From: schieber@jetson.uh.edu (Schieber, Jay D.)
Subject: Re: Stigma was Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:03:00 GMT

In article <BuLCMD.1GE@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca>, drraymon@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca (Darrell Raymond) writes...
>In article <14SEP199215404508@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu>, merolajs@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (JOSEPH S. MEROLA DEPT OF CHEMISTRY VPI&SU) writes:
>> 
>> True, there are some studies which show that there are
>> some problems with affirmative action, but I also have seen
>> information on some that have not had any real problems.  
>> 
>> But, I  will ask again, in the hopes of turning this into a positive
>> discussion.  
>	.
>	.
>> However, I keep asking for
>> someone to come up with something better.  
> 
>  I think this is a valid request, if we who find problems with affirmative
>action are not to be dismissed as whiners.  Here is a two-part suggestion, 
>offered not as a panacea, but for your comments:
> 
>  1. You say above that some studies show that AA has problems and others 
>     do not.  I think it important to determine what factors result in 
>     (in)effectiveness.  It may be that AA is only a minor component in
>     some comprehensive plan, the total impact of which is effective 
>     (AA may either help or impede the overall impact); or it may be that 
>     intense personal involvement of exceptional individuals makes the 
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I am not sure exactly what you are getting at here, but it may not
be essential to your basic point...



>     difference between success and failure. Or it may simply be that 
>     studies of AA are lousy pieces of science.  I don't know which of 
>     these is true, but it would be a step beyond simply arguing the 
>     philosophy of AA to look at the empirical evidence. 
> 
>     Proposal #1: let's evaluate current programs and find out what
>  		  causes beneficial effects, and how.

I agree.  Some studies have been done.  Since I am not a sociologist,
I cannot accurately judge those results.  However, we have seen how
the results of one study posted on the net already evoked quite 
different interpretations.  Some of the conclusions of the study
sited seemed to me to go much further than straightforward conclusions
from empirical observations (even points that I agreed with).  
Typically, people pick out parts to
justify their own biases.  Since many people have stakes in the
ideology supported or refuted, it is sometimes difficult to use
the results of such studies fairly.  However, as honest, intelligent
people, we can probably come to some agreement on what is working.


> 
>  2. Trying to stem racism and sexism at the door of undergraduate program 
>     or at the faculty club is, in my opinion, far too late.  First, by
>     this point many potential academics have simply checked out early.
>     Second, universities cannot realistically hope to be very far ahead 
>     of society's general attitudes (for an empirical observation, just 
>     consult the nearest fraternity's initiation rite). I think you have 
>     to get to people earlier, in public school.  After all, it's there
>     (and in the home) that these problems first take root.
> 
>     Proposal #2: overhauling the public school system will have ten
>                  times the effect of overhauling the universities. 

I agree only partially here.  I think that universities can go a long
way to advancing the awareness of students that pass through their
doors.  You are right in that many do not gain much, but there are 
certainly many who do.  I believe that I've learned a great deal from
the days when I grew up in a farm town in the Midwest (mostly I've 
learned that I am pretty ignorant).  Overhauling the 
grade schools would be wonderful, and would make my 
job more pleasant and joyful.  Please work towards this 
goal.  Be careful, though.  There are many who
would claim that grade schools are no place for social agendas. (-8

A question arises for me, however.  Will your second point be
sufficient?  What if, say Native American Indians are told repeatedly
that they can be whatever they want, but they get to the university
and see only white males of european descent, say.  Would that be
too powerful of a message that would overcome the mere words of grade
and high schools?  Also, would it be enough to counterbalance the
many current faculty voices who reject many qualified "minorities"
out of hand?

I think that your suggestions are good ones, and would have a
wonderful synergistic effect with AA.  

One piece of evidence that the perception of 
real opportunity has a tremendous difference is given by the following
anecdotal occurrence:  An alumnus of a very poor NYC public school
became very wealthy by running his own business.  The principal of the
high school asked him to come visit the school and tell the students
that they could make it if they tried.  He decided to go one better,
and offered to pay the tuition of any student who graduated in that
class and got accepted at a university.  Since no more than one or
two students from any graduating class had ever gone to university,
he expected to pay for only three or four, at most.  It ends up
that he his expectation were correct, because the bulk of the
class got scholarships to their universities.  I read this in
the NYT several years ago, but have not read any followups on
how well that class did in university.

At any rate, it may be possible to see if individuals of underrepresented
groups who went to progressive schools faired better than the average
members of that group.  There may be a statistically large enough sample.

> 
>-Darrell.