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...
Affirmative action in the United States is loosely defined as a policy that redresses the disadvantages of certain minority groups as a result of past discrimination, such as African Americans and Latinos, by giving them preferential treatment with respect to employment and university admissions. In particular, affirmative action has generated a great deal of controversy in university admissions, which has resulted in several Supreme Court cases. Proponents of the policy claim that affirmative action is permissible because a) certain racial groups have suffered from a long past of discrimination and b) there is evidence showing the educational benefits that result from a racially diverse student body reflective of the racial makeup of the United States. Although affirmative action may be a well-intentioned policy whose supporting arguments are based upon true historic facts, the policy as a whole is morally impermissible and only serves to perpetuate the issues it claims to address. In addition, the arguments in favor of affirmative action have several key issues, which include: a) not all groups that have suffered from discrimination benefit from the policy, b) using the two wrongs make a right fallacy to justify discrimination against nonminority groups, c) vague terms such as “critical mass,” d) assuming that an applicant is disadvantaged solely on the basis of race, e) stereotyping minority groups, and f) the contested definition of race in general.
Gose, Ben, and Schmidt, Peter. “Ruling Against Affirmative Action Could Alter Legal Debate and Admissions Practices.” Chronicle of Higher Education. (2001): 36.
Holzer, H., & Neumark, D. (2000). What Does Affirmative Action Do?. Cornell University. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/2696075?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=affirmative&searchText=action&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Daffirmative%2Baction%26amp%3Bprq%3Daffirmative%2Baction%26amp%3Bhp%3D25%26amp%3Bacc%3Don%26amp%3Bwc%3Don%26amp%3Bfc%3Doff%26amp%3Bso%3Drel%26amp%3Bracc%3Doff
The most common question that arises in contemporary debates over affirmative action is, “Does affirmative action still work as intended?” The original purpose of affirmative action in college admissions was to eliminate racial bias in the applicant selection process and provide a helping hand to disadvantaged minority students. Has this happened? The simple answer is “No”, but a more precise answer requires more elaboration. Richard Rodriguez, the Mexican-American author of Hunger of Memory and a direct beneficiary of early affirmative action policies, puts it this way, “I think – as I thought in 1967 – that the black civil rights leaders were correct: Higher education was not, nor is it yet, accessible to many black Americans” (Rodriguez 144).
Lemann, Nicholas. (1995). Taking Affirmative Action Apart. In Robert E. Lang (Ed.), The Reference Shelf: Affirmative Action (pp. 136-158). New York: The H.W. Wilson Co.
In 1961, the notion of affirmative action was first appeared when President John F. Kennedy asked government contractors to take “affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.1” Kennedy originally spoke of "affirmative steps" to prevent discrimination, suggesting general efforts to reach out to minority groups. However, the term is not defined or explained further; there is no indication that a specific policy was intended. Yet, by 1978, the first controversy in college admissions arose in the Bakke v. Regents of the University of California case. Since then, questions about whether or not affirmative action increases equality i...
One of the main arguments made by anti-affirmative action groups is that the use of these special programs will lower academic scores in many universities. Because minorities are accepted into universities with lower entrance exams scores opponents believe that minorities will not succeed in these universities, setting them up to fail in college, thus lowering the ...
Imagine this: it’s 1961, and President Kennedy has just signed Executive Order 10925 into action, forcing government contractors to take affirmative action so that minorities will have an equal chance to find employment. It’s the first order of its kind, and it will lead affirmative action to become utilized in both the workplace and college admissions. But even though Executive Order 10925 was intended as a sympathetic and well-intentioned gesture, affirmative action has sparked many debates across the country. Many declare that affirmative action is necessary and just while others claim that it should be abolished because it actually leads to reverse discrimination. In addition, some opponents of affirmative action go one step further to assert that it actually leads to a perverse phenomenon called “mismatch”, which occurs when underprepared students end up at schools with a far more rigorous and competitive learning environment than they are used to, leading them to fall behind even more. These debates about affirmative action have sometimes climaxed in Supreme Court decisions, with the court constantly deciding and re-deciding what can and cannot be allowed. This shows that many are discontent with what affirmative action is currently achieving and would like to see changes occur in how it is applied. Since affirmative action began with the best of intentions but is not reaching its desired effects, it should be reformed to counteract the negative effects of mismatch. This can be achieved by focusing more attention on reforming the K-12 education system, and on movements to help colleges to release more information about their enrollment.
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 SAT score of 2300 to be considered for admission at a top school such as Yale and a white applicant might need a score of 2100, while an African American or Hispanic only needs a score of 1700. While affirmative action provides equality in the workplace, it has no place in the college admissions process and should, therefore, be abolished and replaced. This type of policy can be repealed completely, replaced with a college admissions process that favors first generation college applicants, or replaced with a policy based on an applicant’s socioeconomic status.
Discrimination is still a chronic global issue, and drastic inequalities still exist at the present time. Thus, the Affirmative Action Law is an important tool to many minorities most especially to women, and people of color, for the reason that this program provides an equality on educational, and professional opportunities for every qualified individual living in the United States. Without this program, a higher education would have been impossible for a “minority students” to attain. Additionally, without the Affirmative Action, a fair opportunity to have a higher-level career...
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.