Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Impact of affirmative action on society
Effects of affirmative action on education
Reverse discrimination 3. Affirmative action
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Impact of affirmative action on society
Racial diversity is a desired concept that intends to secure the right of equal opportunity that is promised to all citizens of the United States. Such an idealistic vision has been attempted through a process called affirmative action. As a program created from the 14th Amendment, affirmative action aims to impose “equal protection of the laws” by requiring schools to adopt a quota for the enrollment of minorities. This program is intended to compensate for the centuries of discrimination that minorities have faced, but affirmative action has became problematic as it has failed to do this. Affirmative action is not the solution to ensure equal opportunity for minorities to access higher education. Although affirmative action has increased diversity in selective schools, it defeats its purpose because the resulting diversity is not equal representation of the nation’s communities , the process has led to reverse discrimination, and the education standard has been lowered in the selective schools.
At the start of a new era, the Constitution was created in order to ensure security and prosperity for the citizens of the United States. Within this sacred document is the 14th Amendment which states “All persons born or naturalized in the United States….are citizens of the United States….nor shall any state deprive any [citizen] of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (14th Amendment). This amendment was created in order to protect the Civil Rights Act of 1866 that gave citizens the same rights “without distinction of race or color, or previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude” (1866 Civil Rights Act), but it was written such...
... middle of paper ...
...ades and effort because they are learning in an unmotivated and less competitive environment which later affects their education as well. This unfairly prevents students from gaining the higher education that they had originally applied for which counteracts the purpose of equal opportunity.
Throughout time, more problems have arisen through Affirmative Action. Although it was a program enacted with the good intention of decreasing the discrimination of minorities, it had the opposite effect. Much to the dislike of majorities such as whites, minorities were able to receive a better education despite low education scores and as a result, the whites were less motivated to do better or were denied admittance into colleges despite being qualified. The attractive concept of racial equality was unsuccessful as it did not take into consideration many real world factors.
Media plays an essential role in shaping the opinions of society. Writers tend to be selective in the information they provide, manipulating the truth in order to support their own perspective. By placing any given topic under certain light, writers have the power to control the audience’s response and lead them to form an opinion based on their experience with the information. On the other hand, readers have a tendency to readily and automatically accept this information without much thought, despite the possibility that the information they are absorbing is false or biased. Thus, the cycle of perpetuation of misinformation continues; the media feeds the masses false information, and they eat it up.This problem is evident in the topic of affirmative
This amendment was created during the reconstruction phase attempting to reunite this country after the brutal battles of the Civil War. Henretta and Brody emphasize how the Republicans were progressing in a direction to sanctify the civil rights of the black community. These authors contend the vital organ of the document was the wording in the first section. It said “all persons born or naturalized in the United States were citizens.” No state could abridge “the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”; deprive “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”; or deny anyone “the equal protection of the laws.”2 Imagine the problems that could arise in the country if repeal were to come to a realization. Henretta and Brody point out how the wording in section 1 of the document was written in a way that could be construed as inexplicit. The reason for this was for the judicial system and Congress could set an example for balance in due process here in the
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, 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.
The issue of Affirmative Action, preferences towards persons of racial minorities to compensate for prior discrimination, in college admissions is a quite complicated one. Many sides must be explored to gain a better understanding of the theories and views on this issue. It is not easily answered with a yes or no. Since its inception, Affirmative Action’s use has been a major debate in American society. Many questions are left to be investigated. Many believe that we should live in a society where preferential treatment could be eliminated, and admission to college is based solely on one’s merit and character, yet this view seems quite unrealistic.
Last summer, the Supreme Court ruled against the use of race in the college admissions process in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas. Since then, affirmative action has become a big issue in the media; however, many people still do not even know what affirmative action is. Affirmative action is a policy to prevent discrimination on the basis of “color, religion, sex, or national origin.” Overall, it favors minorities that are often discriminated. It might sound like an excellent policy; however, the use of this policy in the college admissions process is prejudice. In the college admissions process, affirmative action lowers the standards for some races, while raising the standard for other races. For example, an Asian might need a SAT score of 2300 to be considered for admission at a top school such as Yale and a white applicant might need a score of 2100, while an African American or Hispanic only needs a score of 1700. While affirmative action provides equality in the workplace, it has no place in the college admissions process and should, therefore, be abolished and replaced. This type of policy can be repealed completely, replaced with a college admissions process that favors first generation college applicants, or replaced with a policy based on an applicant’s socioeconomic status.
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.
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
Affirmative action is a term used for policies that are designed to help the effects of past discrimination against minority groups in the United States of America. Here are three reasons why affirmative action needs to be abolished.
Today there is considerable disagreement in the country over Affirmative Action with the American people. MSNBC reported a record low in support for Affirmative Action with 45% in support and 45% opposing (Muller, 2013). The affirmative action programs have afforded all genders and races, exempting white males, a sense of optimism and an avenue to get the opportunities they normally would not be eligible for. This advantage includes admission in colleges or hiring preferences with public and private jobs; although Affirmative Action has never required quotas the government has initiated a benefits program for the schools and companies that elect to be diversified. The advantages that are received by the minorities’ only take into account skin color, gender, disability, etc., are what is recognized as discriminatory factors. What is viewed as racism to the majority is that there ar...
Affirmative action is needed to create diversity in America. Affirmative action allows people of different races and backgrounds to interact in the workplace and universities. During 1996, Neil Rudenstine, president of Harvard University, explained Harvard's commitment to diversity by using John Stuart Mill, who emphasized the value of people being in contact with people who are different from them (5). Justice Powell who stated "a diversity of opinions, experiences, backgrounds, talents, aspirations, and perspectives" helped college students to feel great intellectual exchange, exploration, and growth (5). With such great advantage to the students with colleges with great diversity the education system itself should have implemented a policy such as affirmative action. According to Patricia Gurin, a psychology professor at University of Michigan, students experience better learning in a diverse educational atmosphere and are more prepared to become active in our pluralistic, democratic society after they leave college (5). In America today, we are already have enough problems with people being apathetic and not involved in society. When students grow up in diverse schools, they can become active and help the democratic society. Affirm...
In many cases, affirmative action can be said to have become “a political lightning rod,” as stated by the authors due to its ability to ignite an argument. Taylor and Sander attempt to validate mismatching as a passable reason for why affirmative action should be rescinded and why many minorities across the nation fail at the nation’s best institutions. Mismatching leads to an environment where minorities are unable to learn and compete with their white peers because the course material is not at their level. Taylor and Sander claimed “racial preference policies often stigmatize minorities, reinforce pernicious stereotypes, and undermine the self-confidence of beneficiaries,” as some of the side effects that can occur when institutions use affirmative action to diversify
Civil Rights activities are believed to have led to the Affirmative Action being pioneered in the United States. The sixties era was full of Civil Rights movements and the search for minority equality. In 1961 President John Kennedy issued an executive order for the government to employ more minorities. This was the Committee on Equal Opportunity’ task to administer. The Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964. Trying to create equality President Johnson then unintentionally created reverse discrimination. In 1969 President Nixon passed the Philadelphia Order. This order was to ensure equal opportunity hiring in the federal projects that required construction workers. In 1978 the Supreme Court placed boundaries on affirmative action to ensure while providing opportunity for minorities it was not at the expense of the majority in the landmark case of Regents of the University of California vs. Bakke. In 1980 the Supreme Court again ruled that 15 percent of government contracts be held for minority contracts and that this was perfectly constitutional.
For the sake of this essay, affirmative action in education is defined as: “policies and programs designed to advance equality of educationalopportunity for individuals from groups that have suffered systematic historical discrimination” (Mickelson 29). What is being referred to here is race-based affirmative action, or the act of taking into consideration an applicant’s race in the college admissions process. This is a hot topic all over the United States and has been for quite a while, the debate raging between two sides: those in support of affirmative action and those opposed. The ethics of affirmative action itself are difficult to determine, but here an attempt will be made to prove that affirmative action is indeed unfair. In addition, perhaps people are looking at the wrong issue. Maybe the real problem is the early education gap between the minority and majority students, something that, if fixed, could solve the issue of affirmative action once and for all.
A lot of minorities within the United States do not receive the education they need for a