What do you think about affirmative action in university admissions?
111308
I like Thomasfromia's concise answer. Of course it is not an ideal system, but it clearly has helped to overcome centuries of discrimination in educational admissions. All it means is to look at criteria other than test scores and grades in determining admissions, with the goal of a more diversified student body. This allows access to the "pie" to people that otherwise would be shut out. In turn, enlarging this access in the long term decreases economic and social inequities in our society. You might be surprised at how many affirmative action admits, when given the chance, become outstanding, productive citizens.\nSure, I'd rather not have it, but for the sake of our society, I'd rather have it than nothing. Ironically, though, we've always had a different form of affirmative action, one that allowed ill-prepared but wealthy students to get in above those better qualified. The most obvious example is the Ivy League legacy policy that let's in the offspring of the rich. Or how about the policy of "special admitting" athletes who otherwise wouldn't qualify? At least, if you get rid of it, get rid of all such favoritism.\nAs long as all of those who enter the university are required to complete the standards for graduation, I am happy to enlarge the pool of students who are given an opportunity.
99393
i think they are pandered to - just because and that affirmative action has little or nothing to do with it- I think that Amaricanisim needs to be put forth as a culture- without regards to race , color or religion.  We need to realize that whatever our country of origin- we all live in this one now and we need to work to make it better-
698419
Excellent!\n\nPeople are all for special perks and programs until it directly effects them in a negative way.\n\nHere's how you explain it to the young college crowd: How about if we take the average grade for the class and give that to everyone regardless of whether or not they studied, did their homework, or even showed up for class? Then, black and Hispanic students get a 10% bonus for simply being black. Do you think that's fair?\n\nI haven't heard one logical argument from any one of them.
444498
Hmm, that's a slightly controversial one, but not nearly as much as say, er, other stuff, so I'll jump in.  Why not?  ^_^\n\nIt may depend slightly on the type of affirmative action you're talking about, but in general I don't feel that it's right.  Especially relating to job acquisition, this is a bad idea.  If a white guy applies for a job and a black (forgive the terms, but "white" and "black" DO take less time to type...although this sentence kinda already made that a useless excuse...but meh) guy applies for the same job, and the white guy is more qualified but they take the black guy because they have to "meet quota" or they "don't want to appear rascist," then that both hurts the economy as well as being a bad moral practice.  Also, if the place those two were applying at WAS just trying to "meet a quota," and later the same white guy tries to apply and another black guy of slightly lesser qualifications also applies (please don't infer that I'm saying that non-white people are less skilled; this is merely an example), they are going to hire the white guy, or at least they should, as he meets the criteria better (not because he's white; I stated that his qualifications are better for the purposes of this example).  Anyway, if the second black guy is technically more skilled than the first black guy, then the end result in this situation is that a white guy and a black guy were hired, but the company could have had a better black guy, and the black guy that had mre qualifications did not get the job he could have had if the company had hired on what I think is a moral basis: ability.  And yes, this is a very far fetched example.  However, hiring on the basis of race is completely unjustified.  I also think hiring on the basis of need is unjustified, which of course immediately leads me to the aforementined race conclusion.  If a person really needs a job, then they need to convince their employer that they can do a darn good job of it.  Thing is, if they really need it, they will try harder to get it AND will work harder at it, which will make them at least in part better cantidates for employment.  I hope that this made sense; I tend to ramble a lot.  Anyway, I'm gonna move on to education.\n\nAs for education, there are a lot of grants out there, and I have seen stats about how African Americans and Hispanics (hmmmm, I chose to type it out NOW, but not in the earlier...oh well) are oftentimes at a disadvantage in paying for school compared to white people.  However, I really feel that we should not be labeling people like that.  there are white people I'm sure that are in just as dire straights as some of the people who apply for "race-only" scholarships.  I think scholarships should be based on merit and need.  If the people of certain races really are more needy, and they are willing to get the grades or reccomendations (and/or write good scholarship application essays), then they should get those scholarships anyway.  As it is, white people who need scholarship money are having to compete with everybody for them, but other races can enter both into "everyone" scholarships as well as scholarships that are only for their race.  Also, having quotas for letting other races into colleges can be hurtful to the people who actually try to get good grades.  I'm not saying that white people always get better grades or anything like that, but if say for one year the applicants at a university are a little more slim on the "non-white" side, and the "white" side is better qualified to get in, the unbiversity may still have to "meet quota," which is not necessarily PUNISHING ability, but is certainly not rewarding it.  If people are not rewarded for their ability and work, then something is wrong.  If minorities want to get into college, then they should (and many do of course) work h
346773
It depends.  On the one hand, it's a proven fact that poor, and often minority, students don't get as good an education, and therefore it's harder for them to get into college.  Letting in a minority student with a lower GPA than a non-minority is about the only way to even things out a little.\n\nOn the other hand, if you're a white male, it can be very hard to get scholarships, and some schools will choose a minority student over a white student, which seems just as unfair.  \n\nI suppose if I had to choose, I'd keep the policy, but use it sparingly and hope that the administration knows what they're doing.
532036
depends on whether you believe in affirmative action or not.  I say yes!
762321
No! We never should have had it . Affirmative action is fighting discrimination with discrimination.
665699
Not while the government institutions make distinctions between the races and give preferences based on racial differences.\n\nThis means affirmative action, quotas, set-asides, lowering of college entrance requirements, etc.\n\nEvery action of government that differentiates between races keeps racial divisions alive.
250779
For it, some minorities live in poor areas and havent had the same educational chances as others.\nagainst it. It is descrimination, you should get into school based on your academic record not your race.
1147839
I don't know if I understand the question correctly.  But if you're describing a situation where the college assigns housing based on race, I think it would be.  If, on the other hand, the "majority/all of the students"of a particular program, let's say for example, a sports team, or international students, or first-year students, are of a distinct racial minority on that campus, it might be trickier to prove intentional racism.  What it can be is institutional racism- that is, if the admissions recruiters always look in the same places for the same faces, and they keep getting one group, such as European Americans, and then they have this special recruitment effort to get a particular sports team that is majority-minority (for that campus), then that would fit institutional racism.  The legality part is tricky, because the courts and those who write the law haven't stood up to institutional racism with much backbone.  They seem to look for a smoking gun- intentional discrimination.\n\nIt's similar to how people look at Affirmative Action. Those who see no long, unending, government-supported history of institutionalized racism seem to oppose Affirmative Action.  These same opponents are looking for the same smoking gun. They often claim that they are not personally responsible for racism, so shouldn't suffer any remedies.  The reason Affirmative Action was created, under President Kennedy, was to look at the patterns of discrimination, and say- hey, when we can prove a long history of discrimination, we can't count on this pattern to take care of itself.  When confronted by two roughly equal candidates, take the underrepresented group, who has been historically harmed by discrimination/racism/sexism.  By the way, the group that benefits the most from Affirmative Action has been white women, who have benefitted second only to white men from the very system of white privilege that sees the best education, best housing, and best jobs, protected for them.\n\nThe second group sees Affirmative Action as either effective, necessary, or still not enough.  I would consult a lawyer, and probably not the feds to get an opinion on your case, if it's effecting you at this college/university.  There are still too many majority-white institutions of higher education who do not know or care to know how to recruit AND retain a diverse student body, and who have a disproportionate number of students of color on their sports teams.  I see a pattern that seeks redress in the national picture, but not sure about the specifics in your case.  Check out various national organizations working on these issues- see some listed below.  Best of luck.  Document everything.  Write it down, email it, etc.
109582
No.  It is the fact that the laws that are intended to try to even the playing field like affirmative action are racist.  Racism works both ways.  To not be racist is to not care what ethnicity a person is.  Though I am white, I always fill out the forms saying that I am blasian.  What's worse is that laws like affirmative action don't attack racism, they just try to turn men of a different race white.  It is trying to force assimilation.
865488
this is my answer, my reason, personally:\n\nAffirmative Action. It is just as wrong to give women preference as it is to give a minority preference. Being a woman or being black does not make you special or bring anything to the table.\n\nWould you like to be operated on by a surgeon who was hired via an Affirmative action?\n\n-so, if a black person is an affirmative action baby than no, I do not like them.
567716
As contradictory as this statement may sound, I feel that affirmative action promotes reverse discrimination but is very necessary in some cases. The biggest problem we are facing today is that the playing field (i.e. in the business world, college admissions, etc.) is not as leveled as some people may think.  Sure, Black Americans (as well as other minorities) have come a long way from the old Jim Crow days, but there is a great amount of discrimination that still exists.  Believe me, I wish that the policies didn't exist, but then again, that would only occur/work in a perfect, non-discriminatory world...
844047
In respect to the ban on affirmative action, many leaders in the minority community support this.  They believe it hurts schools and businesses as they are forced have to meet quotas of minorites in their employment, not getting the best candidates based on merit.    \n\nSo if you have to have 10 spots open and you need 8 minorities, you hire the people based on the quota's you have to meet, not choosing the best who applied.  You are just filling spots.  You can't hire a white man because you need one more woman or mexican person to comply with the law or face fines.   Or you don't hire a black woman with an MBA because you have your quota of blacks, so you hire a white woman with an associates degree.   Discrimination is discrimination and it works both ways.  \n\nAs for the school funding initiative, where is the funding going to come from?  The state would of had to fund minimum requirements of 565 million per year.  With this state losing so many jobs and the lottery obviously not covering education funding, what are they going to get the money to fund the shortfall?   You can't just print money!  So will there be an increase in taxes for gas, cigarettes, sales, businesses, or property in the future?  Increase DMV fees, tags, start toll roads, \nwhatever they can?  \n\nMichigan is at 7.1% unemployment whereas the nation is at 4.4%.  We citizens cannot afford to spend more to fund a mis-managed government.
851051
The original concept of affirmative action was simply to actively search out bright and promising young minorities, and help and encourage them to seek some higher education.  But when the pols got through with it and added "quotas" as a measure of compliance, it did become very much a matter of reverse discrimination.  The really sad part about it was that many young people were put into extremely competitive schools, way over their heads, became frustrated and dropped out.  Better to get a 4 year diploma from "Middling U." than drop out of Harvard after 1 semester.  So no, not only is it not fair as a matter of reverse discrimination, it has been self-defeating from the viewpoint of its original intent.  Hope this helps!!
612590
Affirmative action is a policy that allows race to be a consideration in things like college admissions or employment.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is a federal agency that enforces different types of federal anti-discrimination laws.
228555
About 25% better than a white male student with a 4.0 GPA.\n\n30% better if you are a black female rather than a black male. :)\n\nEdit: Not being racist or classist here... if you think I am, look into it and educate yourself on the matter. When it comes to higher education, white students get LESS money and are denied a LOT more on their entrance applications than students of color because of the 'standards' at nearly all universities (Especially California, what a screwed up state). HOWEVER, to balance out the coin here I will say that when it comes to PUBLIC schooling, Students of color have to put up with a lot more crap, and less oppertunities (steriotype, but in GENERAL statistically)... SO, in the view of college acceptance, a minority student (non-asian) with a 4.0 GPA stands out a LOT more than a white/asian student with a 4.0 GPA.\n\nHow many 'white only' scholorships are there?\n\nHow many '<insert random minority here> only' scholorships are there?\n\nKinda makes you think, eh?