Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Affirmative action is unnecessary
Impact of affirmative action on society
Affirmative action for college admissions
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Affirmative action is unnecessary
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 This type of policy can be repealed completely, replaced with a college admissions process that favors first generation college applicants, or replaced with a policy based on an applicant’s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.
Many people are pressuring colleges to change their admissions policy and abolish affirmative action. As a result, many colleges are abolishing their affirmative action policy. According the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), states like California, Florida, Michigan, and New Hampshire have passed laws prohibited the use affirmative action in public colleges or universities. In Michigan, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals rul...
... middle of paper ...
..., or replaced with a policy based on socioeconomic status. Abolishing affirmative action completely has its disadvantages, for it does not increase diversity on campus. An admission policy favoring first-generation college students helps to increase diversity on campus. However, the purpose of affirmative action should not be to increase diversity on campus; it should be about giving disadvantaged students an opportunity at a better life. A policy based on socioeconomic status does that. Affirmative action must be put to an end and replaced with one of these alternatives. This country was established on the ideals of equality for all races, and affirmative action goes against all these ideals. Martin Luther King once said, “All men are created equal.” The color of someone’s skin should not be a determining factor for admissions into a certain college or university.
I believe that this idea is immoral; I don’t believe affirmative action harms minorities, and I don’t believe people should be accepted to college for the reason of being black, but instead should be a fair process for both whites and blacks.
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.
“Anyone interested in higher education should want to contemplate, on behalf of colleges and universities, students and faculty, alumni and paying parents, the fate of affirmative action(Chace, M William 20). The Oxford Dictionary states Affirmative Action is “an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination, especially in relation to employment or education; positive discrimination.” In 1961, John F. Kennedy signed an Executive Order calling for “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.” This is now known today as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission(EEOC). Affirmative action policies would later be forced upon businesses and have also been instituted at many universities where minorities are given preferred admissions over non-minorities. An Example of this would be at the University of Michigan where applicants who represented racial or ethnic minorities were given 20 points towards admission out of a 150 point system where only 100 points were needed to gain admission. Trying to put the 20 points in perspective, applicants with perfect SAT scores only received 12 points toward admission. This system was later struck down by the Supreme Court, but another similar policy was upheld at the University of Michigan Law School. With how diverse our society is currently compared to years ago, it seems to compliment that the policies have indeed worked. But now, the policies are questioned by many as whether or not they moral, constitutional, and/or...
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.
Racial preference has indisputably favored Caucasian males in society. Recently this dynamic has been debated in all aspects of life, including college admission. Racial bias has intruded on the students’ rights to being treated fairly. Admitting students on merit puts the best individuals into the professional environment. A university’s unprejudiced attitude towards race in applicants eliminates biases, empowers universities to harness the full potential of students’ intellect, and gives students an equal chance at admission.
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...
The discrimination against Caucasian and Asian American students a long with the toleration of lower quality work produced by African American students and other minority students is an example of the problems caused by Affirmative Action. Although affirmative action intends to do good, lowering the standards by which certain racial groups are admitted to college is not the way to solve the problem of diversity in America's universities. The condition of America's public schools is directly responsible for the poor academic achievement of minority children. Instead of addressing educational discrepancies caused by poverty and discrimination, we are merely covering them up and pretending they do not exist, and allowing ourselves to avoid what it takes to make a d... ... middle of paper ... ...
Introduction 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 within college admission decisions. What is Affirmative Action?
I wholeheartedly agree with Richard Rodriguez that the approach of affirmative action based on race was misguided and that a race-blind approach to affirmative action would yield the desired objectives of equality among the American population. Race-based affirmative action results in biased favoritism which brings up a new form of discrimination in the name of alleviating it. It is because of this rising discrimination in university admissions that made me feel the full effect of the existing policies on affirmative action in the U.S.
The landscape of race-based affirmative action has changed drastically since the ruling of Grutter v. Bollinger in 2003 Gurin, Lehman, Lewis, Gurin, and Dey (2004). In 1997, Barbara Grutter sued the University of Michigan’s Law School admission policy of race-conscious affirmative action (Gurin, et al., 2004). The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that “student body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify using race in university admissions…” (Gurin, et al., 2004, p. 98). This ruling is significant because it found that institutional interest in diversity is not only convincing for educational pedagogy, but also for students’ future civic duties
The system of Affirmative Action’s role in college admissions needs to change, because although it has assisted many minorities in their pursuit of higher education, it has also put others, non-minorities, at a disadvantage. College admissions should focus on the merit, academics, and character of a potential student rather than the specific attribute they can’t change – their race.
Affirmative Action in regards to college admissions is a ludicrous agenda due to its unfairness, it’s effect on race relations, and how it can make people fail. Diversity in a classroom may have its perks, but relying on diversity alone to provide a good learning environment is a hopeless cause. Like Robert Fullinwinder said,” The link between racial diversity and a better education is not strong enough to justify the very special urgency we attach to racial and ethnic representativeness in the university.”
The purpose of this paper is to debate why the current Affirmative Action Policy needs to be improved in higher education. Affirmative action is an outcome of the 1960's Civil Rights Movement, intended to provide equal opportunities for members of minority groups and women in education and employment (National Conference). Affirmative Action policies in the United States are only implemented if the employer or institution receives federal money. Generally, when the policy is implemented it is stating that at some point the company or institution will have to higher or accept minorities, or women if they are lacking in diversity in minorities or women. Since Affirmative Action is working well for employment with things like the United States Equal Employment
Affirmative action in college is doing more bad than good. It’s bringing in minorities to colleges that they shouldn’t be in. We need to think about the future.