Affirmative action is “the practice of improving the educational and job opportunities of members of groups that have not been treated fairly in the past because of their” race or sex (“Affirmative Action”). No one can argue that inequality is evident in today’s society, although there are both intelligent and unintelligent ways of solving it. Affirmative action, for instance, creates a separate scholarship for certain races, which is the definition of a racial barrier. In addition, it breaks governmental laws and negatively impacts both minorities and majorities. Affirmative action’s end goal, diversity in colleges, cannot justify the means that are necessary to achieve it.
First of all, affirmative action is legally wrong. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed to eliminate discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin (The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Sec. 202). Affirmative action ignores this by using race as a factor in college applications. This creates discrimination toward the majority group of America on the basis of race. In addition, the Fourteenth Amendment states that no “state [has the right to] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without [the] due process of law” (U.S. Constitution, Amend. XIV, Sec. 1). By using race as a factor to take away education from some majorities,
…show more content…
Majorities are not simply given admission to colleges. They must work just as hard as minorities to develop as students and prepare themselves for the future. Sometimes, they are not accepted into college simply because they are a majority race, even if they are more qualified than a minority student who is accepted. Race should not be used as a factor in applications, because “students—minority or otherwise—do not automatically benefit from attending a school that they enter with academic qualifications well below the median level of their classmates”
I believe that this idea is immoral; I don’t believe affirmative action harms minorities, and I don’t believe people should be accepted to college for the reason of being black, but instead should be a fair process for both whites and blacks.
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 ethical permissibility.
African- American males have been underrepresented among college students and degree earners for years, however the reason for this is often misconstrued. The percentages of white high school graduates “In 1998-2000 had jumped to 46. However, only 40 percent of African-Americans and 34 percent of Hispanics in the same age group were attending college” (McGlynn, Angela Proviteira). The question then to pose, is why minority students are not succeeding in college compared to Caucasian students, “Only 47% of Black male students graduated on time
Imagine, your walking down the street looking for a job. You see a sign in the window that says, “Whites encouraged to apply.” Imagine the period in time when just being white got you into a college, without any other considerations of grades or athletic ability. Those were the days of the Jim Crow laws. Now these instances have happened in the past 20 years, through new laws called Affirmative Action. The big argument is over these few years of affirmative action. Have they alleviated the pain of the Jim Crow laws? The answer to that question is no. Especially, in the case of the University of Michigan‘s use of Affirmative Action in the acceptance of students. Using race as a factor of admission is wrong and is reverse discrimination.
Affirmative action has been a controversial topic ever since it was established in the 1960s to right past wrongs against minority groups, such as African Americans, Hispanics, and women. The goal of affirmative action is to integrate minorities into public institutions, like universities, who have historically been discriminated against in such environments. Proponents claim that it is necessary in order to give minorities representation in these institutions, while opponents say that it is reverse discrimination. Newsweek has a story on this same debate which has hit the nation spotlight once more with a case being brought against the University of Michigan by some white students who claimed that the University’s admissions policies accepted minority students over them, even though they had better grades than the minority students. William Symonds of Business Week, however, thinks that it does not really matter. He claims that minority status is more or less irrelevant in college admissions and that class is the determining factor.
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.
Affirmative action was created to allow minorities to have more opportunities in the workforce and in education. It still remains to be a debate whether affirmative action should be a necessary route even though we have made progress towards greater equality. The argument over Affirmative action has been going on for some time with two opposing sides. There is one side who finds Affirmative action as an opportunity to the less fortunate; those who are against have the belief that it promotes less qualified individuals rather than a person own merit.
Today there is considerable disagreement in the country over Affirmative Action with the American people. MSNBC reported a record low in support for Affirmative Action with 45% in support and 45% opposing (Muller, 2013). The affirmative action programs have afforded all genders and races, exempting white males, a sense of optimism and an avenue to get the opportunities they normally would not be eligible for. This advantage includes admission in colleges or hiring preferences with public and private jobs; although Affirmative Action has never required quotas the government has initiated a benefits program for the schools and companies that elect to be diversified. The advantages that are received by the minorities’ only take into account skin color, gender, disability, etc., are what is recognized as discriminatory factors. What is viewed as racism to the majority is that there ar...
Minorities are a growing segment of the population. However, this group continues to be underrepresented in the area of post secondary education. Obtaining an advanced degree remains a likely predictor of future career success. The problem facing the minority student is that barriers persist which continue to hinder enrollment, retention, and graduation rates in institutions of higher education. These barriers must be identified and examined and solutions offered if college completion rates are to be increased for this population.
Affirmative Action Affirmative action can be defined as action taken to compensate for past unfairness in the education of minorities. The current system of affirmative action allows universities to admit applicants from certain ethnic and minority groups with lower credentials. The main purpose of affirmative action is to produce a diverse campus population that is comparable to today's society. The use of race as a facto by which someone is admitted to college in the long run will compromise the quality of the university. Implicating affirmative action to solve the problem of diversity on today's campuses has lead to the creation of problems.
This indicates the fear and doubt affirmative action creates for minority groups. Acceptance into college is an earned privilege, a privilege that one has to work for his or her entire childhood to achieve. Schoolwork, homework, sacrifices; children do these things since they are little to assure their acceptance into a college. It is a rite of passage that society looks forward to. Yet, affirmative action can be taken as a condescension and insult to those people by implying that minorities cannot achieve their goals through hard work and ability. Moreover, instead of trying to strive for the best possibility, affirmative action allows African Americans to use the injustices, which is slavery, as an excuse as to why they cannot be successful today.
Affirmative action policies were created to help level the playing field in American society. Supporters claim that these plans eliminate economic and social disparities to minorities, yet in doing so, they’ve only created more inequalities. Whites and Asians in poverty receive little to none of the opportunities provided to minorities of the same economic background (Messerli). The burden of equity has been placed upon those who were not fortunate enough to meet a certain school’s idea of “diversity” (Andre, Velasquez, and Mazur). The sole reason for a college’s selectivity is to determine whether or not a student has the credentials to attend that school....
A black student has been waiting for that letter of acceptance from the college of her choice. She receives that letter and gets in. At the same time a female white student is also waiting for her letter of acceptance from that same college. The white student receives a rejection letter even though she had higher test scores and a better GPA than the black student. Was this fair to the students? Was it the best outcome for the country in the long run? Many minority students are accepted into colleges and law schools due to their race while at the same time white students are rejected because colleges have to make room for these minorities. The question many colleges are facing now is whether race should be considered in college admissions. Is affirmative action necessary anymore and is it fair to all students? What is its long-term impact on American and world society? Liberals say, “Yes affirmative action is a fair path and a path that still needs to be taken if our society is going to move forward.” Conservatives argue that affirmative action is reverse discrimination against white students and that widespread use of affirmative action in colleges is creating an un-level playing field.
I believe that colleges and Universities should be able to use low-level affirmative action when deciding whether to accept a student. I believe this because affirmative action when limited can create a more diverse college demographic in our country, which can be largely beneficial to minorities as well as non-minorities.
Every year at the same time, thousands of students face the same difficult decision: What college should I attend? Consider two young men both of the highest intellectual capacity and deserving of admission into the nation's most prestigious institution. Steven, high school All American, student body President, and leader of the debate team, hopes to be admitted to the university of his dreams. Christopher, most valuable player in the high school division and aspiring NBA athlete, wants to attend college with students of the same caliber. Steven's parents are both successful neurosurgeons at the local hospital planning to see to it that their son is awarded recognition for his efforts. Christopher's mother, unemployed and unable to care for her family, is optimistic that her son will succeed regardless. Now, the university has a tough decision to make. Christopher receives his letter, thanking him for applying but denying his admission, encouraging him to apply at a later date. After all, Christopher is white and, according to Affirmative Action, Steven is more deserving of admission based on his ethnicity which "increases the diversity of the institution by allowing students of different races and cultures the same opportunities."(1) But does it?