praj-17/QA-MCQ-Open-ended huggingface dataset:
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: The strides that the Johnson presidency made in ensuring equal opportunity in the workforce were further picked up by his successor Nixon. In 1969 the Nixon administration initiated the "Philadelphia Order". It was regarded as the most forceful plan thus far to guarantee fair hiring practices in construction jobs. Philadelphia was selected as the test case because, as Assistant Secretary of Labor Arthur Fletcher explained, "The craft unions and the construction industry are among the most egregious offenders against equal opportunity laws . . . openly hostile toward letting blacks into their closed circle." The order included definite "goals and timetables." As President Nixon asserted, "We would not impose quotas, but would require federal contractors to show 'affirmative action' to meet the goals of increasing minority employment."

question: Who followed in Johnson's footsteps in terms of ensuring equal opportunity? 

answer: his successor Nixon

question: Which piece of legislation was begun in 1969? 

answer: Philadelphia Order

question: Which industry of jobs did the legislation target? 

answer: construction

question: Aside from the construction industry, which other group was one of the main offenders against equal opportunity laws? 

answer: craft unions

question: Who held the position of Assistant Secretary of Labor? 

answer: Arthur Fletcher
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: After the Nixon administration, advancements in affirmative action became less prevalent. "During the brief Ford administration, affirmative action took a back seat, while enforcement stumbled along.":145 Equal rights was still an important subject to many Americans, yet the world was changing and new issues were being raised. People began to look at affirmative action as a glorified issue of the past and now there were other areas that needed focus. "Of all the triumphs that have marked this as America's Century –...none is more inspiring, if incomplete, than our pursuit of racial justice."

question: In terms of advancement, what happened to the progression of affirmative action after the Nixon administration? 

answer: became less prevalent

question: What was one of the primary reasons that the issue of affirmative action lost its momentum? 

answer: there were other areas that needed focus

question: Which administration allowed affirmative action to take a backseat to other issues? 

answer: Ford
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: In the beginning, racial classifications that identified race were inherently suspect and subject to strict scrutiny. These classifications would only be upheld if necessary to promote a compelling governmental interest. Later the U.S. Supreme Court decided that racial classifications that benefited underrepresented minorities were to only be upheld if necessary and promoted a compelling governmental purpose. (See Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co.) There is no clear guidance about when government action is not "compelling", and such rulings are rare.

question: What kind of classification was subject to strict scrutiny? 

answer: racial

question: What was the only situation in which a racial classification could be considered acceptable? 

answer: necessary to promote a compelling governmental interest

question: Who later confirmed that racial classifications were only to be upheld if they were necessary? 

answer: U.S. Supreme Court

question: What is an example case that can help display where upholding a racial classification is beneficial? 

answer: Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co.
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: Ricci v. DeStefano was heard by the United States Supreme Court in 2009. The case concerns White and Hispanic firefighters in New Haven, Connecticut, who upon passing their test for promotions to management were denied the promotions, allegedly because of a discriminatory or at least questionable test. The test gave 17 whites and two Hispanics the possibility of immediate promotion. Although 23% of those taking the test were African American, none scored high enough to qualify. Because of the possibility the tests were biased in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, no candidates were promoted pending outcome of the controversy. In a split 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that New Haven had engaged in impermissible racial discrimination against the White and Hispanic majority.

question: Which case concerning White and Hispanic firefighters was heard by the Supreme Court in 2009? 

answer: Ricci v. DeStefano

question: Where was the issue of White and Hispanic firefighters heard in the case based out of? 

answer: New Haven, Connecticut

question: How many whites were given the possibility of immediate promotion as a result of taking the controversial test? 

answer: 17

question: What percentage of those people taking the test were African American? 

answer: 23

question: What was the final vote count for the Supreme Court over the issue? 

answer: 5-4
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: President Kennedy stated in Executive Order 10925 that "discrimination because of race, creed, color, or national origin is contrary to the Constitutional principles and policies of the United States"; that "it is the plain and positive obligation of the United States Government to promote and ensure equal opportunity for all qualified persons, without regard to race, creed, color, or national origin, employed or seeking employment with the Federal Government and on government contracts"; that "it is the policy of the executive branch of the Government to encourage by positive measures equal opportunity for all qualified persons within the Government"; and that "it is in the general interest and welfare of the United States to promote its economy, security, and national defense through the most efficient and effective utilization of all available manpower".

question: Which President declared that discrimination is contrary to the Constitutional principles of the United States? 

answer: Kennedy

question: Which piece of legislation did President Kennedy use to claim that discrimination was a violation of the Constitution? 

answer: Executive Order 10925

question: What were the affected industries in terms of regulation as a result of Executive Order 10925? 

answer: Federal Government and on government contracts
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: Proponents of affirmative action argue that by nature the system is not only race based, but also class and gender based. To eliminate two of its key components would undermine the purpose of the entire system. The African American Policy Forum believes that the class based argument is based on the idea that non-poor minorities do not experience racial and gender based discrimination. The AAPF believes that "Race-conscious affirmative action remains necessary to address race-based obstacles that block the path to success of countless people of color of all classes". The groups goes on to say that affirmative action is responsible for creating the African American middle class, so it does not make sense to say that the system only benefits the middle and upper classes.

question: Other than being race and gender based, what did believers in affirmative action also feel that the system discriminated against? 

answer: class

question: Which organization believed in the class based argument? 

answer: African American Policy Forum

question: What group of people did the AAPF claim affirmative action created? 

answer: African American middle class

question: What does the AAPF believe the foundation for the class based argument is? 

answer: non-poor minorities do not experience racial and gender based discrimination

question: What does the AAPF believe the goal of affirmative action should be? 

answer: to address race-based obstacles that block the path to success
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: Following the end of World War II the educational gap between White and Black Americans was widened by Dwight D. Eisenhower's GI Bill. This piece of legislation paved the way for white GIs to attend college. Despite their veteran status returning black servicemen were not afforded loans at the same rate as whites. Furthermore, at the time of its introduction, segregation was still the law of the land barring blacks from the best institutions. Overall, "Nearly 8 million servicemen and servicewomen were educated under the provisions of the GI Bill after World War II. But for blacks, higher educational opportunities were so few that the promise of the GI Bill went largely unfulfilled."

question: What major event preceded the growth of the divide in education between White and Black Americans? 

answer: end of World War II

question: What was considered to be a major cause of the increase in educational gap? 

answer: Dwight D. Eisenhower's GI Bill

question: What did returning black veterans not receive? 

answer: loans at the same rate as whites

question: How many servicemen and women were educated as a result of the GI Bill? 

answer: Nearly 8 million

question: What opportunities were few for black veterans? 

answer: higher educational
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: According to a study by Dr. Paul Brest, Hispanics or "Latinos" include immigrants who are descendants of immigrants from the countries comprising Central and South America. In 1991, Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Cuban Americans made up 80% of the Latino population in the United States. Latinos are disadvantaged compared to White Americans and are more likely to live in poverty. They are the least well educated major ethnic group and suffered a 3% drop in high school completion rate while African Americans experienced a 12% increase between 1975-1990. In 1990, they constituted 9% of the population, but only received 3.1% of the bachelors's degrees awarded. At times when it is favorable to lawmakers, Latinos were considered "white" by the Jim Crow laws during the Reconstruction. In other cases, according to Paul Brest, Latinos have been classified as an inferior race and a threat to white purity. Latinos have encountered considerable discrimination in areas such as employment, housing, and education. Brest finds that stereotypes continue to be largely negative and many perceive Latinos as "lazy, unproductive, and on the dole." Furthermore, native-born Latino-Americans and recent immigrants are seen as identical since outsiders tend not to differentiate between Latino groups.

question: Who conducted a study about the origins of "Latinos"? 

answer: Dr. Paul Brest

question: How much of the Latino population did Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans and Cuban Americans make up in 1991? 

answer: 80%

question: In relation to other major ethnic groups, what is the education level of Latinos? 

answer: least well educated

question: What was the percentage increase of the high school completion rate for African Americans between 1975 and 1990? 

answer: 12%

question: How many of the total bachelor degrees awarded in 1990 went to Latinos? 

answer: 3.1%
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: The category of Native American applies to the diverse group of people who lived in North America before European settlement. During the U.S. government's westward expansion, Native Americans were displaced from their land which had been their home for centuries. Instead, they were forced onto reservations which were far smaller and less productive. According to Brest, land belonging to Native Americans was reduced from 138 million acres in 1887 to 52 million acres in 1934. In 1990, the poverty rate for Native Americans was more than triple that of the whites and only 9.4% of Native Americans have completed a bachelor's degree as opposed to 25.2% of whites and 12.2% of African Americans.

question: Which groups can be categorized as Native Americans? 

answer: people who lived in North America before European settlement

question: When did the Native Americans lose their land? 

answer: During the U.S. government's westward expansion

question: Where were Native Americans forced to live after they lost their land? 

answer: reservations

question: How much land did the Native Americans own in 1934? 

answer: 52 million acres

question: In relation to whites, what was the poverty rate for Native Americans in 1990? 

answer: more than triple
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: Early Asian immigrants experienced prejudice and discrimination in the forms of not having the ability to become naturalized citizens. They also struggled with many of the same school segregation laws that African Americans faced. Particularly, during World War II, Japanese Americans were interned in camps and lost their property, homes, and businesses. Discrimination against Asians began with the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and then continued with the Scott Act of 1888 and the Geary Act of 1892. At the beginning of the 20th century, the United States passed the Immigration Act of 1924 to prevent Asian immigration out of fear that Asians were stealing white jobs and lowering the standard for wages. In addition, whites and non-Asians do not differentiate among the different Asian groups and perpetuate the "model minority" stereotype. According to a 2010 article by Professor Qin Zhang of Fairfield University, Asians are characterized as one dimensional in having great work ethic and valuing education, but lacking in communication skills and personality. A negative outcome of this stereotype is that Asians have been portrayed as having poor leadership and interpersonal skills. This has contributing to the "glass ceiling" phenomenon in which although there are many qualified Asian Americans, they occupy a disproportionately small number of executive positions in businesses. Furthermore, the model minority stereotype has led to resentment of Asian success and several universities and colleges have limited or have been accused of limiting Asian matriculation.

question: What form of discrimination did early Asian immigrants experience? 

answer: not having the ability to become naturalized citizens

question: What law type did Asian immigrants struggle with? 

answer: school segregation

question: Which piece of legislature marked the start of discrimination against Asians? 

answer: Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882

question: Which bill was passed in an attempt to limit or prevent Asian immigration? 

answer: Immigration Act of 1924

question: According to studies, what are Asians perceived to be lacking? 

answer: communication skills and personality
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: Proponents of affirmative action recognize that the policy is inherently unequal; however, minding the inescapable fact that historic inequalities exist in America, they believe the policy is much more fair than one in which these circumstances are not taken into account. Furthermore, those in favor of affirmative action see it as an effort towards inclusion rather than a discriminatory practice. "Job discrimination is grounded in prejudice and exclusion, whereas affirmative action is an effort to overcome prejudicial treatment through inclusion. The most effective way to cure society of exclusionary practices is to make special efforts at inclusion, which is exactly what affirmative action does."

question: What is one of the issues with affirmative action? 

answer: inherently unequal

question: How do people who are in favor of affirmative action view it? 

answer: an effort towards inclusion rather than a discriminatory practice

question: What does affirmative action supposedly aim to do? 

answer: overcome prejudicial treatment through inclusion

question: What do proponents of affirmative action believe is the best way to combat exclusionary practices? 

answer: make special efforts at inclusion
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: There are a multitude of supporters as well as opponents to the policy of affirmative action. Many presidents throughout the last century have failed to take a very firm stance on the policy, and the public has had to discern the president's opinion for themselves. Bill Clinton, however, made his stance on affirmative action very clear in a speech on July 19, 1995, nearly two and a half years after his inauguration. In his speech, he discussed the history in the United States that brought the policy into fruition: slavery, Jim Crow, and segregation. Clinton also mentioned a point similar to President Lyndon B. Johnson's "Freedom is not Enough" speech, and declared that just outlawing discrimination in the country would not be enough to give everyone in America equality. He addressed the arguments that affirmative action hurt the white middle class and said that the policy was not the source of their problems. Clinton plainly outlined his stance on affirmative action, saying:

question: Which President made their stance on affirmative action clear in 1995? 

answer: Bill Clinton

question: How long after his inauguration was Bill Clinton's speech? 

answer: two and a half years

question: Which speech did Bill Clinton's speech draw parallels to? 

answer: President Lyndon B. Johnson's "Freedom is not Enough"

question: What did President Clinton claim would not be enough to give everyone in American equality? 

answer: just outlawing discrimination

question: What was President Clinton's response to the claim that affirmative action was hurting the white middle class. 

answer: the policy was not the source of their problems
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: The National Conference of State Legislatures held in Washington D.C. stated in a 2014 overview that many supporters for affirmative action argue that policies stemming from affirmative action help to open doors for historically excluded groups in workplace settings and higher education. Workplace diversity has become a business management concept in which employers actively seek to promote an inclusive workplace. By valuing diversity, employers have the capacity to create an environment in which there is a culture of respect for individual differences as well as the ability to draw in talent and ideas from all segments of the population. By creating this diverse workforce, these employers and companies gain a competitive advantage in an increasingly global economy. According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, many private sector employers have concluded that a diverse workforce makes a "company stronger, more profitable, and a better place to work." Therefore, these diversity promoting policies are implemented for competitive reasons rather than as a response to discrimination, but have shown the value in having diversity.

question: Where was the National Conference of State Legislatures held in 2014? 

answer: Washington D.C.

question: What did proponents of affirmative action claim some of the effects of policies that support affirmative action had done? 

answer: help to open doors for historically excluded groups in workplace settings and higher education

question: What has the concept of workplace diversity caused employers to do? 

answer: actively seek to promote an inclusive workplace

question: Having a diverse workplace allows for employers to do what? 

answer: draw in talent and ideas from all segments of the population

question: Which organization claims that private sector employers believe having a diverse workplace is beneficial? 

answer: U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: In the year 2000, according to a study by American Association of University Professors (AAUP), affirmative action promoted diversity within colleges and universities. This has been shown to have positive effects on the educational outcomes and experiences of college students as well as the teaching of faculty members. According to a study by Geoffrey Maruyama and José F. Moreno, the results showed that faculty members believed diversity helps students to reach the essential goals of a college education, Caucasian students suffer no detrimental effects from classroom diversity, and that attention to multicultural learning improves the ability of colleges and universities to accomplish their missions. Furthermore, a diverse population of students offers unique perspectives in order to challenge preconceived notions through exposure to the experiences and ideas of others. According to Professor Gurin of the University of Michigan, skills such as "perspective-taking, acceptance of differences, a willingness and capacity to find commonalities among differences, acceptance of conflict as normal, conflict resolution, participation in democracy, and interest in the wider social world" can potentially be developed in college while being exposed to heterogeneous group of students. In addition, broadening perspectives helps students confront personal and substantive stereotypes and fosters discussion about racial and ethnic issues in a classroom setting. Furthermore, the 2000 AAUP study states that having a diversity of views leads to a better discussion and greater understanding among the students on issues of race, tolerance, fairness, etc.

question: What does AAUP stand for? 

answer: American Association of University Professors

question: What were the effects of affirmative action on universities according to the study done by the AAUP? 

answer: positive effects on the educational outcomes and experiences of college students

question: What did a study claim about the beliefs of faculty members on increased diversity? 

answer: helps students to reach the essential goals of a college education

question: Who supposedly suffers no detrimental effects from classroom diversity? 

answer: Caucasian students

question: In which year did the AAUP release their study? 

answer: 2000
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Context: Richard Sander claims that by artificially elevating minority students into schools they otherwise would not be capable of attending, this discourages them and tends to engender failure and high dropout rates for these students. For example, about half of black college students rank in the bottom 20 percent of their classes, black law school graduates are four times as likely to fail bar exams as are whites, and interracial friendships are more likely to form among students with relatively similar levels of academic preparation; thus, blacks and Hispanics are more socially integrated on campuses where they are less academically mismatched. He claims that the supposed "beneficiaries" of affirmative action – minorities – do not actually benefit and rather are harmed by the policy. Sander's claims have been disputed, and his empirical analyses have been subject to substantial criticism. A group including some of the country's lead statistical methodologists told the Supreme Court that Sander's analyses were sufficiently flawed that the Court would be wise to ignore them entirely. At the same time many scholars have found that minorities gain substantially from affirmative action.

question: Who claims that artificially raising minority students into schools has a negative effect on them? 

answer: Richard Sander

question: What was a negative effect of affirmative action according to Richard Sander? 

answer: high dropout rates

question: Where do half of the black college students rank in terms of their performance relative to the rest of their class? 

answer: bottom 20 percent

question: What is the failure rate for black law school graduates compared to whites for the bar exam? 

answer: four times