Affirmative action in public education systems has been one of the most hotly debated areas of American policy. The debate on whether racial quotas should be maintained by universities has divided many, and as a result the Supreme Court will hear another case on affirmative action, this one concerning the University of Texas. According to an article published by CNN yesterday, Abigail Noel Fisher had her application to the university rejected in 2008, and consequently sued the institution for racial discrimination in the application process. There will be no concrete ruling until early 2013, but the case will be a fascinating addition to other issues surfacing during this election year.
Affirmative action was originally instituted to allow ethnic minorities with inferior educational resources equal opportunities in higher education. However, with growing diversification and a much larger portion of the population able to attend college, the policy is ironically discriminatory. The socioeconomic landscape of America is constantly evolving; and when college admissions are concerned, it is now the norm that if you’re an ethnic minority you have a certain advantage for admission to an elite institution. While diversity is an important component of the college experience, this diversification cannot come at the cost of equally qualified students being denied on the basis of race. Furthermore, these quotas could actually perpetuate racial stereotypes rather than eliminate them.
Once the case was filed with the Supreme Court, the University of Texas defended its application process, claiming it took into account a multitude of factors when deciding which students to admit. Obviously historical events have had an impact on some minorities’ assets and opportunities, but the college admissions process should not serve as the forum for resolving these issues. Tackling racial inequality in education does not begin with colleges – reform has to be pursued at the elementary and high school levels. If resources are adequately distributed in all school districts, including poorer neighbourhoods, the issue of minorities not having equal access to educational opportunity early in life would be rectified. The potential implications of any decision the Supreme Court makes will be important to education policy; hopefully college decisions will be based on individual merit and aptitude rather than race.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
I’m a little surprised by the myopic views of Affirmative Action presented in this editorial. If you read the original 1978 Bakke case or the 2003 Grutter case, it exemplifies the cases where affirmative action can be used and the restrictions placed on it. Specifically, quota systems are unconstitutional and have been since 78. So is discriminating on the basis of race. Race cannot even give a standardized mechanical advantage (Graetz v. Bolinger), but rather schools must consider each individual candidate holistically and decide whether or not their enrollment will satisfy a compelling interest in diversity.
MIT’s Tech got this issue right. The FreeP got it wrong. The notion that we live in a meritocratic system free from systematic and covert (let alone overt) prejudices is absurd, and not giving people a benefit for having overcome a lifetime of discrimination is absurd.
http://tech.mit.edu/V132/N5/editorial.html