Affirmative Action - The Battles Against Race-based Educational Plans

Antonovics, Kate. "The Effect of Banning Affirmative Action on College Admissions Policies and Student Quality." Journal of Human

“When we can predict how well students will do in school by looking at their zip code, we know we have a serious systemic problem” (Gloria Ladson-Billings 20). When we are able to forecast how a child will perform by where the child resides, then how can we say that every child is receiving quality education. The unsuccessful educational system infused into the United States is affecting the majority of minorities. In the United States students due to their race and social class, suffer from underfunded public schools, inexperienced teachers, and housing segregation, which in turn inhibit their opportunity to succeed through education. These difficulties plaque students from the very beginning of their public school experience and follow them throughout their academic life. There are a few solutions to these issues but they have to be implemented and enforced with a slow integration.

In the long history of the United States, Texas is one of the few states that demonstrated three-way segregation including white, black, and Latinos communities. Generally, segregation influenced all dimensions of the society. In specific, former segregation in Texas has left an immeasurable impact on the state’s culture, economy, geography, and education. Despite the fact that institutional desegregation occurred decades ago, segregation of minorities still exists in modern Texas. In particular, the contemporary implementation of Texas House Bill 588 – as known as the “Top 10 Percent Rule” – indicates the state’s tenacious effort to heal the scars of racial segregation in educational perspective. Practically, the law has not only fostered multiracial public institutions, but also reshaped colleges in a statewide scale.

Race-conscious admissions policies (and affirmative action policies generally) are subject to strict scrutiny. This standard requires universities to demonstrate that the inclusion of race furthers a compelling governmental interest, and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. Of particular importance to the Court is whether “the means chosen ‘fit’ th[e] compelling goal so closely that there is little or no possibility that the motive for the classification was illegitimate racial prejudice or stereotype.” Put differently, universities must demonstrate that including race in the admissions process is necessary to enroll a diverse student body, and is accomplished through means that are reasonably calculated to achieve the educational

The equal opportunity that affirmative action provides has also increased the amount of minority applicants applying to each school. It has “resulted in doubling or tripling the number of minority applications to colleges or universities, and have made colleges and universities more representative of their surrounding community” (Messerli). Since the playing field has been evened, it has encouraged more of those who are disadvantaged because of their ethnicity to apply for and get admitted into college. However, the quotas cause schools to admit under qualified students of minor races who don’t meet the limit over highly qualified students who’s race has reached the limit.

An article written by Terence Chea explaining that, Campus Diversity Suffers under Race blind Policies, admission was “four times higher than their percentage in the state’s K-12 public schools” (Chea, Terence). Asian Americans students have a high acceptance rate into universities. Specifically to UC Berkeley, the freshman class consisting in the school of 30% of white and 46% percent of Asian Americans. As the result of affirmative action reverse discrimination is present as a large number of minorities Asian Americans have been accepted into UC

In 1998, when California banned its affirmative actions program, it had a huge impact in the number of minority admissions at UC Berkeley and UCLA, dropping the number of admissions to 61 percent and 36 percent respectively. It was the same case in Texas at Rice University, when the program was eliminated the number of students reduced to 46 percent less African-Americans and 22 percent less Hispanics students (NCSL, 2014). This shows that the program benefitted a lots of minority students to getting admissions, get education and graduate helping them get better job opportunities, and eventually better

Perhaps one of the most divisive issues in the United States is race. While most Americans would rather not talk about it, there are still issues surrounding race that will strike the interest of most citizens. This is perhaps nowhere more true than the debate over affirmative action. Although the United States has made great strides in improving race relations over the past forty years, affirmative action continues to be one of the most controversial policies in America. It has rattle the halls of higher education. It has appeared on the steps of the Supreme Court. And it has divided not only different racial groups, but even members of a single racial group. In fact, I’ve heard some of the most heated conversation over affirmative action between two African Americans. Like myself, many other African Americans believe this policy is one the most effective strategies for leveling what has long been an uneven playing field. However, critics of affirmative action believe this kind of reform does an injustice to the idea of merit. Though no one can deny that minorities and women have made significant steps towards autonomy and equality in American society, there are still wide economic disparities between these groups and white males. While theses issues and controversies surrounding affirmative action can not be resolved easily, the question remains: do we still need affirmative action in America? I say yes, affirmative action was and is needed to achieve full gender and

Affirmative action policies initially focused on improving opportunities for African Americans in employment and education. However, eight states currently ban race-based affirmative action at all public universities. California, Washington, Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, and Oklahoma all passed bans through voter referenda. Affirmative action policies that were previously successful in improving representation of blacks and other disadvantaged students are now either dismantled or greatly restricted. Ironically, African Americans who were at the forefront of the successful struggle to open America 's colleges and universities to more diverse participation now face exclusion from California 's and the nation 's most prestigious institutions. Hispanic and African Americans enrollment at the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of California, Los Angeles dropped sharply after voters approved a statewide ban on affirmative action. Those numbers have not recovered, even as the state’s Hispanic population has grown. Affirmative action refers to

Specifically the black student enrollment at the University of Michigan has lowered from 7.2 percent to 4.63 percent. This is not solely an issue for universities in Michigan either, The Michigan Daily reports, “Across the country, minority enrollment is drastically below state populations among peer institutions that have bans on affirmative action” (Geva). Moreover, minority students should not be penalized for their financial situation. College should be a universal program awarded to any student that wants to better him or herself. Furthermore, banning affirmative action in college admission is takes away a defense against the unequal parallels in secondary education, especially for the minority community, acquainted with the different financial capabilities of American

Affirmative action is the current method for combatting the systematic racism and general bigotry that has long plagued American society. It is a source of much debate, both from the legal and moral perspectives. When it comes to higher education, it has been the subject of serval Supreme court decisions and many philosophical papers. Affirmative action’s stance makes a statement about how American society intends to handle its problems of bigotry; if it wants to ignore them, or if it wants to choose to face them, and recognize that previsions must be made to rectify the past, and those issues that haunt it in the present.

Growing up, most people were told to try their hardest to succeed in life and achieve the goals they set for themselves. Adults often told students to study often and work hard for high grades so they could later be admitted to the college of their choice. However, once the program affirmative action was instilled into universities around the nation, it set different qualifications for minority applicants and assigned points based off race. With these new criteria instigated, people saw the program as alluding to the notion that if you came from a particular race, the bar was no longer set at a high standard and therefore no need to work as hard as before. Others saw it as a great step forward to helping those who needed the extra assistance. Affirmative action began through President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Executive Order 11246, created with the hope of increasing diversity throughout the education system and job market. Since it first began it has sparked debate over whether it truly promotes equality and is as progressive as we would like to presume, or is just creating more problems. The program has created a firm divide between those who see it as unfair and those who believe it can still assist minorities. During a time where minorities were discriminated against, affirmative action may have been the best option to overcome racial barriers. However, the nation has made exceptional progress since Johnson’s time as president. Now the program rather brings more issues than

Affirmative Action in the college system needs to be continued for numerous reasons—but there also must be other factors to add and adjust to make an even better diversity for students. Choosing to take in students will nevertheless enhance the learning experience, just as Finkleman has said. “If we believe we learn from our students, and that our students learn from each other, then the importance of minority students in the class is obvious. A diversity of views leads to a better discussion and greater understanding among the students.” Many Americans can learn more and appreciate the different cultures where minorities and even whites come from. Understanding and stretching thinking are the key to greater understanding.

Affirmative action is a system that intends to assist minorities; however, it discriminates against these groups. Some say they feel that they were just given an advantage based on their race, and if they did not put their race or ethnicity on their application they would not have been recruited into the institution. People implementing affirmative action understand that it does establish reverse discrimination, but are willing to accept it as long as it increases diversity (Steele 37-39). In other words, they are stating that discrimination is reasonable as long as institutions can meet their racial quotas. In the present time, minority applicants are being assessed mainly based on the racial or ethnical group they belong to, and not as much due to their merit (Steele 37). “Most Americans would support what was called affirmative action back in the 1960s, programs where efforts were made by companies and colleges to go outside the mainstream in their recruiting efforts. But that's an entirely different thing from having hard and fast racial quotas--hiring people according to numbers in society” (Hanmer 9).

Affirmative action programs are initiatives geared towards improving the welfare of the marginalized groups in the society. Most of these policies often target education, health insurance, and employment. In the context of higher education, affirmative policies are programs that guarantee equal access to learning opportunities among the historically marginalized population sections, such as minorities and women (Goldin, 2014; Kantarjian, et al. 2014). Notably, there have been controversies surrounding the legality of affirmative action since critics claim that it violates the principles of reward based on merit (Kravitz, 2008). Nonetheless, the affirmative action ideology within the US is spot on as it addresses systemic inequalities in access to health care, the distribution of employment and education opportunities.