Affirmative action
developed in this country in response to the racial inequalities deeply
entrenched within American society. After the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights
Act, the government mandated that colleges and universities explicitly consider
race in their admissions decisions in an effort to achieve equal opportunity
and break away from a tradition of segregation and exclusion (Orfield, 2001). Despite
the intense controversy this issue has ignited in the higher education
community, colleges and universities continue to support efforts to increase
access for historically disadvantaged students. In a recent article in the
chronicle of higher education, the Obama administration publicly expressed its
support for the use of racial preferences in undergraduate freshman admissions
at University of Texas at Austin (http://chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/obamas-affirmative-action-brief/34003).
In recent years, the rationale for affirmative action policies has gradually receded
from its original purpose to achieve equity in representation to the promotion
of diversity as an educational benefit.
In a nation built
on the idea of a meritocracy, where hard work is truly rewarded and every
individual has a chance at the American dream, then one must wonder why the
“achievement gap” continues to widen. Higher education institutions often
proclaim that they make a strong effort to promote a diverse student
enrollment, but there seems to be a legitimate concern as to whether simply
recruiting a varied student body is sufficient to address the underlying
problem of minority college readiness. Although postsecondary institutions seem
to have good intentions, giving preferential treatment to disadvantaged
students only promotes a viscous cycle of unprepared college students at risk
for both academic and social struggles. The challenge to overcoming the lack of
college campus representation of minority and low-income students involves
addressing the complex social structures and institutional barriers that
maintain these disparities.
Ideally, we would
live in a society where affirmative action, college access interventions and
other equal opportunity programs were no longer necessary, but unfortunately
this is not the case. Furthermore, instead of focusing on the advantages and
disadvantages one group has compared to another, why not engage in a meaningful
discussion on how we can provide access to quality primary and secondary education
for all students? A scholar’s pre-collegiate educational experience seems to be
an important indicator of his or her eventual access to and success in higher
education. In this new era of equal opportunity, the burden on higher education admissions officers to admit a diverse
student body may begin to shift to K-12 leaders who must ensure that a larger pool of students are adequately prepared for admission to America’s most selective colleges
and universities.
References
Orfield, G. (Ed.). (2001). Diversity
Challenged: Evidence on the Impact of Affirmative Action. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard and Civil Rights Project.
I posit that "affirmative action" lost its footing as a revenue stream in the early 2000's the same way the GI Bill did in the mid 1980's. Ralph Waldo Emerson once said of altruism, "The history of persecution is a history of endeavors to cheat nature, to make water run up hill, to twist a rope of sand." Some could question Emerson's faith in the "good-nature-of-man." I am not arguing that we as academic and administrative professionals harbor ulterior motives, but we must maximize-balancing-all-interests when it comes to building university populations. As stated in King's blog-it is a question of preparation, i.e., a question of funding. As universities switch to MOOC's and other online platforms, the question of diversity may become moot. Many would claim that top students of color are being admitted and aggressively recruited by tier one colleges and universities. The question is the widening gap between primary and secondary student populations, and the even wider gap for students on the tertiary tier. An economist could argue the cyclical nature of "streams of revenue", an educator could argue for greater equality to bring leverage between the "haves and have nots," An administrator could argue competition and readiness-and each person would have a valid point(s). As higher education professionals we are charged with the task of leveraging all of these concerns in the hopes of building a campus that is pluralistic and diverse.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to diversity in education, it's always a numbers game. I believe that institutions can fool themselves and anyone else all they want to believe that their community is diverse. A 10% black/African American population may seem significant and in favor of more government aid, but it's a useless figure if these students are "silo-ed" from other student populations. I strongly believe in teaching our students about social politics. Our students need to be empowered to learn from each other and support one another. Diversity is truly achieved when students are provided the opportunity to have conversations surrounding race, ethnicity, sexuality, class religion, etc.
ReplyDelete-Paul R.
I think affirmative action has reared it head in the last few years. Like you mentioned, universities are constantly pushing "diversity" in their communities and having a varied student body. But what does diversity mean? Does it mean that you have to meet a racial quota every year? Does it mean you provide more scholarship money so that low-income students who do truly meet the criteria of a university's standards has the money to attend? Does it mean more programing or community services opporuntities? I think universities really need to clarify this term "diversity".
ReplyDeleteErica Wasserman
Great topic, Chase! This is something I encounter everyday in a variety of forms. As an underrepresented minority, I often face assumptions that my ethnicity and cultural background played a role in my admission. Similarly, as an undergraduate admission officer, I sometimes encounter prospective students and their families that assume that only students of color have access to scholarship money, which I know is not the case. Affirmative action is very much alive in my profession today, however. While "racial quotas" at places of higher learning are a thing of the past, an increase in underrepresented and minority students is desired. Essentially, I am an advocate for college access for all. As first-generation, gay minority, I am no stranger to being underrepresented. Unfortunately, the bar is not equal for everybody based on our country's history, and the bar needs to be raised or lowered to create 'equal access,' which recognizes our original limitations or priveleges. Without this recogniation society could be limited in how far it progresses. The recognition allows our societal practices to be multi-dimensional and open for a broader exchange of goods and ideas on a domestic and international level. A few weeks ago, I assisted a young high school senior with his personal statement for his college application. He attends a private Jesuit school in the city of Los Angeles and wanted the subject of his essay to be about his encounter with a street-walking, homeless teen on LA's skid row. This encounter was organized by one of the priests at his school where a group of students participated and listened to the homeless boy speak of his experience. This is an extreme example, but I wanted to express the passion and wonder my student shared about hearing from someone his age that had a completely different lifestyle than his. This type of interaction and learning happens in the classroom and on the college campus when a diverse student population are brought together by the common bond of higher education. Ethnicity, culture, geography, socioeconomic status, and academic interests are only a few areas that differentiate each of us. What a disservice we, as higher education professionals and educators, could be doing by not promoting a diverse and interactive community!
ReplyDeleteIt seems almost certain that the Supreme Court is going to curtail or perhaps even eliminate the use of affirmative action in admissions once they get their hands on the Fisher case. While I agree with those of you who point out that raw numbers of students of color (i.e., 10% African American or what have you) are not an actual measure of diversity per se, I think we're looking at what will likely be a pretty sharp drop in the number of African American and Hispanic students enrolled in our top colleges if we're forced to move to a race-neutral or race-blind admissions process. What will colleges and universities do then? How will we ensure that our student bodies remain diverse and that we're encouraging meaningful interactions between all of our students?
ReplyDelete- Joel
Equity in education at the k-12 level has long been contended. It is clear that a student's opportunities can be deeply limited depending on the neighborhood they live in. Charter schools, in fact, have arisen in order to curtail the achievement gap by allowing teachers to experiment and be accountable for results.
ReplyDeleteI think it's important to note that ethnic minorities are not the only groups suffering from lower competencies once in college. Many working class caucasian Americans also face the same issue. Institutions of higher learning each have individual rationales for the implementation of affirmative action, whether it is to showcase a diversity of life experiences to benefit the classroom learning experiences for all or simply to tout having a diverse campus. At the end of the day, affirmative action was supposed to right the wrongs of prejudice previous to the 1960s and not to fix the achievement gap between socioeconomic classes.
The sweeping generalization that underrepresented ethnic minorities are typically incapable of college level work is wrong. While institutions looks to recruit highly eligible students across groups, the issue, to me, is not a racial one. In fact, k-12 schools should be college-going centers and normalize the expectation of college and achievement. Socializing students from a young age into a healthy and competitive academic environment will then train students to strive for the best. Think about the inner city k-12 schools research presents to us as having a multitude of problems. As administrators (at either k-12 or higher ed level) we hold a significant potential to turn social issues in our communities around by instilling confidence in students.
^JUANA ESCOBAR
ReplyDelete