In Defense Of Affirmative Action Analysis

The institution of public education has been one of the most controversial establishments in the United States since its inception. More specifically, equality in the conditions and the opportunities it provides has been sought as one of its major goals. There is little doubt that minority ethnic groups have struggled to achieve educational equality, just as they have struggled for equality in other aspects of life. One way that minorities have tried to achieve equality in education is through lobbying for help in college admissions for their respective groups. This social practice has been debated on many grounds, including necessity and

The Founding Fathers wanted all men to be treated equal. The Declaration of Independence states, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that 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” (Jefferson, 1776). Unfortunately, equality for everyone has not been truly realized. The main issues affected were people’s skin color and gender. Women and people of color were not considered to be equal for many years. To correct this issue Affirmative Action was implemented. Affirmative Action helped people of color and women to be considered for jobs and accepted into colleges equally among other candidates. Today, equality between races and genders has improved, although Affirmative Action should be modified to meet the needs of today’s society.

Affirmative action policies are passionately debated by everyone from educators and politicians to ordinary citizens, all who hold differing opinions on both the necessity and validity of the policies. There is no doubt affirmative action is an emotional topic and deals with the

Affirmative action has been around for decades. Some believe it isn’t fair but others do. Those who believe and agree with affirmative action tend to say, “The principle of affirmative action is to promote societal equality through the preferential treatment of socioeconomically disadvantaged people” (Bidmead, Andrew pg 3). Others that disagree with it and find it unfair simply see it as another form of discrimination, giving one group extra advantages based upon nothing but their skin color (Cline, Austin pg 1). I believe that affirmative action is indeed fair because it gives minorities a better chance at having a successful career in their near future.

Race-based affirmative action has been challenged by a great deal of objection during the course of it duration. According to its opponents, Affirmative action proves to be inconsistent. Affirmative action based on race increases race consciousness instead of supporting color-blind justice. By giving people special consideration to ensure equality, it contributes to inequality. The constitution of the United States calls for equal treatment, therefore, allowing racial consideration poses a contradiction.

A person has just obtained their dream ACT score, 34, while maintaining outstanding extracurricular activities throughout high school. After applying to the university of their choice, they are informed that they have not been admitted. Crushed and confused, they go on the university’s website only to discover that the university is looking for people with a more diverse racial background. Standing in the way of their acceptance is a defective policy formally known as race-based affirmative action. Informally called affirmative action, it is a combination of adopted policies that construct an advantage to minority groups, giving them more possibilities to succeed in jobs, education, and other aspects of daily life. The whole concept came

This notion is, however, untrue. The elimination of affirmative action policies is liable for far greater negative consequences. There are several reasons why this claim is true. In “Why Supreme Court case on race in admissions matters more than ever” by Liliana Garces, Garces makes the claim that “[a] decision [in the Fisher v. UT Austin case] that further restricts the consideration of race could potentially exacerbate the racial tensions that we are seeing around the nation” (¶ 4). Eliminating the use of racial preferences acts as a catalyst; further, abolishing preferences will only inflame underlying existent racial tensions. According to Garces, the abolition of racial preferences will impose harmful consequences for the diversity of the student body. Garces, an Assistant Professor of Education at Pennsylvania State University, utilizes research she conducted on her own—her findings indicate that as a result of bans on affirmative action policies, diversity on college campuses has dramatically suffered. Garces also states that “bans on race-sensitive admissions led to declines in racial and ethnic student body diversity in the field of medicine” (¶ 11). She uses her own research in which she examined the effects of bans in six states to justify this reasoning. According to Garces, “underrepresented students of color at public

Throughout America there are many different views on the effects of affirmative action. Many see it as a negative policy which gives an unnecessary advantage to minorities in America. In a 2009 Pew Poll, “58% of African Americans agree” and only “22% whites agree” that there should be “preferential treatment to improve the position of blacks and other minorities” ("Public Backs Affirmative Action”).

In the 1960s when minorities and whites were equal according to the constitution but unequal in reality, a program was needed to level the playing field. Thus the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was created and prohibited discrimination. It marked the beginning of a debate that has been going on for nearly a half of a century. Affirmative action needs to be reevaluated in educational settings in light of current needs.

I think affirmative action was fair at its inception under Lynden B. Johnson, and throughout the remainder of the 20th century, but I don’t feel it’s fair in society today.

Affirmative action is an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination, especially in relation to employment or education; positive discrimination. I agree with it, because it will let everyone be equal, having the same level and no one will be treated superior or inferior. for example, if we get to the women their rights to be treated as men so all be equal then it will be no more prejudice, because we will not have any more dominant or subordinate

In the mid-1900s, discrimination and segregation movements were rampant throughout America. African Americans, Hispanics, Asians and other minorities were often denied jobs based on the color of their skin alone. Many minorities were excluded from colleges and found themselves unable to obtain a proper education. In order to combat such discriminatory and racist actions, the Civil Rights Movement enacted a program to prevent the denial of students into universities because of unfair factors such as race, ethnicity, background, etc. This program is called affirmative action. Through affirmative action, the Civil Rights Movement aimed to help historically disadvantaged people gain acceptance to institutions for higher education. However, their plan to increase the representation of minorities in universities utilized the very practice it sought to destroy: discrimination.

Affirmative Action needs to become a more widespread topic of conversation amongst the millennial generation so that the peer group can realize that Affirmative Action is not helpful, and is in fact, very hurtful to students and potential job applicants. Affirmative Action is when a decision is made by an employer, college/university, and other outlets to how and who will be hired for a specific job opening, admission to a college/university, etc. This is a hurtful process to people, specifically women and minorities, due to the key fact that acceptance of something should not be grounded in gender or race and should be grounded in skill level and

I think the court should decide in favor of the employer. Affirmative Action is defined as “the actions appropriate to overcome the effects of past or present practices, policies, or other barriers to equal employment opportunity. The main focus of Affirmative Action is to improve employment opportunities with groups that have been victims of discrimination: women, African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Pacific Islanders, and disabled persons as well as certain veterans” (Walsh, 2016, p. 263). Basing Affirmative action just off of a minority is not allowed; however, it can be a factor when it comes down to how they choose an applicant.

To many, this made sense. Supporters of affirmative action asked, "why not let the government help them get better jobs?" After all, the white man was responsible for their suffering. While this may all be true, there is another question to be asked. Are they all truly responsible for the years of persecution that the African Americans were submitted to? Probably not. Does the person working in the cube next to me resent me knowing consciously that we are working side by side because of affirmative action and not because we both qualify to be employed there? Probably so. This type of work environment is not strengthening diversity, it tears it down.