Creating a System that is No Longer In Need of Affirmative Action Policies

As a student in college, I appreciate diversity in the classroom because students learn better in a diverse environment. When I applied to college I could not help but be a little jealous that I am not a minority. I was not able to check the “correct” box on my application. Affirmative action policies in higher education institutions have caused a great amount of controversy in the past couple of years. As students we worked very hard on essays, SAT classes, and a good GPA. It is disheartening to students who work so hard and apply for admission and are rejected while their friends, who are minorities, apply and receive admission when they are not as well achieved. As a student, I want to know that working hard and being well qualified compared to other applicants will guarantee admission.

Affirmative action policies have become incredibly controversial recently because they have become outdated. Even though we know that people learn better in a diverse environment, it does not seem right to reject applicants who are more qualified than those being admitted. Affirmative action has been called “reverse racism” and has begun doing exactly the opposite of what the policies were created to do. These programs lead some students to believe that they can rely on their race or ethnicity to help them get admission. There is a problem with these policies because it does not make sense to reject a student who is well achieved and qualified and accept a student who is not just because their race will fulfill a certain amount of diversity. We all understand that there have been wrongs done in the past, but we like to hope that our country has moved past them.

Affirmative action policies were created in 1965 during President Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty. In 1965 President Johnson made an Executive Order “mandating government contractors to ‘take affirmative action’ in all aspects of hiring and employing minorities” (Garrison-Wade). In the same way “many colleges and professional schools started to recruit minority students as a part of their educational mission” (Garrison-Wade). This began a process in which admissions processes “took race into consideration.” These policies were created in the 1960’s when minorities were being discriminated against. They were created to force companies and admissions officers to hire and admit minorities.

The court system has become involved in trying to fix issues people have with affirmative action policies. The first case the Supreme Court ruled on affirmative action was in 1978, Regents of University of California v. Bakke. In this case “Allan Bakke, a white applicant, claimed he was wrongfully denied admission to medical school at the University of California to make room for less qualified minority students” (Garrison-Wade). This case was brought to the Supreme Court, who ruled that “the establishment or use of ‘racial quotas’ in determining admission violates the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment; however, institutions of higher learning can still consider race as a factor, among many, in the admission process” (Garrison-Wade). The most recent cases heard by the Supreme Court involved the University of Michigan’s admission process. The Grutter v. Bollinger ruling in 2003 allowed the University of Michigan Law School to use of any sort of race based affirmative action policies (Garrison-Wade). In the same year the courts ruled on, Gratz v. Regents, stating “the university’s undergraduate College of Literature, Science, and Arts could not use an admission process that awarded points based on an applicant’s race and ethnicity” (Garrison-Wade). These decisions have essentially changed the system by outlawing the ability to give “extra points” to applicants (Garrison-Wade).

If we look at the history of affirmative action policies they were created for a reason and did serve a purpose. These policies have become outdated. There needs to be a new approach to making the system “fair” without allowing those who are not qualified to be admitted. In order to make this system fair all students must be offered the same sort of opportunities through public institution in elementary and secondary educational systems before they begin applying for admissions in higher education levels. The only way to rid the system of affirmative action policies is to create a system that does not need them. As much as no one likes to admit it all public school systems are not equally equipped with teachers, money, supplies, and some of the most basic tools needed to give a student a good education. I have family who has begun lying about their address in order for their children to receive a good education. My ant does not want her children to be forced to go to the school in the district they live in because it offers such a poor education. There needs to be an answer to creating equally equipped public schools in all districts.

One way to create an equal system is to force equal funding for all public school systems. U.S. Rep. Chaka Fattah, D-Pa says, “unequal funding and affirmative action are directly related” (Dervarics). There are too many school districts that receive inadequate funding, which creates a system in which “too many low-income, minority children attend inferior local schools with few resources and an insufficient tax base” (Dervarics). If all students are given the same opportunities in elementary and secondary education levels then there would be no need to assume that because an applicant is of a certain race or economic standing they did not receive the same opportunities in elementary and secondary education levels. Many justify the use of affirmative action because of the unequal funding given between rich and poor school districts. If the root of the problem, funding, is fixed then there will no longer be a need to have programs making amends for limited opportunities given in elementary and secondary education (Dervarics). This justification will no longer exist when the school systems are all made fair.

The second part to the creation of a new system is to create one that offers fair educational opportunities to all. Making sure that all school districts are equally qualified in seven specific areas: “curricula, trained teachers, books, class size, libraries, facilities (including computers), and guidance counselors” (Dervarics). The standards for all of these areas need to be met or else government officials will enforce them and take away certain “administrative funds” (Dervarics). In the same way that the government can enforce a drinking age, which is a state law (as is education), the Federal government can remove funding for other things, for example highways, while the states make the mandatory adjustments in the areas the federal government wants changed. This idea is “the Student Bill of Rights.”

All those in support of this legislation believe that “the quality of a student’s education shouldn’t be determined by the digits of their zip code” (Dervarics). Essentially, the idea behind improving elementary and secondary educational systems and making them equal will make affirmative action policies irrelevant. All students will be given the same opportunities to receive a good, quality education before applying into higher education levels. The creation of a system, in which all those who participate are always on a level playing field, will make affirmative action irrelevant and pointless.

Simply disregarding the fact that our public educational systems at the elementary and secondary levels are unequal and removing affirmative action policies would be unjust. The system needs to be altered before these programs are eliminated because they were created for a reason and have accomplished the goal of achieving a sort of equality in the system.

Others have the view that affirmative action programs need to be eliminated and that they are of no help in our culture. Dr. Shelby Steele, “a well-known Black conservative,” believes that affirmative action has not been of any aid to the black community but has in fact held it back. He says that affirmative action policies were created out of “white guilt” (Roach). He believes that laying blame upon “white guilt” is not right (Roach). Blacks should be able to respond to the system’s “call for excellence,” on their own, without help from, “white guilt” (Roach). It is impossible for anyone to respond to the “call for excellence” unless they are offered an equal opportunity to receive a high-quality education at the elementary and secondary educational levels. The only way to make the Black community, any community, able to respond and able to compete at the higher educational level is to give an equal opportunity to receive a good, quality education at elementary and secondary levels. By simply doing nothing the system will fail.

Affirmative action programs are slowly but surely being outlawed in admissions processes. More and more people believe “treating members of various groups differently in the pursuit of diversity or social justice…is downright immoral” (“The Color”). The only way to make the process fair to all those who go through the admissions process in higher education is to create an equal standard of education at the elementary and secondary levels.