Thernstrom's Argument Analysis

Thirdly, they point out that a diverse student body better prepares college students to interact and work with individuals of diverse backgrounds in the future. By creating an environment where students can be exposed to a racially diverse group of people, their interactions further reduce prejudice and misconceptions about race (Grutter v. Bollinger, 2003). The amicus brief reveals that race is an inseparable component of an applicant 's’ experiences and should not be excluded from the admission officers’ consideration.

Affirmative Action. For many Texas high school students, these two words haunt them. Their future, or at least their future at the University of Texas, depends on these words. For Abigail Noel Fisher, a 2008 graduate from Sugar Land, Texas, affirmative action and its race bias policies allegedly ruined her chances of getting into this prestigious state university. Fisher argues that race should not be a factor in college admissions processes, Fisher argues for equality. Equality in respect to race is in our constitution; it surrounds us everyday. In theory, race should be irrelevant in this day and age. Humanity has established that one race is not superior to another, so why should race matter at all in the college admissions process? Why should the University of Texas, or any other university, have that “check your race” box on their applications? Abigail Fisher, and every other person applying to the university, deserves as much opportunity as every other student of any race. When it comes to college, intelligence and character should be key to admission- not the color of the applicant’s skin. The University of Texas’ current affirmative action policy is an unfair college admissions process that the Supreme Court should ban so that admissions are based on intellectual ability in high school, national testing scores, extracurricular activities, and community service; this should be changed so that every person,

Recently, in the year 2013, there was a case brought to the Supreme Court’s attention that was first trialed in the district court. That case’s name was Fisher vs. University of Texas. It was in this case that the plaintiff, Abigail N. Fisher filed suit against the University of Texas with the claim that the University had violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 13th Amendment. The main question that arose in the question was, “does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit the consideration of race in undergraduate admissions decisions”. The overall decision of the Supreme Court was that the University of Texas hadn’t violated the Equal Protection Clause, and in fact that they were permitted to consider race in the admissions process. I do agree with the Supreme Court’s decision. I agree with said decision because the argument made by the plaintiff Fisher was weak, and the rights of life and liberty weren’t in any way tampered with in the admissions process that the University of Texas was going through in the situation suited.

Whether the University’s consideration of race is narrowly tailored to a principled, detailed diversification goal. A university’s approach, actions, and goals must be

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.

Last summer, the Supreme Court ruled against the use of race in the college admissions process in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas. Since then, affirmative action has become a big issue in the media; however, many people still do not even know what affirmative action is. Affirmative action is a policy to prevent discrimination on the basis of “color, religion, sex, or national origin.” Overall, it favors minorities that are often discriminated. It might sound like an excellent policy; however, the use of this policy in the college admissions process is prejudice. In the college admissions process, affirmative action lowers the standards for some races, while raising the standard for other races. For example, an Asian might need a

Some might believe that this could be just a random occurrence, but the same results showed in the University of Texas Law School 's enrollment, three blacks this fall to last years fifty-nine (Applebome a14). Thus, bans on Affirmative Action are having negative effects on enrollment for blacks and other minorities in Texas ' and California 's prominent universities. Therefore, proving that without Affirmative Action, any minority will not have a fair chance in today 's society. Professor Lino Graglia, a critic of Affirmative Action points out "The whole reason you have racial preferences is that the racially preferred do not meet the standards applied to others, if you require that they meet the standards, then they don 't get in." This might be true in some maybe all cases, but in this very true rebuttal to Graglia 's statement Rodney Ellis, Texas state senator, graduate of the University Law School in 1976 says "I clearly got in through an Affirmative Action program, and I don 't apologize for it... I 'm proud of it. It got me in, but it didn 't get me out, didn 't take the bar exam for me, didn 't pass the two hundred and eighty five or so pieces of legislation I 've Scott4 authored." (Applebome a14). Rodney Ellis is a perfect

In an attempt to retain minorities in higher education, efforts of resolving this current issue have met many challenges that have caused decreases in the enrollment of predominantly white institutions. There have been a variety of studies conducted since 2000 to measure the value of higher education including minority attendance and performances. ((NCES,2016:APA,2012;Bischel,2012;; IGI,2017;Tinto2005,2006,2014,: Swail 1999,2008; Kamenetz,2016;USGA, N.D.; GAPS,2015). Most of these occurred in early 2000 with very little to nothing being done during meaningfully in the last decade. In the ACE study, New Jersey, and Arkansas, however, are examining the impact of minority higher education retention and it’s significant to our society and

Affirmative action is a product of the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement and it is intended to provide equal opportunities for those who have been historically discriminated against within our society. Affirmative action policies are those that make an effort to improve opportunities for historically excluded groups within our society. When focusing on higher education, affirmative action is often referring to admission policies that have been put in place to provide equal access to education for groups that have been historically discriminated against, such as minority groups. This topic is greatly debated across college campuses within the United States. Supporters of affirmative action argue that after California Colleges in 1998 had dropped their affirmative action programs, that minority admissions had reportedly fallen. For example UC Berkeley’s admissions fell 61%, and UCLA 36% (Messerli, 2014). Critics of affirmative action argue that the policy is outdated, that we no longer live in a highly racial society, and that this policy is now causing reverse discrimination by favoring one group over another affirmative action is currently an issue not because there is extensive public outcry in support of racial discrimination, this is not to say that racial discrimination does not persist. The controversy of this issue surrounds around the disagreement about how to best fight discrimination in the current day, and whether to even recognize if

During the last several decades, the diversity idea has evolved into higher education. However, implementing goals, concepts, and strategy has not been easy. Creating goals to increase multiculturalism, access, equity, and inclusion needs is complex. For nearly 50 years, higher education has actively addressed campus diversity issues (Smith & Wolf-Wendel, 2005). In the past, effective diversity changes that were made were ignored. Attention to diversity is only given in the face of necessary legal forces. Institutions create changes that are more symbolic but missing in human, financial, and technical resources; or influence new plans only when academic leaders are faced with powerful incidents. This paper will provide the foundation for

However, Affirmative Action actually does the opposite as it promotes equality for all races. It still keeps intact the necessity of accepting scholars based on their qualifications first, while providing equal access to these opportunities towards those who would have otherwise been denied previously without this law. Although quite controversial, Affirmative Action should be enforced in all universities in the United States because of its crucial role in promoting diversity and economic

The world is filled different cultures, races and ethnicities, and it is crucial that our higher education institutions reflect this diversity. Representation matters. We are a country filled with diverse cultures all of which whom need to be represented. The purpose of this literature review is to explain why and how diversity in a higher education setting is important. Students learn better in such an environment and are better prepared to become active participants in our pluralistic, democratic society once they leave school Diversity is not only important among the student population but also within college curriculum. It is an important issue regardless of the setting. However, when it is applied it to a place where people come to learn,

However, affirmative action proponent Ronald Dworkin utilizes evidence amassed from William Bowen and Derek Bok’s research on affirmative action in higher education to undermine both of Steele’s central arguments. Bowen and Bok’s study concluded that blacks do in fact applaud affirmative action because it has had positive effects on their educational experience and

In the 1960’s, affirmative action was something that was necessary to compensate for the past misconduct towards minorities. In 2015, affirmative action is something that is no longer necessary. In the twenty-first century, today’s America is divided more by class and income as opposed to race. If the main goal of affirmative action were to eradicate discrimination, then it should be dispersed on the basis of disadvantage, not on the premise of race. Ultimately, keeping affirmative action around today is detrimental to those who have higher academics and qualifications, because it is not allowing those who surpass criteria recognition.

One of the main problems with seeking diversity involves the choice of characteristics included within the definition of diversity. What human characteristics should be considered worthy of special consideration and representation? Most campuses define diversity through ethnic and racial affirmative action categories, those affirmative action categories reflect the diversity statistics they choose to report. One consequences of this approach are that many groups worthy of campus representation are ignored. Other campuses use a much more expansive definition of diversity, and are overly concerned with representing geography, socio-economic class, unusual life experiences, and talents. On some campuses, this drive for a diverse student population can be harmful and have negative trade-offs including academic standards and budgetary priorities. For example, hiring faculty in the aim of a more diverse staff if they are underqualified, can lead to cynicism about the campus commitment to merit. Once academic standards are bent, it becomes hard to avoid a variety of requests and demands from people of a certain group even ethnicity for special treatment.