What are your views on legacies and affirmative action?

Parent Cafe
1

<p>So I am reading this non-fiction book (And Still We Rise: The Trials and Triumphs of Twelve Gifted Inner-city High School Students) about 12 inner city African American students in LA, California who attend a gifted program in this inner city school which is consisted of predominately minorities. This story takes place in 1996. During the time California voted to end Affirmative Action (Proposition 209). For those who don’t know, Affirmative Action is the process in which colleges give underrepresented minorities a little “boost” in their application. Most people think that Affirmative Action helps minorities with very low GPA and test scores beat out rather smart Caucasians and in some cases Asians. However, statistics show that many of the minorities who are accepted actually have test scores and GPA similar and only slightly lower than their counterparts (Caucasians and Asians). These 12 students in this book are the last ones to benefit under Affirmative Action in California. </p>

<p>Foes of Affirmative Action states that minorities with lower GPA and test scores should not get a boost and admitted to elite institutions because they won’t be able to compete and will be demoralized. However, a study of the academic record and postgraduate lives of 45,000 students at 28 of the nation’s most selective university over 20 years reveal a big contrast. This study (primarily on white-black comparison) revealed that the graduation rate among African Americans who entered elite colleges in 1989 was 75%. On the other hand, Caucasians attending these schools across the country had only a 59% graduation rate. The study also found that black students earned advance degree at the same rate as other students at elite university. What’s more interesting is that African Americans actually earned professional degrees (law, business, medicine etc.) at a slightly higher rate. These black students were more likely to be involved in civic affairs after graduation than their Caucasian peers. (This book is called The Shape of the River: Long-Term Consequences of Considering Race in College and University Admissions. It is written by economist William G. Bowen, former president of Princeton, and Derek Bok, a political science and former president of Harvard)</p>

<p>They state “A mandate to ignore race in choosing applicants would require that more than half of black students attending these selective institutions be rejected…would society be better off as a result? Considering the educational benefit of diversity and the need to include more highly qualified minorities at the top ranks of professions, our finding convince us that the answer is no”. Even General Colin L. Powell stated how absurd he regards the argument that blacks would be stigmatized by affirmative action.</p>

<p>Now at the time California’s governor was Republican Pete Wilson. He opposed affirmative action and campaigned against it. He persuaded the Regents of University of California’s to prohibit affirmative action. He called this “unfair”. However, what is surprising is that he and the UC regents actually used their position to obtain admissions to University of California campuses for family, friends, neighbors and business associates and beat out better qualified applicants. They had their own “affirmative-action program”. This program benefited children of rich and influential white people, people Wilson said “play by the rules”. </p>

<p>At most elite universities (Ivy League and equivalents), children of alumni-known as legacies-have a decided advantage (much like affirmative action, and in some cases, these advantages are much better than affirmative action). A report by the Berkeley’s Institute for the Study of Social Change states: “In American higher education, far more white have [gotten admitted] to elite universities through ‘alumni preferences’ than the combined number of all the blacks and Mexicans enter through affirmative action.”</p>

<p>The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights conducted a two year investigation into Harvard’s admissions after complaints by Asian applicants. The office concluded that whites were admitted to Harvard at a higher rate than Asians because of the number of students at the college who were legacies and recruited athletes-who had SAT scores about 130 points below the non legacy group. However, the office said that that it was “legally permissible”. And Asians are the most represented minority at Harvard. (It’s worthy to note that minorities barely fell into the athlete and legacy category)</p>

<p>However, affirmative action benefits in the case that a lot of minorities live in the inner city and can’t afford to get good education. Affirmative action benefits in which a lot of these minorities can’t afford to take the SAT/ACT many times and can’t afford to take SAT/ACT classes (these classes can cost up to $1000 dollars for only a couple of hours, a price that most inner city kids can’t pay). The reason why I say inner city is because a good percent of minorities live in the inner city and less wealthy areas. A good percent of minorities don’t go to private schools. It has been shown that African American scholars do just as well as Caucasian scholars even when the black scholar was admitted through affirmative action. </p>

<p>So what I ask is: Do you think legacies are fair? What are your views on affirmative action? What do you think about having legacies but removing affirmative action?</p>

<p>Sources (all facts are from):
*And Still We Rise: The Trial and Triumphs of Twelve Gifted Inner-city High School Students * by Miles Corwin.</p>

2

<p>At most of the Ivies and other very selective schools, advantages of legacies (outside of contributing lots of money) have been radically reduced at just such a time as a significant number of minority graduates (and women) are finally in a position to take advantage of it.</p>

3

<p>Legacy - It doesn’t mean anything in the public universities in California and it shouldn’t. At private institutions I have no problem with it and it might provide some benefit to the institution in donations.</p>

<p>Affirmative action - I don’t belive there should be affirmative action based on one’s race. I’m glad the public universities in California don’t follow this discriminatory practice. The process of drawing inferences, both positive and negative, just based on one’s race are discriminatory and invalid. Providing some kind of boost to kids who have grown up in disadvantaged socio-economic households, who attended schools that might not have offered as many programs, ex: number of AP classes, or who might have had to work during HS to support the family or who might have had to take extensive care of siblings makes some sense to me - i.e. some of these kids have lower ‘stats’ than some others but are probably just as capable of doing the higher level of work as long as they have a certain base level of competency.</p>

<p>OP - If you want to see posters’ views on these subjects just use the search feature of CC since there have been many long threads on the subjects.</p>

4

<p>^I agree. Affirmative action assumes all students in that particular ethnic group are disadvantaged. That’s just not the case. As a minority myself, my family did not qualify for fin. aid when my siblings and I were in college. Both of my parents were college grads and dad did not want us to join the “equal opportunity program” on campus. They paid 100% of our college tuitions and we were not wealthy by any means. We were also not the typical Asian family. My parents assimilated and wanted us to think of ourselves as American first and foremost. Consequently, none of us has ever felt disadvantaged in any way because of our race. A color blind society has to start somewhere.</p>

5

<p>I am not a big fan of affirmative action as it’s usually described, but I think colleges have an interest in a diverse student body - it’s academically beneficial for everyone involved. I also think that people put way too much store on grades and scores and forget that many other factors are important. MIT’s routinely accepts women with lower grades and SAT scores the men, but once at MIT those women on average get better grades than the men. </p>

<p>I remember peeking in on a bio class at Berkeley and every single student in the room was Asian. There were no African Americans, no whites and no Hispanics as far as I could tell. Thankfully, not all of Berkeley is so homogenous, but it did give me pause, though my son didn’t apply there for other reasons.</p>

6

<p>I have a different view for private vs. public schools. For public colleges I see the need for “economic affirmative advantage” giving a boost to low income students. Private schools can create a class any way they want as long as they are willing not to take government funds.</p>

7

<p>I find it difficult to believe that the graduation rate at the top 28 schools was 59% for whites. USNWR’s # 28 university, Tufts, has a graduation rate for all students of 89%. There’s a tie in the USNWR rankings for #27/28/29 for LACs among three women’s colleges, but the #26 school, Macalester, graduates 86% of its students. What could this study possibly be averaging to get a graduation rate of 59% for whites?</p>