Gender And Race Does It Matter For College Application?

In the reading “At the Elite Colleges” by Peter Schmidt the nature of admissions in top colleges was discussed in relation to class and race status. Schmidt states that affirmative action is often serving white populations of upper middle class females rather than those in minority races and ethnicities. This was a great relevant point, especially when considering why affirmative action was proposed and enacted in the first place. Affirmative action was created to serve those who are part of groups who had been quashed in some way by oppression. This stands in stark contrast. Colleges often make excuses for these undeserved admissions because, they are looking for future donors or are aiding an athlete. However, this is still inexcusable. On

Women are obtaining more then half of the bachelor degrees earned in America but that has not limited the earning and abilities of the working class man. Phyllis Rosser’s, Too Many Women in College? (2005) is used to expose the still continuing gender issues in higher education. It exposes the issue that yes, there are more women then men in undergrad and master’s programs but men are still outnumbering women in doctoral programs as well as higher paying fields of study (engineering, computer science, business). Still regardless of education women will still face the income gap. Comparing Lee’s and Shaw’s conclusion to the study by Investing in Futures Public Higher Education in America, Women in Higher Education both sources have come to the conclusion that women make up over half of students enrolled in undergrad and their is an uneven representation of women in math and science based degree programs. Janet Lee’s and Susan M. Shaw’s, Women’s Voices Feminist Visions Classic and Contemporary Readings is an accredited and well developed source that highlights the development of women’s

Race and gender are two facets that inherently dominate individuals everyday lives. A person’s social environment, work environment, and educational environment is congruent to their race and gender. From birth, it has been set up that everyone is assigned to a label. A pink or blue blanket is swaddled around a newborn child and a box is checked signifying that child’s place in society. These two actions ultimately define how a child is to be viewed and treated. As children grow into young adults they either decide to stick with their original assignment, while others decide to deviate from it. These individuals deviation results in many of them being viewed harshly and looked down upon because they strayed from their social norms. This constant cycle of being classified and labeled from birth is the social institution of gender and race. These social institutions aid in the inequality that is present in society, and race and gender are shaped by this. However, if these social institutions were removed, race and gender could dissipate. This is due to the fact that race and gender are not real, but are socially constructed concepts used to organize the power, or dominance, within our society to one social group over the other groups.

The purpose of this action is to strive for equivalent open doors for everyone paying little heed to race or skin color. Race has always been a controversial factor in the college admission process. Critics who are supportive of the action say that colleges reach out toward minorities since they are the least diverse in the college environment. With the demographic they display they are urged most of the time to apply for college admission. Often these institutions offer some help to those minorities such

Is affirmative action in higher education needed? This question provokes a myriad of emotions. Is affirmative action antiquated and unneeded in 21st century America? Or are the racial boundaries of this country’s ancestors still in effect? America’s Declaration of Independence states, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” yet quotas, check marks, and plus factors give minority students advantages in the admission processes of the country’s universities and colleges (NARA).

Racial preference has indisputably favored Caucasian males in society. Recently this dynamic has been debated in all aspects of life, including college admission. Racial bias has intruded on the students’ rights to being treated fairly. Admitting students on merit puts the best individuals into the professional environment. A university’s unprejudiced attitude towards race in applicants eliminates biases, empowers universities to harness the full potential of students’ intellect, and gives students an equal chance at admission.

The past has shown that minorities do in fact have equal opportunities compared to the white majority, but they do not use them. There are statistics from the AAMC saying the average MCAT scores and GPAs of applicants who are Latino, Black or American Indian are lower than those of their White and Asian American peers (Liliana M Garces). Liliana M. Garces is an Assistant Professor in the Higher Education Program and a Research Associate in the Center for the Study of Higher Education at The Pennsylvania State University. With her contributions to this area of study, people can see how the ever-growing population of minorities in the United States is becoming an issue. If the minorities can now still get into colleges and universities with these

Arguments against race-sensitive admissions overlap and work in concert with each other. Four main charges encompass many of these seemingly disparate complaints into clear areas of discussion: (1) a moral argument which charges that society should be colorblind; (2) an economic charge that argues race-based policies admit unqualified students, creating a financial burden for institutions; (3) a charge of "social Darwinism" which argues that race-based policies do not allow for normal selection process; and (4) a political charge which questions whether policies effectively service society. In order to establish a position on the issues of race sensitive admissions

The fault in special admissions programs is that they will use skin color as a more important factor than academic and personal merit. Thus, those who deserve advancement may not receive it, due to affirmative action and the associated reverse

I think when it comes to academics and even job applicants. In the sense that if the person is skilled enough, then they should be hired ( or accepted if a school) it shouldn’t matter what race they are. If we do talk about it and we want it to matter does that mean that races are put into a “box” and perpetuate stereotypes and outsiders become more racially biased? We don’t want to erase the identities of races as well as many will have that as the base of their foundation for identity but we would like to move passed it but not forgetting it. Just because someone is of a certain race and may or may not do something that is a stereotype (“good” or “bad”) An example of a stereotype is all Asians are good at math. That must put pressure into thinking they should be great at academics or they aren’t able to connect with their race from an “outsider” view. Anyone can be racially biased when discussing race where should the focus be on? I think it could be focused on correcting stereotypes though there are more places to start. First hand that is the only thing I have experienced but, I think we could focus on correcting how African-Americans are portrayed as aggressive, or how all Muslims (though that is a religion but still stands) are not

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.

For as long as most can remember, women have never been viewed as equal to men. Women have fought for many rights including the right to vote, run for office, and for everyday things such as equal pay, the right to job listings, getting an education, and even having a credit card in their own name.

There are so many things that people focus on, and the one overlooked the most is the discrimination of gender roles. Women have to work harder to be treated the same as a man. Men have to hold and maintain the standard for the women to try to reach. Instead of everyone being looked at the same, and also having the same accountability. Both sexes have to struggle on receiving the same treatment. Women and men should be equally treated and held to the same

Along with equal employment both men and women should be allowed to achieve profit and wealth from their employment. Women should have access to the means in order to further their education by going to college to advance their knowledge and skills to teach or work. The women also emphasized that both men and women should be entitled to their right to vote for representatives. Women should be not only allowed to but also encouraged to speak at religious assemblies, just as men are. In the same way women are expected to hold themselves to a certain behavioral standard, men should be held to that same standard enabling both men and women to be reprimanded in the same way for any of transgressions.

To make my point about women not being able to get the jobs they wanted with the proper recognition. I will discuss problems at the following universities Cambridge, University of Wisconsin, Oxford University, Stanford, Columbia, and University of California. Very qualified woman such as, Sylvia Earle she was an Oceanographer, Jocelyn Bell she was a Radio Astronomer, Esther Lederberg she was a genetic scientist, Chin-Shiung Wu she participated in the development of the Atomic Bomb, Liesa Meitner she was a nuclear physicist, Rosalind Franklin was a Biologist, Nettie Stevens was a geneticist, were snubbed due to sexism. Without exception men were given credit for the women's work.