interesting reality TV series made from it that will pay for it all.
That sure would be interesting. There wouldn’t be any education going on but hey, that’s not the point is it?
We just want it to be interesting.
GM
bilbo799
March 1st, 2012
7:34 am
To me, this is not a question of whether diversity is good for education. Let’s assume it is. Does that justify racial discrimination?
Translate this into the corporate world. Suppose a white sales force would help a company’s profits because it sells products in the Atlanta suburbs. Should that company be able to discriminate against non-white job applicants?
When did the diversity argument overcome our sense of fairness and equality? Maureen?
dcb
March 1st, 2012
7:48 am
My experience is now well in the past as a retired independent school head, but Burgandy’s comment above hit the nail on the head for me -” When i hire someone I dont look at skin color I look at resumes. As do MOST people.” One of my most vivid memories is the excitement I felt when receiving an English teaching position application from a black female who was just graduating from a Doctorate program at a very reputable university here in the South …. and the disappointment that followed when in the interview, it was obvious she couldn’t speak the king’s English. I hope things have changed but no question she was a product of affirmative action as it was known in the ’90’s by that university.
Public Schools need Leadership Changes
March 1st, 2012
8:31 am
This is total racist BS. All students should pull their own weight. Work hard and be successful. This whole diversity thing is nothing but racism and a lazy person way out of working for themselves. Dr.King said let a man be judged by his character and not by his skin color.
USMC
March 1st, 2012
9:00 am
Affirmative Action is great for the economy because it gives unearned rewards (handouts) to the truly unqualified members of society and forces the qualified members of society to enter the entrepreneurial world and create industry/jobs, etc.; therefore growing the economy.
The only problem with Affirmative Action is that it is Racist.
no name used
March 1st, 2012
9:55 am
It is silly that this is even a topic. Silly and SAD. Dr. King said he wanted a world where his children (and others I would assume) were judged by the content of their character, not their skin. I am going a step further and adding home address and depth of pockets. So why is diversity for sake of diversity desired? Ability is what is important, along with ambition, and a willingness to learn from everything around you. Personally, I want to learn from people who are smart and good hearted, and treat others the way they want to be treated, regardless of skin tone, or gender.
I don’t care what color you are. I care about what you can do. I care about if you have managed to stay out of trouble, both in school, and out. I care about your grades-overall-not just a test grade, since those are reflective of 1 day in your life. I care about the PERSON you are-what you do for others-even just friends, how you treat people, your manners etc. Those don’t have to be perfect, but common courtesy and a respectful attitude for people in general is a big thing. Look at the kinds of activities that person does-don’t judge them (the activities) because of personal preference, but on was that person dedicated to that activity, whether it is showing cats or volunteering, or just trying to help a neighbor without expectations. Letters of reference from employers, neighbors, teachers, etc. help paint a picture, even if they are not a good reference. Look at their criminal record-hopefully they don’t have one, but if they do, and they have made the appropriate steps to not fall back into that then count that too.
In other words, count everything except race and gender, then you will have the diversity you crave. More importantly, you will have people that are the best qualified. Not everyone is college material, and there is no shame in that. A person who can work with their hands will always be able to find a way to make a living. The wisest man I know told me that a long time back, and he never lied to me on any thing. College is supposed to be for the purpose of furthering your education in the field of work you have chosen to go in to. It is not supposed to be some grand experiment where you try to find yourself. Life teaches you who you are.
catlady
March 1st, 2012
9:59 am
Profile students: You miss the point. No one would be denied a college education (at least till they prove they can’t do it) BUT we should target resources so an 800 (math and language) SAT student does not waste our money by going to Tech.
And congratulations on being a “completer.”
RAMZAD
March 1st, 2012
10:01 am
These arguments from the Georgetown doctor are truly the products of academic administrative desperation. College should not be picking academic winners and losers to get student diversity,
but they are stuck, and the good doctor is just putting a nice face on the problem. The country is
the most diverse place on the face of the earth, so why are colleges getting the hood of a Chevy, the door of a Toyota, the windows of a Corvette, and the seats of Nissan to cook up campus diversity?
Colleges are literally forced to run this diversity game to get students of various, backgrounds, color, geography, income, sex, religion- because of the poverty of racial and economic diversity in the geography of high schools that are cutting the mustard by truly preparing students for college.
Predominantly black high schools do not attract the best teachers, are rife with criminal, unethical or self serving boards and administrators, are usually hotbeds of disciplinary problems, community drama, students who do not really buy into getting an education, and systems that are not geared for academic excellence. Colleges turn up with the unenviable job of turning college preparation 6 into a 9, and the Affirmative Action heartburn begins for its life of taint, innuendo and degradation about who did not really earn a college admission/education and who did.
RAMZAD
March 1st, 2012
10:18 am
Of course, diversity cooks ups like Affirmative Action may be forever necessary in a country where vast swaths of the leadership, political and economic power, and religious faiths continue to believe that non-white people are inherently stupid- even when the country has been mortgaged to Chinese. Go figure!
Frankie
March 1st, 2012
10:50 am
So as I read some of the comments, I see that people say that affirmative action is no longer need.
I agree that entrance into college should be based on GPA, ACT, SAT, community service. But in most cases it is based on ability to PAY.
If every high school had the same funding, the same good teachers and administrators and all things were equal, you would still have discrimination when it came to college admittance.
Colleges are run on money and the federal dollars colleges receive for being as diverse campus is like poor man winning the lottery and sayin ‘nah I good with being poor”
If the laws were not necessary, then you can eccentially say I can eliminate all laws because people know how to treat one another and respect one another murders and roberies won’t occur again because these laws havebeen in effect for over 50 years….
wrong again. as long as there is bigotry, racism, legacy and greed. we will always need some form of affirmative action…does it need to be revised or updated..possibly..but eliminated NO…not ever…
hryder
March 1st, 2012
10:52 am
Check the USA. Go to extremes and one has a mess. The two past Presidents resulted from a legacy and the next from affirmative action. We have a problem because both were thought to be appropiate due to thinking that each member of a given family would be competent and that when provided the opportunity, one would easily be competent since they spoke so well and were believed to be well educated. This defies logical reasoning. Spending ones formative years in a different culture than the mainland, in a broken family, and a very spotty employment record of tax supported “working” slots are but a few reasons that the latter would have been rejected except for political correctness in Obama’s ascendance. Bush seemed to be a good choice but 9/11 showed that he became so attentive to its ramifications that all other aspects of governance were ignored and special interests, including Bush’s protection at allcosts, ran wild. Now the country is hurting and the special interests still run wild. A possible solution: VOTE ALL ELECTED INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS.
Frankie
March 1st, 2012
10:55 am
so when you start judging people by the content of the character and not by the color of their skin then we can talk,but as I have seen time and time again in this blog and others, that we ain’t no where near there.
MannyT
March 1st, 2012
11:10 am
If there were more spaces than applicants, there would be no concerns.
When we talk about selection when the spaces are limited, recognize two things. There is the qualified hurdle (can you do the work?) and the most qualifications false barrier (do I have bigger numbers in the things you looked at even though you didn’t look at all the factors.) The application should be required to meet the qualified hurdle, not the most qualifications false barrier. (Many poorly applied pro affirmative action arguments are due to the qualified hurdle & many poorly applied anti affirmative action arguments are due to false barriers.)
Even with the reality of more applicants than spaces, we have to ask the honest question, how well does the application process align with the success of the job/activity? In college admissions, the answers are very mixed. It is stated that grades & SAT scores are leading indicators of college success. HOWEVER, we do try to account for many other factors (my grades are lower because my school is more challenging; my SAT scores are lower because my school doesn’t teach this level of vocabulary; my exposure to topic X is lower because of socioeconomic factors, not limited interest; etc.) Yet, there is not an automatic link between the most successful college students and the most successful college applicants.
Using a sports analogy, sometimes we need to settle things on the field. The catch is–who do we allow to get into the game? (Sports teams have made numerous poor choices based on recruiting/drafting the player with the most qualifications instead of the best fit. I’m sure we also do it in other parts of society.) Don’t let false barriers stop us from allowing people to get into the game.
Prof
March 1st, 2012
11:33 am
To return to the topic of the blog—which is not about Affirmative Action law, but about admission policies of colleges and Universities–these college admissions boards seek diversity for the sake of their students, not to right any past wrongs to the underrepresented groups. For these admissions boards, diversity is race/ethnicity AND ALSO many other types of diversity, such as gender, geographic region, socioeconomic class, and age.
Race/ethnicity is only one of many factors, and the reason is not just “skin color.” I’m very tired of hearing that canard. The value of having black, Latino, Asian, and multiracial students on campus is that they have experienced to some degree the hatred, contempt, and false racial “facts” that go along with having the “skin color”…which many bloggers here have illustrated very nicely.
It’s a broadening aspect of higher education for white students to learn the perspectives and experiences of those not in the majority. And it certainly will prepare them for the adult work-world they’re about to enter.
Dan
March 1st, 2012
1:40 pm
@ Sarah Coulter, you point is petty, I am sure there would be institutions that don’t allow white males, as there are today. It is the choice of those institutions to do so. Quite frankly the best alternative was mentioned by another poster earlier. Perhaps the applications should have no refererence as to race or ethnicity. Not sure that would be possible but it is truly the only method free of bias
Ronin
March 1st, 2012
1:49 pm
While well meaning when established, affirmative action has now become a standard for reverse discrimination against non-minority groups.
The question is: do you go back 50 years 250, 500 or even 1000 years to establish the criteria to mandate “what is fair”. Further, once a law is in place, rarely (actually never) would it be repealed, as it would be viewed as a racist action. The perception of what is “fair” is seen differently by each ethnic group and as such, it is impossible for government to not discriminate against one ethnic group by giving preference to another.
If the purpose of affirmative action in the USA was to establish greater opportunities for minorities over the last 50 years, I believe that it’s mission has been accomplished. However, the real question is: has affirmative action created an environment where the pendulum has shifted 180 degrees and creating greater opportunity for the minority protected class at the expense of the majority ethnic group as job/school applicants?
Observer
March 1st, 2012
5:22 pm
Most of the entries here seem to be written by white men, probably old and retired since they are writing during the day or late at night so they don’t have to worry about the next work-day. An awful lot of the monikers are male-sounding. And oh, the injustices of reverse racism, of “skin color” meaning anything today, of women and minorities getting special advantages, of colleges refusing to consider grades alone for admission!
Those in a position of privilege just aren’t gonna give it up, are they? As the blogger “Digger” laconically commented on another thread about the APS teachers who won’t resign: “Ever try to pull hogs away from the trough?”
Ole Guy
March 1st, 2012
5:43 pm
…About Poor People: Stand by one, pardner. This crap; the unadulterated _ hit about “poor people” pisses me off. First of all, (so-called) poor people have a hulluva lot of bennies which I can’t come close to qualifying…despite my income level, I’m obliged to pay for my chow…ALL my chow. Likewise the assorted “owies” sustained throughout an active lifestyle. I bang myself up; an accident of one sort or another…I pay the doc; I pay the ER. Sure, I’m blessed to have semi-decent insurance, however, I still sustain a financial obligation, something to which “poor people” are absolved.
I’ve sat next to some very “poor people” throughout my academic ventures. Somehow…and through great personal SACRIFICE, they managed to achieve some rather impressive credentials and some admired stations in life…ALL WITHOUT THE PISSIN’ AN’ MOANIN’ and “poor people” crap.
If you feel that “poor” Black kids are singled out as having difficulty in adjusting to the demands of academia, it is only because the public educational systems have allowed these “poor” Blacks…and just about any other kid who yelped…TOO DAMN MUCH SLACK. It’s not the bad ole colleges fault…they are simply doing that which the public schools should havebeen doing all along…INSIST ON STANDARDS…OR GET THE HELL OUTA HERE.
Any Questions?
bu2
March 1st, 2012
9:26 pm
@Maureen
The freshman class at the University of Texas is (the Supreme Court suit):
54% female, 46% male
48% Anglo, 21% Hispanic, 18% Asian, 5% African American, 4% foreign
So the University wants to reduce Anglos and Asians. In particular, female Anglos are likely impacted most heavily. 73% of their freshman class was admitted by the top 10% rule. 90% of the class were in the top 25%. 6% were in the 2nd quarter.
no name used
March 1st, 2012
11:48 pm
Observer, you would be wrong in that assumption. I am neither old, nor male, nor even moderately well off. I have 2 kids in college, and 2 in highschool. I work 2 part time jobs because my really good one shut down, and my hubby is a blue collar worker. It is not privilege I am wanting to give up.It is for everyone to be judged on their own merits. For those that say when so and so gets treated such and such a way then I’ll start–hey, it has to start somewhere. Why not with you and me?
I am not asking for anything, and I know life is not fair, and that is ok with me, because the chances for advancement of all people are there. You said we were basically complaining about reverse racism. No, I am saying that by giving a head start (in basic terms) to anyone based on their color or race or gender is insulting to the person given the head start. It is saying, oh, we don’t think you are capable of meeting our standards, so we’ll lower them for you. Hello, I don’t think that does anything but give a victim mentality and sometimes puts people that can’t cut it in posts where that individual may be a bad fit. I don’t drive as well as my husband does, but if we applied for the same driving job and the “diversity” programs were in play, then I would be given a preferential treatment, which I would not deserve and he would. By the same token, at my chosen occupation, I run circles around my husband, and would have earned the preferential treatment.
I like the idea of taking gender and race identifiers off college applications. It would definitely be a step in the right direction.