Aa
U.S. Supreme Court to decide the fate of affirmative action
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Tuesday in Fisher v. University of Texas, the court’s first case on the use of race in higher education admissions since its decision in Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger.
Gail Heriot of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights says new research indicates that race-preferential admissions to America’s top universities are hurting those they are supposed to help.
“If this research is right, we now have fewer minority science and engineering graduates than we would have under race neutral admissions policies,” Heriot said in an amicus brief filed along with fellow commissioners Peter Kirsanow and Todd Gaziano.
“We have fewer minority college professors . . . fewer minority lawyers too.”
On the other hand, The American Educational Research Association says it isn’t so. “Research continues to show that student body diversity leads to important educational benefits,” the group, along with other research associations, said in its amicus brief to the court.
The Supreme Court has received 92 “friend of the court” briefs filed in Fisher v. University of Texas, which it will hear Tuesday, seventy three on behalf of UT and the rest supporting Fisher or in opposition to affirmative action. The point of these briefs is to inform the justices of the consequences.
Abigail Noel Fisher, who is white, says she was denied admission to UT in 2008 while the university’s policy resulted in African American and Hispanic students with lesser credentials being admitted.
UT says race is just one of many characteristics it considers in a “holistic” review of some applicants to build a diverse class, as governed by past Supreme Court decisions.
“The amicus briefs explain to the court the importance of what the decision means to everyone else. In this case, not just the 50,000 students at UT,” but to students in universities across the country, said Lisa S. Blatt, an attorney who has appeared frequently before the Supreme Court.
Abigail Thernstrom, another Civil Rights Commission member, says affirmative action undermines race relations “by heightening stereotypes and creating greater separation and self-segregation between racial groups.”
She adds that the preferences create disincentives for black and Hispanic students to work hard and they increase those students’ “self-doubts about their abilities to succeed academically.”
UCLA law professor Richard Sander, and journalist Stuart Taylor Jr. in a new book and in a brief to the court, say there are wide academic gaps between minority students admitted because of their race and their fellow students, and lead to lower grades and graduation rates and cause some students to switch to less-challenging majors.
http://www.examiner.com/article/u-s-supreme-court-to-decide-the-fate-of-affirmative-action
Gail Heriot of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights says new research indicates that race-preferential admissions to America’s top universities are hurting those they are supposed to help.
“If this research is right, we now have fewer minority science and engineering graduates than we would have under race neutral admissions policies,” Heriot said in an amicus brief filed along with fellow commissioners Peter Kirsanow and Todd Gaziano.
“We have fewer minority college professors . . . fewer minority lawyers too.”
On the other hand, The American Educational Research Association says it isn’t so. “Research continues to show that student body diversity leads to important educational benefits,” the group, along with other research associations, said in its amicus brief to the court.
The Supreme Court has received 92 “friend of the court” briefs filed in Fisher v. University of Texas, which it will hear Tuesday, seventy three on behalf of UT and the rest supporting Fisher or in opposition to affirmative action. The point of these briefs is to inform the justices of the consequences.
Abigail Noel Fisher, who is white, says she was denied admission to UT in 2008 while the university’s policy resulted in African American and Hispanic students with lesser credentials being admitted.
UT says race is just one of many characteristics it considers in a “holistic” review of some applicants to build a diverse class, as governed by past Supreme Court decisions.
“The amicus briefs explain to the court the importance of what the decision means to everyone else. In this case, not just the 50,000 students at UT,” but to students in universities across the country, said Lisa S. Blatt, an attorney who has appeared frequently before the Supreme Court.
Abigail Thernstrom, another Civil Rights Commission member, says affirmative action undermines race relations “by heightening stereotypes and creating greater separation and self-segregation between racial groups.”
She adds that the preferences create disincentives for black and Hispanic students to work hard and they increase those students’ “self-doubts about their abilities to succeed academically.”
UCLA law professor Richard Sander, and journalist Stuart Taylor Jr. in a new book and in a brief to the court, say there are wide academic gaps between minority students admitted because of their race and their fellow students, and lead to lower grades and graduation rates and cause some students to switch to less-challenging majors.
http://www.examiner.com/article/u-s-supreme-court-to-decide-the-fate-of-affirmative-action
Fair is not always so easy.
College SAT score tests were proven years ago to discriminate against black students. They didn't really show proof of intelligence or aptitude. Many of the questions assumed a knowledge of white American culture.
College SAT score tests were proven years ago to discriminate against black students. They didn't really show proof of intelligence or aptitude. Many of the questions assumed a knowledge of white American culture.
I should have put an s at the end of my statement as I was being sarcastic. I think it goes to show that no matter what your status, it doesn't feel good when things happen unfairly, no matter who you are or your color. Its almost like it has reversed and now we are in the minority? They just need to keep it fair all way around. I just don't know what is so hard about that.
I guess thats what ya call progress!
Right, right and right. That's what I got out of it.
Well it used to be that if you were not white you could not get into the better colleges am I right? Which is why they started implementing the fact that you had to accept a certain percentage of minorities as well? So, it sounds like If I am understanding this right, it has done a complete 180 in order to satisfy the minority thingee?
I know that employers were rewarded for hiring minorities there for awhile as well.
So in effect, we are back where we started from? Only now it is the average caucasian being passed over for the minority? Nice.
I know that employers were rewarded for hiring minorities there for awhile as well.
So in effect, we are back where we started from? Only now it is the average caucasian being passed over for the minority? Nice.
This is something else I can't wrap my head around....
I doubt I will ever understand this whole scenario. I know that I have been hired/accepted and even passed over because of my credentials. I have been "too experienced" in some considerations and "not experienced enough" in others. I accept that. I am good with that. What that did is make me a better employee, a better student of my wares.
Credentials is what it should be about. In my current position, I cannot afford to hire someone who is not qualified to be in the positions that I can offer. One has to have certain credentials in order to even be considered.
Race has never been a consideration, nor will it ever be. (Speaking for myself, the position I currently hold or will hold in the future.) Giving someone preferential treatment because of race (regardless of their race) is a set up for a big let down in most circumstances... in every circumstance if you consider ones ability to do the job.
I've had a good friend get passed over for a good position with the fire department because he was 34 (at the time), married, had children, an already "successful" career, and was white. He was told this after placing in the highest ranks of physical aptitude and general knowledge testing and placing in the top 1% in the oral boards..... It is pitiful, shameful and goes against the grain of the work place, if you ask me.
I doubt I will ever understand this whole scenario. I know that I have been hired/accepted and even passed over because of my credentials. I have been "too experienced" in some considerations and "not experienced enough" in others. I accept that. I am good with that. What that did is make me a better employee, a better student of my wares.
Credentials is what it should be about. In my current position, I cannot afford to hire someone who is not qualified to be in the positions that I can offer. One has to have certain credentials in order to even be considered.
Race has never been a consideration, nor will it ever be. (Speaking for myself, the position I currently hold or will hold in the future.) Giving someone preferential treatment because of race (regardless of their race) is a set up for a big let down in most circumstances... in every circumstance if you consider ones ability to do the job.
I've had a good friend get passed over for a good position with the fire department because he was 34 (at the time), married, had children, an already "successful" career, and was white. He was told this after placing in the highest ranks of physical aptitude and general knowledge testing and placing in the top 1% in the oral boards..... It is pitiful, shameful and goes against the grain of the work place, if you ask me.
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
