In 1978 the US Supreme Court ruled unconstitutial the admission process of the Medical School at the University of California at Davis. UC Davis’ process at that time set aside 16 of the 100 seats for “Blacks,” “Chicanos,” “Asians,” and “American Indians”, establishing a separate admission process for those 16 spaces.
In 2003 (Grutter v. Bollinger), the US Supreme Court ruled that race-conscious admissions processes may favor underrepresented minority groups. Since then, public universities and other public institutions of higher education are allowed to use race as a plus factor in determining whether a student should be admitted.
Over the past decades, numerous cases have been presented to the Supreme Court, with similar allegations against university admissions processes. But until present time, no ruling has been able to put a stop to allegations of reverse discrimination in university admissions processes.
The reality is that in an ideal world, race wouldn’t play a role in whether a college applicant is granted admission or not. Unfortunately we don’t live in an ideal world.
In the most recent case Fisher v. University of Texas, UT states the need for an inclusive admissions process as a necessity to provide a diverse educational experience. The University fills the bulk of its slots with students who graduate in the top 10% of their high school class, without regard to race. And for the rest, race is not the only consideration; there are other factors such as community service, work experience, extracurricular activities, awards, etc.
Universities have understood the value of having a class that is widely diverse and represents different racial, ethnic and religious groups. But there is also a lot of pressure from those who feel they are being discriminated for not fitting in the description of a minority.
Another reality fact is that some minority groups such as blacks and Hispanics see great benefit from inclusive programs that allow them to jump from some of the worst and lowest quality education districts in the country to the top colleges and universities. This happens not only because of their racial background, but because they are high achieving students that more often than not cannot afford a college education but have an edge in applications to universities and scholarships.
This is the real purpose behind affirmative action policies: favoring the underrepresented; favoring those who, because of several reasons such as race and country of origin, were born and/or raised under disadvantaged circumstances if compared to their white peers.
What do you think? Add to the discussion by sharing your thoughts and experience with affirmative action and other diversity policies whether at school or work. Do you see it as a matter or reverse discrimination or a favor to the underrepresented?