Affirmative Action In College Admissions

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

Newspaper headlines and public forums demand educational reform with growing frequency. Race-sensitive admissions policies are often at the center of these debates. For example, according to the Los Angeles Times on March 21, 2001, the Los Angeles Community College district trustees are scheduled to vote for a resolution to support the University of California’s move to reinstate affirmative action in its admissions policies. This reinstatement has visible student support as seen in the March 15, 2001 rallies at the UC Regent’s meeting in which over 1,000 supporters of affirmative action came out to voice their opinion. This activity closely follows two other perceived victories for affirmative action proponents when two recent court

California's decision in 1996 to outlaw the use of race in public college admissions was widely viewed as the beginning of the end for affirmative action at public universities all over the United States. But in the four years since Californians passed Proposition 209, most states have agreed that killing affirmative action outright would deepen social inequality by denying minority citizens access to higher education. The half-dozen states that are actually thinking about abandoning race-sensitive

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

Politically speaking, the United States is a country founded on the principles of equality, one that strives to ensure that all its citizens are treated equally and have equal opportunities. Despite all of this, the United States is not predicated on equal outcomes and, as such, some people will naturally rise while others fall. To some, this may seem unfair, but the truth is that, guaranteeing equal outcomes for all people, would severely undermine the foundation on which the United States was built while also threatening its democracy since, to guarantee equal outcomes, some overriding governmental body would have to take the necessary steps to do so. Since affirmative action is a step toward guaranteeing equal outcomes – even when these outcomes should not be equal – it should be prohibited from having any place in the college admissions process. Instead, there should be more emphasis on guaranteeing equal opportunity, and this can be done by “strengthening public education…we must make certain that every child in public school can learn as much and go as far as his or her talents permit” (Summer, 2012, p. 3). Strengthening public education so that the standards are higher and there is a more rigorous curriculum would lift everybody up equally, and would therefore be more in step with American’s democratic ideals than admitting students into college simply based on

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).

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

Affirmative action policies are passionately debated by everyone from educators and politicians to ordinary citizens, all who hold differing opinions on both the necessity and validity of the policies. There is no doubt affirmative action is an emotional topic and deals with the

The utilization of race in affirmative action policies in higher education has been a topic of contention for several decades now. Since the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we have seen some of the most heated debates over the fairness of affirmative action and the impacts on society the utilization of race creates. With such pending questions on fairness and of the constitutionality of affirmative action policies two major Supreme Court cases have arisen, University of California Regents v. Bakke and Grutter v. Bollinger, both impacting university admissions policies throughout the country and setting precedent in following rulings. Following the two rulings of these cases, I argue that affirmative action and the utilization of

The various alternative forms of Affirmative Action all have received national attention. Yet, the country is divided on all of these issues, specifically how university admissions should assess issues of merit and diversity against national fundamental issues of diversity and fairness.

According to the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (1993), African-American in higher education face many impediments such as not being hired, by prominent white universities and colleges. President Kennedy signed “Executive Order 110925 in 1961” making affirmative-action in the higher education field, a priority. Many continue to question what is affirmation-action, what does it do? What does it mean? And what is it use for in United States. Although African-Americans focus on many issues in education and employment, as two of them are primary concerns Affirmation-action is specifically concerned with

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

As affirmative action has become a simplistic strategy to decrease racial bigotry, it has developed into undermining the minority while producing favoritism. Additionally, the flawed policy has created preference within career fields and an academic mismatch among races. To eliminate this outdated system, financial-based affirmative action would serve as a revolutionary law that would help those suffering in poverty without highlighting the color of an individual 's skin.

As a testament to the next discussion point of opportunities, especially within the realm of college admission, I have experienced firsthand the opportunities presented by affirmative action. As a low-income, first-generation college student, Virginia Tech had offered me a full scholarship based solely on merit and financial need. As a “minority” according to Virginia Tech, I had an