By: Crystal Fu
Racial equality has emerged as one of the most pressing issues in American society with the surging civil rights movement in the late twentieth century. To achieve diversity, universities and other institutions began to implement systems of affirmative action (using racial preferences when admitting students or staff), which is criticized in Mismatch by Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor. Despite the importance of student diversity, universities should reduce the use of racial preferences in admissions because they foster harmful racial stereotypes and impede the academic and professional success of minority students. To begin, as Sander and Taylor argue in Mismatch, students who are admitted using racial preferences are at risk of inadvertently reinforcing false stereotypes and developing low self-esteem as a result. For instance, the performance gap between students admitted through affirmative action and other students fuels negative racial stereotypes, and “hearing or being reminded of a negative stereotype of a group one belongs to hurts short-term performance” (Sander and Taylor 104). When a minority student notices that many classmates admitted using affirmative action – who also happen to be minorities – are struggling, it would be easy for him or her to incorrectly conclude that minorities are less smart or less capable. This can create a vicious cycle in which the performance of those students is further impeded, resulting in an even greater performance gap. On the contrary, according to a study conducted by researchers from Syracuse University and the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (ironically opposing affirmative action bans), banning affirmative action has correlated with minorities being “[pushed] from selective to nonselective colleges” (Lutz et al.) compared to before the ban. One can infer that, without being mismatched by racial preferences, minorities were more likely to apply to colleges aligned with their academic strengths, leading to a decrease in minority applications at prestigious colleges. This shift can allow minority students to thrive in their college environments instead of struggling to keep up with their peers. Thus, students floundering at institutions while feeling out of their depths instead of matriculating at schools suited to their needs would suffer needless emotional harm. Moreover, the futures of these “mismatched” students would also be catastrophically impacted by racial preferences. For example, a law school professor laments in Mismatch that “ ‘[the faculty will] admit black and Hispanic students with low entering credentials, but... [t]hey don’t take the time to help them master the skills necessary to pass the bar’ ” (qtd. in Sander and Taylor 88). Unfortunately, what these universities do is akin to admitting children into an amusement park for free and yet not buying them any tickets to rides. Just as a park is nothing without its attractions, for students, entrance into a school is never the end goal, but merely a gateway to what really matters: a quality education. When universities do not understand this, students suffer; for instance, the dean of George Mason University Law School reports that “ ‘students with LSAT scores below 150 are more than six times as likely to experience academic difficulty... more than thirteen times as likely to be dismissed for academic cause, and almost twice as likely to fail the bar exam on their first attempt’ ” (qtd. in Sander and Taylor 226-227). This is unacceptable and must be addressed by universities implementing racial preferences. Although many schools do understand the negative effects of racial preferences, they are forced to continue using them by organizations like the American Bar Association (ABA) that threaten their accreditation if they do not comply.The sooner administrators acknowledge the damage caused by these policies, the sooner they can find better solutions that promote racial diversity. However, school administrators refuse to hear any criticism of affirmative action out of fear of becoming embroiled in ugly racial politics. For example, as elucidated by Sander and Taylor, institutions that “lack racial legitimacy can become targets of civil rights lawsuits or unfavorable media coverage" (Sander and Taylor 189), resulting in high financial and reputational costs. This fear of scandal and public backlash explains why, despite overwhelming evidence, universities do not address the harmful effects of racial preferences even when the data is in plain sight. Avoiding the subject only exacerbates the problem and hinders any attempt to find a solution. In contrast, Dr. Meera E. Deo proposes in a supporting article that a better approach would be to implement an “equity-focused affirmative action model that targets the full inclusion of our most vulnerable students” (Deo) that considers factors other than race alone. Surface-level diversity in schools is not enough to help minorities and other disadvantaged groups gain access to equal education. Instead, schools should consider their socioeconomic status and the changing situations in America among racial groups. If universities make more efforts to support students in this way, it would be much more impactful than mechanically applying bonuses to students’ applications. In hindsight, although racial preferences were born out of misguided good intentions, their harmful impacts on minority students have been thoroughly detailed in books such as Mismatch. Benevolent intentions do not excuse the systematic damage they have caused; they must be replaced by better programs that transcend stereotypes and give minority students the opportunity to thrive. When school administrators become willing to embrace this change, they will usher in an era of true racial equality in education. Works Cited Deo, Meera E. "THE END OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION." North Carolina Law Review, vol. 100, no. 1, Dec. 2021, pp. 237+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A690996042/AONE?u=j079907013&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=de69235a. Accessed 14 Feb. 2023. Lutz, Amy, et al. "State Bans on Affirmative Action and Talent Loss Among Blacks and Latinos in the United States." Ethnic Studies Review, vol. 43, no. 2, summer 2020, pp. 58+. Gale Academic OneFile,
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorLatest article written and published by Alexandra Hamilton. Archives
April 2023
Categories |