More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of diversity in undergraduate education
Paper on diversity in higher education
Essay on diversity in higher education
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Importance of diversity in undergraduate education
Abigail Fisher applied for admission to the University of Texas in 2008 and was denied. She was unqualified for the university’s top ten percent plan (Ten percent plan definition: guaranteed admission for any student in the top ten percent of their high school class (has to be in state of Texas)). For those who do not meet the requirements of the ten percent plan their applications are determined by several factors such as race. Fisher proceeded to sue the University, and claimed that utilizing race as a factor for the application process violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. She claimed that the University discriminated her for being white, but the district court claimed the admissions process constitutional. Then
In 1973 a thirty-three year-old Caucasian male named Allan Bakke applied to and was denied admission to the University of California Medical School at Davis. In 1974 he filed another application and was once again rejected, even though his test scores were considerably higher than various minorities that were admitted under a special program. This special program specified that 16 out of 100 possible spaces for the students in the medical program were set aside solely for minorities, while the other 84 slots were for anyone who qualified, including minorities. What happened to Bakke is known as reverse discrimination. Bakke felt his rejections to be violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment, so he took the University of California Regents to the Superior Court of California. It was ruled that "the admissions program violated his rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment"1 The clause reads as follows:"...No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor without due process of the law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."2 The court ruled that race could not be a factor in admissions. However, they did not force the admittance of Bakke because the court could not know if he would have been admitted if the special admissions program for minorities did not exist.
When conducting research for my project, I came across a website that contained a few primary sources regarding the Salem Witch Trials. One of these primary sources was the photo of a legal document explaining the death warrant and reasons for execution of a woman named Bridget Bishop. Bishop was claimed to be a witch in Salem during the year 1692, and the document explaining her significance involving witchcraft resides in the Peabody Essex Museum in Salem, Massachusetts. My thesis for this primary source is that the judge and jury believed they were seeking justice by executing Bishop, a woman whose death was truthfully based on her differences as a person rather than actual crimes she committed.
Evaluation. In this particular case, the justices continued to follow the trend of other cases that questioned the equal protection clause before it. The court admitted Sweatt to the University of Texas law school because of unequal opportunities in the Negro facility. This case drew closer to ridding the nation of " separate but equal,"sated in the 14th amendment.
When Bakke applied again in 1974 he was once again rejected. This time Bakke sued the University of California. His position was that the school had excluded him on the basis of his race and violated his rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the California Constitution, and civil rights legislation. The trial court ruled in Bakke's favor, however they did not order the University of California to admit him. Bakke appealed to the California Supreme Court where they ruled that the school's admissions programs were unconstitutional and ordered the school to admit Bakke as a student.
A person must be accountable for his/her actions. In the play “The Crucible” Abigail Williams is a victim of her society. She is a vindictive person who always had to have her way, and also lead the girls in the accusations. However, can she be excused or pardoned because of the influence of outside forces upon her?
When gender discrimination is mentioned, it is often in the case of a women being discriminated against. In this article Joe Hogan filed a lawsuit against MUW because he was denied admission due to his gender. In the district court he was denied preliminary injunctive relief. However, this decision was later overturned by the Supreme Court. The university was trying to hold on to its tradition. While Mr. Hogan was trying to get an education and a degree from a school near his home in Columbus, Mississippi.
In 2008 Abigail Fisher was denied admission to the University of Texas her argument was that her right to equal protection was violated because the university is using race for their admissions and she is white. Fisher challenged the university’s consideration of race in the undergraduate admissions process. Before Abigail Fisher there was another case that was presented in 1996 similar to that of Fishers the Hopwood v. Texas that also argued race-conscious admissions because of the unfair advantage that minorities were given the unfair advantage. After this case was made the Texas Legislature passed a law agreeing that the top 10 percent of their high school
On February 26, 1946 Herman Sweatt, who had excellent academic credentials and met all standards for acceptance into the university, was denied admission into the University of Texas Law School because of his African American race. At the time, the University of Texas had a separate law school for African Americans to attend because segregation was still widely accepted in the United States. The University of Texas Law School had 16 full-time professors, 3 part-time professors, 850 students, and over 65,000 volumes in their library along with an excellent reputation ("Find Law"). Meanwhile the separate college for African Americans had 5 full-time professors, 23 attending students, and only 16,500 volumes to study (“Find Law”). The inequality between the two schools was obvious, and many applicants began to question change among the university. Herman, along with many others, denied their acceptance into the separate college and decided to fight for equal education. Being on the verging years of civil rights and sixties revolution, the student’s will power was driven by their years of being unequal in their cruel society. These denials would prove to be the beginning of a long and stressful road that would later influence the decision of Brown vs. Board of Education (Cantu).
In 2008, Abigail Fisher is a white student from Houston who claims she was wrongly denied from admission to the University of Texas (in Austin). She sued UT for racial discrimination, which she claims she had the right of racial equality under the 14th Amendment.. UT denied her admission, and Fisher blamed the school’s affirmative action program, which includes race and ethnicity susceptible to being review for certain applications. One of her claims against UT was that there were students in class with lower grades and doing less activities than her, but were accepted to UT due to their race.
When reviewing this case, several question came to mind. What were the differences in the special admissions and general admissions process? Would the special program accept disadvantaged whites and would that have influenced the decision of the court? What classifies as a minority or disadvantaged? To what extent can race be used as a criteria in the admission process?
The next challenge to Affirmative Action programs in higher education sets the precedent for future cases moving forward to the 21st century. The Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1974) involved a white Anglo male, Allan Bakke, and the University of California, Davis Medical School (UCDMS). The plaintiff, already obtained a Master’s degree in mechanical engineering, was denied admission to UCDMS. Bakke claimed that the university’s special admission minority program had reduced the number of places for which he could compete (Moreno, 2003, p. 17). During this time, many higher education institutions began using quota systems as a means to increase the number of students of color in their campus (Smallwood, 2015, p. 2). According
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978) - The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that using racial quotas in college admission decisions violated the Equal Protection Clause. The Equal Protection Clause, included in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, affirms that "no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The University of Texas, Abigail Fisher, a white female, was denied acceptance to the university. She argued that the reason she did not get into the school was because they based her application on race. The state of Texas passed a law to where the University of Texas has to accepted the top ten percent of each high school’s class. She was not in the top ten percent of her class, so she applied to the other non-ten percent. The university does base the applicants that are not a part of the top ten percent of race. Fisher filed a suit that it is a violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to base an applicant on race. The University of Texas argued that they base some applicants on a race to add a sense of diversity to the
The University of Texas’ holistic admission system does not survive a strict scrutiny test and is thus unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Strict scrutiny requires the University to have a compelling interest to institute affirmative action policies and the affirmative action policies must be narrowly tailored. In this case, the University does meet the condition of a compelling interest for diversity. As the respondents argued in their
Bollinger case, the Gratz v. Bollinger case favored a different ruling in which race was not constitutional for distributing 20 or 1/5 of points to minorities who were underrepresented on the campus of state universities. I too agree with the court's decision because race can often get complicated when other factors such as being bi-racial and being a certain percentage of other ethnicities can be difficult to classify or group. Giving me 20 points on my application just because I'm Black is somewhat impeding and downgrading; my education, extra-curriculum activities, and other leadership experiences will be devalued and unappreciated in my eyes. I am a strong advocate for more racial inclusion and diversity programs on college campuses; however, I understand that race can be complex with negating and challenging certain stereotypes or other taboo topics that relates to race and ethnicity. Thus, another person's race should not be more valued or look down upon just because of phylogenetic features. Each race should be viewed as one of the same, but in reality, its not because of economical disparities, political beliefs, and social