rajpurkar/squad huggingface dataset:
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

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

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

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
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

The controversy surrounding affirmative action's effectiveness is based on the idea of class inequality. Opponents of racial affirmative action argue that the program actually benefits middle- and upper-class African Americans and Hispanic Americans at the expense of lower-class European Americans and Asian Americans. This argument supports the idea of class-based affirmative action. America's poor is disproportionately made up of people of color, so class-based affirmative action would disproportionately help people of color. This would eliminate the need for race-based affirmative action as well as reducing any disproportionate benefits for middle- and upper-class people of color.

Question: Which idea is the controversy of affirmative action primarily based upon?
Answer: class inequality

Question: Other than African Americans, who do detractors of affirmative action claim benefit most from affirmative action?
Answer: Hispanic Americans

Question: At who's expense other than Asian Americans are upper-class African Americans and Hispanic Americans supposedly benefiting?
Answer: lower-class European Americans

Question: What do some people believe should be the basis for affirmative action instead of race based legislation?
Answer: class-based affirmative action

Question: Who primarily makes up America's poor group?
Answer: people of color
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

In 1976, a group of Italian American professors at City University of New York asked to be added as an affirmative action category for promotion and hiring. Italian Americans are usually considered white in the US and would not be covered under affirmative action policies, but the professors believed they were underrepresented. Libertarian economist Thomas Sowell wrote in his book, Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study, that affirmative action policies encourage non-preferred groups to designate themselves as members of preferred groups [i.e., primary beneficiaries of affirmative action] to take advantage of group preference policies.

Question: Where were the Italian American professors employed that asked to be added as an affirmative action category?
Answer: City University of New York

Question: Which year did the Italian American Professors make their request?
Answer: 1976

Question: What category of race do Italian Americans normally fall under?
Answer: white

Question: What was the title of the book written by Thomas Sowell?
Answer: Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study

Question: Why would Italian Americans want to get themselves designated as members of a preferred group?
Answer: to take advantage of group preference policies
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

Frederick Lynch, the author of Invisible Victims: White Males and the Crisis of Affirmative Action, did a study on white males that said they were victims of reverse discrimination. Lynch explains that these white men felt frustrated and unfairly victimized by affirmative action. Shelby Steele, another author against affirmative action, wanted to see affirmative action go back to its original meaning of enforcing equal opportunity. He argued that blacks had to take full responsibility in their education and in maintaining a job. Steele believes that there is still a long way to go in America to reach our goals of eradicating discrimination.

Question: What book did Frederick Lynch author?
Answer: Invisible Victims: White Males and the Crisis of Affirmative Action

Question: What did white males feel was happening to them as a result of affirmative action?
Answer: reverse discrimination

Question: What moral position does Shelby Steele hold?
Answer: against affirmative action

Question: What does Shelby Steele believe that the true concept of affirmative action is?
Answer: enforcing equal opportunity
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

Terry Eastland, the author who wrote From Ending Affirmative Action: The Case for Colorblind Justice states, "Most arguments for affirmative action fall into two categories: remedying past discrimination and promoting diversity". Eastland believes that the founders of affirmative action did not anticipate how the benefits of affirmative action would go to those who did not need it, mostly middle class minorities. Additionally, she argues that affirmative action carries with it a stigma that can create feelings of self-doubt and entitlement in minorities. Eastland believes that affirmative action is a great risk that only sometimes pays off, and that without it we would be able to compete more freely with one another. Libertarian economist Thomas Sowell identified what he says are negative results of affirmative action in his book, Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study. Sowell writes that affirmative action policies encourage non-preferred groups to designate themselves as members of preferred groups [i.e., primary beneficiaries of affirmative action] to take advantage of group preference policies; that they tend to benefit primarily the most fortunate among the preferred group (e.g., upper and middle class blacks), often to the detriment of the least fortunate among the non-preferred groups (e.g., poor white or Asian); that they reduce the incentives of both the preferred and non-preferred to perform at their best – the former because doing so is unnecessary and the latter because it can prove futile – thereby resulting in net losses for society as a whole; and that they engender animosity toward preferred groups as well.:115–147

Question: Which book did Terry Eastland write?
Answer: From Ending Affirmative Action: The Case for Colorblind Justice

Question: What did Eastland believe the founders of affirmative action did not consider?
Answer: how the benefits of affirmative action would go to those who did not need it

Question: Outside of promoting diversity, was does Eastland believe the other reason to be in favor of affirmative action is?
Answer: remedying past discrimination

Question: Why does Sowell believe that there is little to no incentive for the preferred minority groups to perform at their best?
Answer: because doing so is unnecessary

Question: What argument does Sowell make in his claim that non - preferred minorities have less incentive to perform at their best?
Answer: because it can prove futile
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

Some commentators have defined reverse discrimination as a policy or practice in which members of a majority are discriminated against in favor of a historically disadvantaged group or minority.[non-primary source needed] Many argue that reverse discrimination results from affirmative action policies and that these policies are just another form of discrimination no different from examples in the past. People like Ward Connerly assert that affirmative action requires the very discrimination it is seeking to eliminate. According to these opponents, this contradiction might make affirmative action counter-productive. One argument for reverse discrimination is the idea that affirmative action encourages mediocrity and incompetence. Job positions would not be offered to the applicants who are the most qualified, but to applicants with a special trait such as a certain race, ethnicity, or gender. For example, opponents say affirmative action causes unprepared applicants to be accepted in highly demanding educational institutions or jobs which result in eventual failure (see, for example, Richard Sander's study of affirmative action in Law School, bar exam and eventual performance at law firms). Other opponents say that affirmative action lowers the bar and so denies those who strive for excellence on their own merit and the sense of real achievement. Opponents of affirmative action suggest that merit should be the primary factor considered in applying for job positions, college, graduate school, etc.

Question: What is a definition of reverse discrimination?
Answer: a policy or practice in which members of a majority are discriminated against in favor of a historically disadvantaged group or minority

Question: What do some commentators claim the irony of policies resulting from affirmative action is?
Answer: these policies are just another form of discrimination

Question: Who is an example of someone that states that affirmative action is another form of discrimination?
Answer: Ward Connerly

Question: What does the opposition of affirmative action believe should be the main key in determining acceptance in employment or education?
Answer: merit

Question: An argument against affirmative action is that it encourages what?
Answer: mediocrity and incompetence
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

Another popular argument for affirmative action is the compensation argument. Blacks were mistreated in the past for a morally irrelevant characteristic of being black so society today should compensate for the injuries. This causes reverse discrimination in the form of preferential hirings, contracts, and scholarships as a means to ameliorate past wrongs. Many opponents argue that this form of reparation is morally indefensible because if blacks were harmed for being black in the past, then preferential treatment for this same trait is illogical. In addition, arguments are made that whites today who innocently benefited from past injustices should not be punished for something they had no control over. Therefore, they are being reverse discriminated against because they are receiving the punishment that should be given to people who willingly and knowingly benefited from discriminatory practices

Question: What is a typical argument in favor of affirmative action?
Answer: compensation argument

Question: In the compensation argument, who should supposedly have to make up for past discrimination against blacks?
Answer: society today should compensate for the injuries

Question: Which argument is being made by those who oppose affirmative action in relation to the compensation argument?
Answer: preferential treatment for this same trait is illogical

Question: In terms of whites, what is an argument that is used to try and refute the benefits of affirmative action as it relates to the compensation argument?
Answer: whites today who innocently benefited from past injustices should not be punished for something they had no control over

Question: According to opposition believers, who should be punished for discrimination?
Answer: people who willingly and knowingly benefited from discriminatory practices
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

Some opponents further claim that affirmative action has undesirable side-effects and that it fails to achieve its goals. They argue that it hinders reconciliation, replaces old wrongs with new wrongs, undermines the achievements of minorities, and encourages groups to identify themselves as disadvantaged, even if they are not. It may increase racial tension and benefit the more privileged people within minority groups at the expense of the disenfranchised within better-off groups (such as lower-class whites and Asians).There has recently been a strong push among American states to ban racial or gender preferences in university admissions, in reaction to the controversial and unprecedented decision in Grutter v. Bollinger. In 2006, nearly 60% of Michigan voters decided to ban affirmative action in university admissions. Michigan joined California, Florida, Texas, and Washington in banning the use of race or sex in admissions considerations. Some opponents believe, among other things, that affirmative action devalues the accomplishments of people who belong to a group it's supposed to help, therefore making affirmative action counter-productive. Furthermore, opponents of affirmative action claim that these policies dehumanize individuals and applicants to jobs or school are judged as members of a group without consideration for the individual person.

Question: Other than failing to achieve its goal, what else do opponents to affirmative action claim it has?
Answer: undesirable side-effects

Question: Other than benefiting more privileged people within minority groups, what is another argument against affirmative action?
Answer: may increase racial tension

Question: When was there a vote regarding affirmative action in Michigan?
Answer: 2006

Question: How many Michigan voters elected to ban affirmative action for university admissions?
Answer: 60%

Question: Which court case featured an unprecedented and controversial decision?
Answer: Grutter v. Bollinger
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

In the US, a prominent form of racial preferences relates to access to education, particularly admission to universities and other forms of higher education. Race, ethnicity, native language, social class, geographical origin, parental attendance of the university in question (legacy admissions), and/or gender are sometimes taken into account when the university assesses an applicant's grades and test scores. Individuals can also be awarded scholarships and have fees paid on the basis of criteria listed above. In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Bakke v. Regents that public universities (and other government institutions) could not set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment. The Court said that "goals" and "timetables" for diversity could be set instead.

Question: Where are racial preferences highlighted the most in the United States?
Answer: admission to universities and other forms of higher education

Question: What is another term for kids who get preferential treatment due to their parents attending the same university?
Answer: legacy admissions

Question: Which case that went to the Supreme Court resulted in a decision regarding public universities and affirmative action?
Answer: Bakke v. Regents

Question: What are public universities not allowed to do?
Answer: set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment

Question: Instead of being allowed to set numerical targets, what did the Court rule that universities are allowed to do?
Answer: "goals" and "timetables" for diversity could be set
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

The racial preferences debate related to admission to US colleges and universities reflects competing notions of the mission of colleges: "To what extent should they pursue scholarly excellence, to what extent civic goods, and how should these purposes be balanced?". Scholars such as Ronald Dworkin have asserted that no college applicant has a right to expect that a university will design its admissions policies in a way that prizes any particular set of qualities. In this view, admission is not an honor bestowed to reward superior merit but rather a way to advance the mission as each university defines it. If diversity is a goal of the university and their racial preferences do not discriminate against applicants based on hatred or contempt, then affirmative action can be judged acceptable based on the criteria related to the mission the university sets for itself.

Question: What does the racial preferences debate indicate about universities and colleges?
Answer: competing notions of the mission of colleges

Question: What claim did Ronald Dworkin make about the expectations that a college application should not have?
Answer: a right to expect that a university will design its admissions policies in a way that prizes any particular set of qualities

Question: What does Ronald Dworkin believe admission should represent?
Answer: a way to advance the mission as each university defines it

Question: When can affirmative action be judged to be acceptable in terms of admissions?
Answer: If diversity is a goal of the university and their racial preferences do not discriminate
Title: Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

To accommodate the ruling in Hopwood v. Texas banning any use of race in school admissions, the State of Texas passed a law guaranteeing entry to any state university if a student finished in the top 10% of their graduating class. Florida and California have also replaced racial quotas with class rank and other criteria. Class rank tends to benefit top students at less competitive high schools, to the detriment of students at more competitive high schools. This effect, however, may be intentional since less-funded, less competitive schools are more likely to be schools where minority enrollment is high. Critics argue that class rank is more a measure of one's peers than of one's self. The top 10% rule adds racial diversity only because schools are still highly racially segregated because of residential patterns. The class rank rule has the same consequence as traditional affirmative action: opening schools to students who would otherwise not be admitted had the given school used a holistic, merit-based approach. From 1996 to 1998, Texas had merit-based admission to its state universities, and minority enrollment dropped. The state's adoption of the "top 10 percent" rule returned minority enrollment to pre-1996 levels.

Question: What did the ruling in Hopwood v Texas set a precedent for in terms of admission policies?
Answer: banning any use of race in school admissions

Question: What did the law passed by the State of Texas guarantee?
Answer: entry to any state university if a student finished in the top 10% of their graduating class

Question: Other than Texas and Florida, which other state replaced racial quotas?
Answer: California

Question: What is one example of what racial quotas were replaced with?
Answer: class rank

Question: After the state passed the top 10% rule, what happened to minority enrollment?
Answer: returned minority enrollment to pre-1996 levels