Affirmative Action And Its Effects On College Demographics Essay

Is affirmative action in higher education needed? This question provokes a myriad of emotions. Is affirmative action antiquated and unneeded in 21st century America? Or are the racial boundaries of this country’s ancestors still in effect? America’s Declaration of Independence states, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” yet quotas, check marks, and plus factors give minority students advantages in the admission processes of the country’s universities and colleges (NARA).

Affirmative Action has become one of the most controversial issues regarding college admissions. It is an issue that exposes profiling to its highest extent. Race, gender and income now become vital factors in education opportunities. Affirmative Action is the procedure that is used as a criteria in admissions that will increase the points a college applicant receives on their application evaluation based on the previous factors. Whether race should be considered in the admission of a college applicant, is without a doubt a must in all states. Affirmative Action definitely will improve the opportunities of a minority student applying at a university but it will not be the deciding factor. When

“ . . . [Government] contractor[s] will 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.”

Ever since President John Kennedy issued executive order 10925 in 1961, Americans have been arguing both for and against its effectiveness and necessity. The importance of executive order 10925 is that it created the Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity and mandated that federally funded projects implement "affirmative action" to insure that hiring and employment practices were free of racial bias. It planned to accomplish this by combating long term racial failures. Essentially, its purpose was to promote equality through fair and equal employment regardless of race. However, many believe that the current practice of hiring and recruiting based on race is counterproductive to the original purpose of executive order 10925 in that employers

Affirmative action policies have been in place since 1957 (Rubio 144). Presidents Kennedy and Johnson signed executive orders in 1961 and 1964, respectively, requiring government agencies and their contractors to take 'affirmative' steps to ensure minority participation. Johnson's order was modified two years later to include women. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed discriminatory hiring, promotion, and retention practices in both the private and public sectors, and established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

There are many supporters and opponents of Affirmative Action. The focus of Affirmative action is meant to be an attempt at equality throughout society. Every sector in America would be equal and unprejudiced. On the other hand, adopting affirmative action would force many employers to replace hard-working employees with those possibly less qualified simply due to their gender or ethnicity. Throughout history, people have been categorized into different groups. These groupings were based on certain characteristics people shared, whether it was their ethnicity, race, gender, or religion. Society is notorious for distinguishing among different groups and favoring one or two of them. Undoubtedly, this separation of peoples, led to increased tension between various groups. As time progressed, the conflicts intensified, and it became apparent that a change was necessary. So I intend to educate the reader on the origin of Affirmative Action; how it impacted the American society; is it still needed in today’s environment; what are some of the drawbacks or issues that came from implementing Affirmative Action, and finally what is the most beneficial aspect from Affirmative Action. One of the most famous quotes about Affirmative Action comes from President Lyndon Johnson who explained the rationale behind the use of affirmative action to achieve equal opportunity in a 1965 speech: “You do not take a person, who for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring

Turning to the realm of education, some opponents of affirmative action claim that its policies actually backfire, and that it harms the very groups it is intended to help. For example, Shelby Steele, a researcher who specializes in racial studies at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute, claims that blacks “stand to lose more from [affirmative action] than they gain,” (Steele 113). Steele argues that affirmative action in higher education precludes the success of racial minorities to “achieve proportionate representation on their own” because, as presently implemented, it confuses representation with development (115). He also claims that affirmative action leads to black self-doubt because it often calls for less prepared black students to compete directly with well-prepped whites (116).

Two people stand in a room looking at a vibrant painting and receive a totally different image. This is something we all realize can happen. It is our different perspectives that make us valuable too each other. When trying to solve a problem or create a new idea, we need each other to bring forth considerations and concepts that would never occur otherwise. This concept is something most of us grasp in theory, yet it never ceases to confound and confuse us if someone draws a conclusion tangent from ours when presented with the same information. This situation lies at the heart of the argument over affirmative action. Policies that are viewed by some as righting past wrongs are viewed by

Affirmative action in college admissions continues to be heatedly debated. In 2003, the Supreme Court had ruled in Grutter v. Bollinger that diversity was a compelling interest for colleges to use race in admissions. In the amicus brief that the American Sociological Association et al. provided to the Supreme Court, sociological evidence was presented to elucidate the value of affirmative action. Yet in 2006, Proposal 2 was passed in Michigan to ban affirmative action in public education (Levitsky). Based on the information in the amicus brief, the correlation between race and socioeconomic status of the minorities, and the negative effects of banning affirmative action, admissions officers at the University of Michigan should consider

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

Affirmative Action is any effort taken to expand opportunity for women or racial, ethnic and national origin minorities by using membership in those groups that have been subject to discrimination as a consideration. The Fourteenth Amendment states that no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. As a result, Affirmative action is not consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment. In this essay, I will first discuss the violation of Affirmative Action against the Fourteenth Amendment. Second, how Affirmative Action helps one group of

In 1971, the Department of Labor under Richard Nixon issued an order requiring all federal contractors to develop "an acceptable affirmative action program," including "an analysis of areas within which the contractor is deficient in the utilization of minority groups and women, and further, goals and timetables to which the contractor's good faith efforts must be directed to correct the deficiencies." (3) By now, affirmative action goals had become the full-fledged policy of U.S. government contracting.

A major controversy encompassing the country is the issue of affirmative action. Many believe that the abolition, or at least restructure, of affirmative action in the United States will benefit the nation for many logical reasons. Originally, affirmative action began as an attempt to eliminate discrimination and provide a source of opportunity; affirmative action did not begin as an attempt to support just minorities and women. In addition, affirmative action naturally creates resentment when the less qualified are preferred instead of the people actually deserve the admission or job. Another reason that has existed since the abolition of slavery is the myth that women and ?minorities? cannot compete

Affirmative Action has been an issue of contention since its inception during the Civil Rights struggles of mid 20th century America. Discrimination could no longer be tolerated and the Unites States government had an obligation to encourage equality at all levels of the social infrastructure. The main type of discrimination being addressed by Affirmative Action programs was racial discrimination. The Merriam Webster dictionary defines racism as: ‘a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.’ The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibited discrimination of any kind, laid the foundation for the introduction of Affirmative Action

The idea of Affirmative action was first brought up by JFK to ensure equality in employment for all people regardless of their race, creed, color, or national origin. However, Many institutions such as college took advantage of “equality” as an excuse to admit students based on their race rather than their merits. AB 1726, also known as the Accounting for Health and Education in API Demographics (AHEAD) Act, was first proposed by California Assemblyman Rob Bonta (California Legislative Information). It is a data disaggregation bill that intends to help better address the disparity in public health and education among API(Asian Pacific Islander)group by adding additional major Asian groups, including Bangladeshi, Hmong, Indonesian,