Benefits of Affirmative Action Programs
The purpose behind affirmative action programs during the admissions process of universities is to promote equal opportunity, and to further desegregate our educational system. Those who do not promote affirmative action feel that these programs instill reverse discrimination, as well as segregation in the universities. They believe that these special programs lower the test scores of prestigious universities while also setting up minorities to fail in the real world. Groups against affirmative action feel that the need for these programs have over grown their usefulness, because of the changing times in which we live in. On the contrary because of past discrimination and segregation affirmative action programs are needed during the admissions process of universities and colleges.
Opponents of affirmative action believe that use of affirmative action programs in the admissions process promotes reverse discrimination, and segregation, which goes against the initial intent of these special programs. They feel that these programs discriminate against non-minorities who cannot be accepted into universities, because of affirmative action. These programs go against the meaning of civil rights, which is to treat all individuals the same under the law regardless of race, religion, sex, or other such social categories (Beckwith 143).
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 ...
... middle of paper ...
...hough times have changes for better for equality, the need for these special programs in the admissions process are still greatly need for the admission numbers are still far from equal. Affirmative action programs must, and still be used in order to promote equality and to give all races an equal opportunity at an education.
Bibliography:
Affirmative Action on Campus. American Civil Liberties Union. 10 December 2000 .
Beckwith, Francis J, and Todd E. Jones. Affirmative Action: Social Justice or Reverse Discrimination. Amherst: Prometheus Books, 1977.
Bowen, William G., and Derek Bok. The Shoe of the River: Long-Term Consequences Of Considering Race In College And University Admissions. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998
WHAT WOULD OUR NATION'S SCHOOLS BE LIKE WITHOUT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION?. American Civil Liberties Union. 10 December 2000 .
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, while a great idea in the beginning, is no longer needed to make up for the past discrimination of women and minorities. It does not get rid of discrimination, but rather creates it towards whites and men. Any form of discrimination is wrong, whether intentional or unintentional. Businesses and universities will set aside a separate pool for minorities and women so they don’t have to originally compete against the whole pool of applicants. A person’s qualifications and how they got to where they are should not be questioned because of affirmative action. The only reason some people are still questioned or considered undeserving is because affirmative action still takes place. Getting rid of affirmative action in universities and businesses will eliminate reverse discrimination and ensure that their qualifications, along with achievements, will not be questioned based on the skin color or gender of a
Affirmative action, the act of giving preference to an individual for hiring or academic admission based on the race and/or gender of the individual has remained a controversial issue since its inception decades ago. Realizing its past mistake of discriminating against African Americans, women, and other minority groups; the state has legalized and demanded institutions to practice what many has now consider as reverse discrimination. “Victims” of reverse discrimination in college admissions have commonly complained that they were unfairly rejected admission due to their race. They claimed that because colleges wanted to promote diversity, the colleges will often prefer to accept applicants of another race who had significantly lower test scores and merit than the “victims”. In “Discrimination and Disidentification: The Fair-Start Defense of Affirmative Action”, Kenneth Himma responded to these criticisms by proposing to limit affirmative action to actions that negate unfair competitive advantages of white males established by institutions (Himma 277 L. Col.). Himma’s views were quickly challenged by his peers as Lisa Newton stated in “A Fair Defense of a False Start: A Reply to Kenneth Himma” that among other rationales, the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action (Newton 146 L. Col.). This paper will also argue that the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action because it cannot be fairly applied in the United States of America today. However, affirmative action should still be allowed and reserved for individuals whom the state unfairly discriminates today.
To sum everything up, we as a human race are not perfect, nor will we ever make solutions that will satisfy both side of arguments. One lesson we can learn from this research paper, however, is that everyone should have the ability to fully enjoy their Equal Protection Clause under the Fourteenth Amendments. Nonetheless, the development of reverse discrimination, the creation of stigma against women and minorities, the buildup of racial tension, and the fact of attempting to solve a racial problem that no longer exist all contributed to the danger of affirmative action. It may be created with good intentions, but certainly not applicable to our society now if all of us wish to be treated equal.
Charles, Camille Z., et al. "Affirmative-Action Programs for Minority Students: Right in Theory, Wrong in Practice." The Chronicle of Higher Education 55.29 (2009). Academic OneFile. Web. 9 Aug. 2011.
Affirmative action is without a doubt, one of the most controversial and debated political topics found throughout the entirety of the history of the United States, especially in regards to college admissions. On both sides of the argument, you have millions of Americans vitriolically defending their beliefs as to whether or not affirmative action is a positive thing that benefits the entirety of America as a whole, or rather an outdated model existing well past its expiration date. Both sides of the argument have its pro and cons, but personally, I am of the opinion that affirmative action in regards to college admissions does more harm than good for America as a whole on a social, political, and economic level, and that it at the very least needs to be modified heavily, if not abolished altogether. However, in order to first understand the arguments both supporting and decrying affirmative action, as well as the controversy behind it, we first need to delve into its history for the related context.
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.
Affirmative action. What was its purpose in the first place, and do we really need it now? It began in an era when minorities were greatly under represented in universities and respectable professions. Unless one was racist, most agreed with the need of affirmative action in college admissions and in the workplace. Society needed an active law that enforced equality during a period when civil rights bills were only effective in ink. With so much of America¹s work force spawned from integrated schools now, some may question whether racism really is the problem anymore, and many college students might answer yes. They see it on college campuses today, and they are not sure why.
Affirmative action started in the 1960’s as a way to end discrimination against African American and later all minorities - including women. By migrating people of all color into workplaces and colleges/universities seemed to be the suitable solution to diversify our nation. Although blacks had been freed for a 100 years, they continually struggled with segregation. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 banned the segregation of all sort in the United States, however that was not enough. Congress mandated the affirmative action program as a plan of desegregation. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy made reference to this plan, but it was not until September 1965 that it was enforced by President Lyndon Johnson. The program affected federal jobs, to include federal contracting company, and universities. In order to receive federal funding, each entity had to hire and enroll minorities. Affirmative action was a good jump start to get our nation to where it is today. However, affirmative action should not be continued because it is a form of discrimination, it is more harmful than helpful, and it supplements race or gender for one’s qualification.
Sacks, David, and Peter Thiel. "The Case Against Affirmative Action." Stanford Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 May 2014.
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.
Introduction Known as one of the biggest obstacles in higher education to date would arguably be the use of affirmative action within the higher education admission process for both private and public institutions (Kaplin & Lee, 2014; Wang & Shulruf, 2012). The focus of current research is an attempt to either justify or deny the use of affirmative action within current practices through various higher education institutions, and though any one person could potentially be swayed to side with the rationale to maintain its use or disregard, the facts are quite clear that the future of this practice is unclear. Therefore, this essay will present current research in an attempt to determine if affirmative action should continue to be used within college admission decisions. What is Affirmative Action?
Tairo, Mario. "A Critical Look at Affirmative Action - Panorama - TakingITGlobal." A Critical Look at Affirmative Action - Panorama - TakingITGlobal. Taking It Global, 05 Apr. 2005. Web. 01 May 2014.
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....
The purpose ofAffirmative Action is a simple one, it exists to level the playing field, so to speak, in the areas of hiring and college admissions based on characteristics that usually include race, sex, and/or ethnicity. A certain minority group or gender may be underrepresented in an arena, often employment or academia, in theory due to past or ongoing discrimination against members of the group. In such a circumstance, one school of thought maintains that unless this group is concretely helped to achieve a more substantial representation, it will have difficulty gaining the critical mass and acceptance in that role, even if overt discrimination against the group is eradicated. For this reason, more effort must be made to recruit persons from that background, train them, and lower the entrance requirements for them. (Goldman, 1976, p. 179) Proponents of affirmative action argue that affirmative action is the best way to corre...