Affirmative Action

The point of promoting diversity in the educational setting is being misconstrued and misrepresented by the opposition. He is claiming that the diversity present in colleges should be akin to that of real-life, however this is not the goal of affirmative action. The goal of promoting diversity is to enhance the educational experience of the students by increasing the types of students that they are exposed to. This is something that is believed to be helpful because it will expose students to different worldviews that they may not be able to be exposed to otherwise. Therefore, just because the "diversity" of the colleges is similar to that of the "diversity" present in the real world, this does not mean that true diversity is present at all! The body of students that a student is being surrounded with at college is not supposed to be representative of what people will be like in the real world. No Harvard student is given a "false notion" of what people are like in the real world because they are surrounded by such successful people, it is understood that college is an experience separate from the real world. Also, the student cited one example to "conclude" that diversity will not drop much because of the elimination of affirmative action policies. One example does not lead to a conclusion, but rather a dangerously unrepresentative inductive generalization. To address the point of "undeserving minorities" being allowed into universities, I would like to point out that "deserving" is something which is determined by the college based on their admissions criteria. It is obvious that when race is not considered something that can make an applicant more "deserving" of admission, less applicants of that race will be accepted! That is simply in the nature of not considering race; it will make less applicants of an underrepresented race be accepted to the university. However, this does not make them "undeserving", because the opposition is assuming that "deserving" means higher grades and test scores. But, we know that colleges must go past GPA and test scores to determine whether a student is deserving of admission to the university. There are many things that go into determining whether a student is "deserving" or not. Remember, things such as whether a student"s parents went to the university can make them more "deserving." Also, things such as where a student is located in the United States can make them more "deserving." This is something that is put in place to promote diversity in the college setting, so if this arbitrary factor is allowed to be considered, why should race be excluded? Policies to promote diversity based upon location have been in place since colleges have been admitting students, yet when race becomes a consideration, a problem is apparently present. Also, no student gets in "simply because of their skin color." If this were the case, minorities would simply have to check a box indicating their race and they would get into the university. However, this is not the case. Race does count as a "plus" for the student to be accepted into the university, but this is in conjunction with the rest of their qualifications. While some may consider this "plus" unfair, remember that things such as athletic abilities, a students" location, where a student"s parents went to college, whether a student"s went to college, can all be considered a "plus" to somebody"s application. So, while one may argue that it is not fair to consider race because it cannot be controlled, there are plenty of factors that are considered which cannot be controlled. The point that the diversity in college should be representative of the "diversity" present in the real world is simply impractical. If the nation were 99% white and 1% black and a college wanted to promote diversity, no one would consider the college "diverse" if its student body were also racially similar. A goal of colleges is to promote diversity and this diversity is relative to the university, NOT to the real world. Colleges believe that diversity is a desirable trait and if this trait will be beneficial to the education of the student body at the college, why should it not be allowed to be considered? Again, a college student-body will NEVER be perfectly representative of what a student will experience in the real world. If a student attends a private catholic college, it is not believed that they will go out into the world thinking that people are predominately Catholic. Or if a student attends an ivy league school, it is not believed that they will go out into the world believing that most people score over 2100 on their SATs. My opponent claims that "quality" is being lost when affirmative action policies are put into place. This point is similar to that of the "undeserving" students he mentioned earlier. "Quality" is a term that is decided by the college, not by your personal definition. If your definition simply means test scores and GPA, then that is fine. However, we must be considering the definition of "quality" as determined by the college. Colleges invariably go past merely test scores and GPA to determine "quality", so why should they not be allowed to consider race as something that makes a student more valuable to the university? So many factors, some of these arbitrary, are already being made to promote diversity, so why should race be excluded? As long as these other factors are present, race should not be treated any differently, which is why universities should still be ALLOWED to consider race. Affirmative action does not give students admission to college "simply because of their skin color." It allows for colleges to give students a plus for being a certain race, because it will promote diversity at their school and benefit their students. While this may seem to be unfair, it is important to recognize that other policies are already in place to promote diversity that may seem to be unfair. For example, students can be given a plus for being located in a state where not many applicants are from. Once agin, if arbitrary factors such as this are allowed to be considered, then why should race not be allowed? It is not any different. Remember that nobody gets in for their race, it is the combination of all of their qualities put together that make an applicant "deserving." Do not be fooled into believing that ONLY GPA and test scores make a student qualified. While these are definitely factors that make a student qualified, they have NEVER been the only factors. If affirmative action should not be allowed because you consider it "unfair", then myriad admissions policies would have to be disallowed, as well. But for the time being, it should be allowed, because it would be inconsistent and blatantly unfair to not allow race when so many other things are considered.