• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Affirmative Action (in college admissions): Good idea or Bad idea.

What's your opinion of Affirmative Action in the college admissions process?

  • I'm in favor of affirmative action.

    Votes: 5 10.6%
  • I don't think it should be used for criteria.

    Votes: 37 78.7%
  • I have no opinion.

    Votes: 1 2.1%
  • Other (please explain)

    Votes: 4 8.5%

  • Total voters
    47
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
939
Reaction score
96
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Are you in favor of it or do you disagree with it?

I think when public schools use this it violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964, more specifically Title II and Title IV and when it comes to private schools I just think it's wrong.
 
Affirmative action has served it's purpose, and should no longer exist. At this points it hurts race relations more than it helps.
 
Racial discrimination is still racial discrimination. Why should anyone claiming to not be racist support this?
 
Racial discrimination is still racial discrimination. Why should anyone claiming to not be racist support this?

I don't know, most Democrats support it. I was hoping some supporters would respond.
 
The United States has these things called "libraries", repositories of information that pre-date that other grand repository of information, "the Internet."

Because of these things, anyone who wants to educate themselves, can.

Because of these things, anyone who wants to prepare themselves for college, can.

Because of these things, no one should be admitted to college on the basis of ethnicity. Academic ability is the only measure that matters.
 
It's incredibly counter productive when it's based exclusively on race.

Is Affirmative Action at Law School Actually Hurting Minorities? - Law Blog - WSJ

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights yesterday released a report echoing a controversial theory — minority students who gain special admission to better-regarded law schools based on their race end up in academic settings for which they aren’t qualified, leading to lower grades and bar passage rates than if they had been admitted to a school that doesn’t use racial preferences. (Here’s a press release from the commission, today’s NLJ story on the report, and a recent WSJ op-ed by one of the report’s authors.)

The 220-page report gives momentum to an idea first researched by UCLA law professor Rick Sander, which he laid out in a 2004 law review article.

Using data on grades and bar-passage rates for black and white law students across the country, Sander found that black and white law students granted admission to a school based on similar credentials earned roughly the same grades and passed the bar at a similar rate. But black law students given preferential treatment over white students — that is, admitted to a school despite lesser qualifications than their white counterparts — had poorer grades and bar-exam results, and higher attrition rates, than whites who attended the same school.

The explanation? Sander blames racial preferences in admissions, writing that even though affirmative action has led to more black students in law schools, it has actually resulted in a 7.9% drop in the number of black attorneys entering the profession.

The commission’s report largely picks up Sander’s theme, stating that “admitting students into law schools for which they might not academically be prepared could harm their academic performance and hinder their ability to obtain secure and gainful employment.”

I believe that a limited form of AA based on things like class, race, background, etc. can serve the purpose of increasing diversity, which is indeed a valuable concern.
 
Last edited:
People should be judged on merit and character alone, anything else violates the spirit of civil rights and equality and does a disservice to everyone. It's very simple, the best and brightest rise to the top no matter what.
 
Why not scrap (retire) affirmative action and have the colleges determine the criteria.
Keep the governments out of it..
 
Are you in favor of it or do you disagree with it?

I think when public schools use this it violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964, more specifically Title II and Title IV and when it comes to private schools I just think it's wrong.

I've no use for anyone that thinks the color of their skin gives them "Special Rights".
 
If colleges encourage diversity and utilize a system of 'affirmative action' voluntarily, cool. However, racial quotas or anything similar should not be forced upon them by the government.

RE Law Schools: This issue is fairly close to my heart as I'll be applying to law schools in just under two years. I'm multi-racial, I know for a fact that several schools will weigh that heavily when considering my application, but they are not being forced to heavily weigh my ethnicity. If they want to accept me due in part to my degree of diversity, that's their choice. Again, I reiterate that they should not be forced to do so.

-NC
 
If colleges encourage diversity and utilize a system of 'affirmative action' voluntarily, cool. However, racial quotas or anything similar should not be forced upon them by the government.

RE Law Schools: This issue is fairly close to my heart as I'll be applying to law schools in just under two years. I'm multi-racial, I know for a fact that several schools will weigh that heavily when considering my application, but they are not being forced to heavily weigh my ethnicity. If they want to accept me due in part to my degree of diversity, that's their choice. Again, I reiterate that they should not be forced to do so.

-NC
I am not opposed to an institution choosing AA either, I still think it's a rather condescending position to take, diversity, while good, should not be created by policy, rather, it should be the best of the best bouncing ideas off of each other and sharing perspectives that otherwise would not be considered, that is how better ideas are formed and thus it is the essence of proper education. Also of note, let's say a less than qualified engineering student(of any cultural, racial, etc.) status starts and industrial engineering firm and lands a contract in a large city to build bridges, because he isn't the best, I would ask how comfortable anyone would be crossing that bridge, or we could apply it to criminal/civil law, or even medicine. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I expect my professionals to actually know what they are doing to the highest degree.
 
Hey LA,
The thing with academic institutions is that it is rare (at least at the undergrad level...the following cannot be said for law schools) for, say a black kid with significantly worse scores or a lower GPA to be admitted over a more qualified white kid nowadays. Typically, two candidates with similar scores are compared to each other, one is Laotian the other is white, the Laotian gets the call because he/she provides the schools with greater diversity. With regard to grad schools, I agree with you, largely.

For what it's worth, diversity does enhance the learning process, it isn't some vague abstraction created by white liberals to make academia feel good about itself. It does provide for a more interesting and stimulating academic experience.

-NC
 
Hey LA,
The thing with academic institutions is that it is rare (at least at the undergrad level...the following cannot be said for law schools) for, say a black kid with significantly worse scores or a lower GPA to be admitted over a more qualified white kid nowadays. Typically, two candidates with similar scores are compared to each other, one is Laotian the other is white, the Laotian gets the call because he/she provides the schools with greater diversity. With regard to grad schools, I agree with you, largely.

For what it's worth, diversity does enhance the learning process, it isn't some vague abstraction created by white liberals to make academia feel good about itself. It does provide for a more interesting and stimulating academic experience.

-NC
I don't have a problem with that kind of diversity program, that makes sense, during my college tenure it was more of a minority shopping kind of deal where qualifications other than minority status didn't weight as highly, that just isn't good for anyone. And I agree, on par diversity is a good thing. :2wave:
 
If colleges encourage diversity and utilize a system of 'affirmative action' voluntarily, cool. However, racial quotas or anything similar should not be forced upon them by the government.

RE Law Schools: This issue is fairly close to my heart as I'll be applying to law schools in just under two years. I'm multi-racial, I know for a fact that several schools will weigh that heavily when considering my application, but they are not being forced to heavily weigh my ethnicity. If they want to accept me due in part to my degree of diversity, that's their choice. Again, I reiterate that they should not be forced to do so.

-NC


So, if they volunteer to employ racial discrimination in their admissions, you're happy.

If you benefit from racism, you're okay with that, but you'll continue to spend your entire life bitching about racism in America, right?
 
SA said:
So, if they volunteer to employ racial discrimination in their admissions, you're happy.
The admissions process in college is, by definition, discriminatory. Schools discriminate against less qualified candidates and accept more qualified candidates. Schools understand the benefits of a diverse learning environment, therefore it is an asset to diversify the student body. If you'd like to view encouraging diversity as racial discrimination, fine. I don't quite see it that way. It's not as if schools are simply randomly some random some black dude to attend classes. As I said to LA, it's simply a matter of qualified students who add to a diverse environment. If you believe that a white student cannot do that, then I'd suggest looking around a college campus. "Diversity" is not simply a matter of race. Socio-economic factors play largely into the equation. So to suggest that only racial minorities benefit from diversification is simply untrue.

SA said:
If you benefit from racism, you're okay with that, but you'll continue to spend your entire life bitching about racism in America, right?
The next time you have a thought about my personal views on race and racism, you'd do better to just let it pass or you risk asking a question as stupid as this.

-NC
 
Last edited:
The majority of people who benefit from affirmative action getting into colleges are white males.

The schools have to cut them a lot of slack to keep the colleges 50/50 male female. If all was fair colleges would be about 65% females.
 
The majority of people who benefit from affirmative action getting into colleges are white males.

The schools have to cut them a lot of slack to keep the colleges 50/50 male female. If all was fair colleges would be about 65% females.
AA and various diversification techniques do in fact benefit white men. The impoverished, individuals with unique life stories, ECs, etc. are given the go-ahead. To reduce the programs to race and 'racism' is to ignore reality.

-NC
 
The majority of people who benefit from affirmative action getting into colleges are white males.

The schools have to cut them a lot of slack to keep the colleges 50/50 male female.

Any evidence to support this claim?

If all was fair colleges would be about 65% females.

If it was fair colleges would have women oriented classes like every day cooking, sewing,birthing, child rearing, how to properly please your man and how to properly please your man with another women, Its man's world 101, house cleaning and how to properly open and give you man a beer.:lol:;)
 
Last edited:
Hey LA,
The thing with academic institutions is that it is rare (at least at the undergrad level...the following cannot be said for law schools) for, say a black kid with significantly worse scores or a lower GPA to be admitted over a more qualified white kid nowadays. Typically, two candidates with similar scores are compared to each other, one is Laotian the other is white, the Laotian gets the call because he/she provides the schools with greater diversity. With regard to grad schools, I agree with you, largely.

What exactly are you basing this on? I'm unaware of many schools that make their AA calculations public.

Furthermore, from those that have been made public, we can see that undergraduate institutions tend to use race as a more independent and important factor than graduate institutions.

For what it's worth, diversity does enhance the learning process, it isn't some vague abstraction created by white liberals to make academia feel good about itself. It does provide for a more interesting and stimulating academic experience.

This is true to a large degree.

It's not as if schools are simply randomly some random some black dude to attend classes. As I said to LA, it's simply a matter of qualified students who add to a diverse environment. If you believe that a white student cannot do that, then I'd suggest looking around a college campus. "Diversity" is not simply a matter of race. Socio-economic factors play largely into the equation. So to suggest that only racial minorities benefit from diversification is simply untrue.

AA and various diversification techniques do in fact benefit white men. The impoverished, individuals with unique life stories, ECs, etc. are given the go-ahead. To reduce the programs to race and 'racism' is to ignore reality.

Again, I think that this is more wishful thinking than reality.

Most colleges may well consider socio-economic diversity when making their decisions on who to admit. However, this receives much less weight than a student's race and accordingly results in less of a mismatch between student and school. 50% of black law students end up in the bottom 10% of their class. I would wager that that's not the case for poor law students, law students with unique life stories, etc.
 
The majority of people who benefit from affirmative action getting into colleges are white males.

The schools have to cut them a lot of slack to keep the colleges 50/50 male female. If all was fair colleges would be about 65% females.

1) Colleges aren't 50/50 male female. 58% of college students are female.

The Daily Bruin - Gender gap widens as trends show more women earning bachelor?s degrees

2) The idea that white males are the primary beneficiaries from affirmative action is patently ludicrous. Care to cite anything to support this assertion?
 
Hello NYC,
NYC said:
What exactly are you basing this on? I'm unaware of many schools that make their AA calculations public.
Based upon my knowledge of NU's system. Additionally, there are several members of my family who have worked in both financial aid and admissions offices in colleges.

NYC said:
Furthermore, from those that have been made public, we can see that undergraduate institutions tend to use race as a more independent and important factor than graduate institutions.
We can see that based upon two SCOTUS cases? I can only speak for law schools, but I can tell you with 100% certainty that law schools emphasize socio-economic factors to a greater degree than undergrad institutions, at the very least this is true for the elite 'Top 14'.

NYC said:
Most colleges may well consider socio-economic diversity when making their decisions on who to admit. However, this receives much less weight than a student's race and accordingly results in less of a mismatch between student and school. 50% of black law students end up in the bottom 10% of their class. I would wager that that's not the case for poor law students, law students with unique life stories, etc.
Do you have a link to the emboldened?

-NC
 
Hello NYC,
Based upon my knowledge of NU's system. Additionally, there are several members of my family who have worked in both financial aid and admissions offices in colleges.

And I'm arguing that I don't think this is a sufficient sample. The systems made public in Gratz and Grutter indicate that the law school used a more holistic system, while the undergrad used a point system that gave minorities a 20 point boost, as compared to 12 points for getting a 1600 on the SAT.

We can see that based upon two SCOTUS cases? I can only speak for law schools, but I can tell you with 100% certainty that law schools emphasize socio-economic factors to a greater degree than undergrad institutions, at the very least this is true for the elite 'Top 14'.

Be that as it may, it doesn't contradict my point, which is that regardless of how much weight schools give to socio-economic factors, it is still less than they give to race.

Do you have a link to the emboldened?

It's from the Sander study, p. 61

Entire study: http://www.law.ucla.edu/sander/Systemic/SA.htm

Relevant portion: Featured Article - WSJ.com

n elite law schools, 51.6% of black students had first-year grade point averages in the bottom 10% of their class as opposed to only 5.6% of white students. Nearly identical performance gaps existed at law schools at all levels.
 
Back
Top Bottom