Affirmative Action (Specifically, Standardized Testing)

1) The SAT does not have a "huge" influence on the college admissions process. SAT scores actually count for very little in the overall matrix used during the college admissions process. The University of Michigan is a great example (not just because it's a prestigious university, but because it was ground zero for the affirmative action debate and was the impetus for the two major AA supreme court rulings). The application process for universities exists to ensure that the population admitted (due to scarce space) will be successful in college. Universities have found that standardized test scores (and GPAs) are poor predictors of college success (because they can be studied for and they don't measure skills that lead to success in a college setting – and GPAs vary from school to school because the varying level of academic rigor at high schools). At U of M, your GPA and SAT score only count a small bit in the overall decision to admit you. It's FAR more important to have a track record of things like "personal achievement" and "leadership and service" (even a factor like having lived in Michigan counts; out-of-state students are given less consideration - even the county you live in counts - they prioritize 'underrepresented counties' along with everything else). These quoted phrases come from U of M directly. I should also say that I work in higher education, so I have more than a passing familiarity with all of this. The comparatively little value of the SAT has actually prompted some universities (like the University of California) to threaten to drop it altogether (which is why the College Board recently overhauled it). 2) I still maintain that points are not allocated based on ethnic minority status for the SATs. Better hurry up and find that article. 3) My point about the voluntary nature of the "race" question on the SAT is perfectly relevant because it illustrates how pointless weighting the scores based on race is. If one can cheat the results – there's no way they can assign extra points ESPECIALLY if that would count toward the college admissions process. Universities aren't stupid; there's no way they would stand for points being arbitrarily assigned on something completely unverifiable like an optional demographics question on a standardized test. 4) If it's unconstitutional for U of M to use a points-based system of affirmative action – it's ALSO unconstitutional for the College Board which is a taxpayer-supported not-for-profit entity just like the University. BOTH would be violating the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment because if a points-based system is unconstitutional in one area – the precedent is established that it would be unconstitutional anywhere else (including hiring). I'm very familiar with the U of M admissions procedure that was deemed unconstitutional – I would also point out that minority status only accounted for 20 of 150 points. 5) Affirmative Action doesn't apply only to the admissions processes at universities – it also applies to outreach and support activities – virtually all universities that have AA admissions policies also have these other policies. Yes, people can apply to attend college; but the problem is – your race and gender determine your chances of going to college or succeeding once you've been accepted. I would even argue that these outreach programs are more important because they help give people who otherwise wouldn't even think of trying to go to college a chance to see that it is a possibility. 6) Affirmative action is a voluntary practice adopted by educational institutions and is one way of responding to racial/sexual inequity. Historically Black Colleges are another way of responding to the pervasive racism in our society. Yes, the students at HBCs might benefit from a more diverse learning environment – but given that they WORK and LIVE in a diverse environment – it's not as though they have a shortage of opportunities to interact with people of other races/backgrounds. 7) When I say that there are affirmative action programs that apply (for example) to white males for fields like Early Childhood Education – I mean the programs encourage men to go into Early Childhood Education AS A DEGREE PROGRAM IN COLLEGE – not that they encourage whites to go to preschool. As for evidence: http://www.sjvhc.org... http://www.careersandcolleges.com... http://www.aacn.nche.edu... http://www.minoritynurse.com... http://www.journal.naeyc.org... http://www.menteach.org... http://www.nea.org... 8) AA is anti-racist. The status quo without AA has discrimination already built in, so your assertion that AA is discriminatory is meaningless because the net result of your opposition to AA is advocating for the continuance of discrimination that naturally exists. AA is a measure that fixes the discrimination that already exists in society with the goal of eliminating discrimination altogether. Right now one's race or sex determines how much access they will have to various career fields (as well as a lot of other characteristics about their life, like their likelihood to end up in prison or their household income). AA is fixing that (and has been since the 1960s when it was first implemented). Slowly but surely, the inequalities are being remedied. What's racist is doing nothing to address past discrimination. 9) This country was founded by slave-owning white males who believed that if you were black, female, or you didn't own land – you shouldn't get to count in the governmental process. What the country was "founded on" in that respect is irrelevant today because we believe in markedly different things than the framers of the Constitution did. It's utter lunacy that you try to claim that the founding fathers were the patron saints of egalitarianism given the rampant inequities that they wrote into the Constitution (which had to be written out by later generations). Your claim that you're somehow being put at a disadvantage because Affirmative Action exists is baseless – especially when it comes to higher ed. If minorities were being given spots at colleges that belonged to whites – the percentage of the college-educated US population would remain the same. It has not. It has steadily increased from around 12% in 1960 to over 27% today. AA is making room for more people; not excluding people. 10) You can claim that affirmative action builds barriers between groups, but you have no evidence for that claim. Michigan, which eliminated AA two years ago with Proposal 2 is the most racially-segregated state in the nation according to a Harvard University study (and is showing no signs of desegregating). PS – I think "Middle Eastern" isn't on the SAT "race" question because "Middle Eastern" isn't a race; it's an ethnicity. Middle Easterners count as "Asians." Then again the whole notion of defining race is problematic and is a great example of the persistence of racism: http://en.wikipedia.org...