Hey News-Changers! Jackie here with The Breakdown. In today’s One Big Thing, we explain everything you need to know about affirmative action in higher education and the case that anti-affirmative action groups want to get in front of the Supreme Court. Plus, what’s happening in Myanmar, good news for women and girls over 13, and preschoolers’ thoughts on the Golden Globes.
Let’s Do This!
Above: Students in 2012 hoping to repeal Prop 209, a ballot initiative to ban racial preferences in admission to universities The Supreme Court Considers Hearing a Controversial Case on Affirmative Action at Harvard (and Beyond) What is Affirmative Action?
In general, affirmative action refers to measures taken to address and correct systemic discrimination and underrepresentation (usually racial or gendered) within an institution. The Supreme Court case in the news right now is specifically about affirmative action in higher education -- where college admissions take into consideration an applicant’s race to increase the representation of historically underserved groups.
How Does Affirmative Action Work in College Admissions?
To be clear, affirmative action would not allow for an under-qualified student from an underrepresented group to be admitted over a qualified student from an overrepresented group.
Rather, race is often considered when admissions counselors are trying to “tie-break” between students who are similarly qualified to attend but are vying for limited spots. Colleges have the right to pick the student who they feel will best help further their institutions’ values, mission, goals, etc. And, yes, race may be a factor if the college chooses to prioritize diversifying their student body, increasing the socio-economic mobility of students of color, or redressing their historic racial discrimination and harm.
Even then, race is only one factor in a students’ holistic evaluation. Affirmative action just allows for the topic of race and its impact to be on the table.
So It’s Not Just Quotas?
Yes, every student still earns their admission. Affirmative action doesn’t “take away” a spot from a deserving student to “give” it to an undeserving one. In fact, the Supreme Court ruled decades ago that it’s unconstitutional for colleges to have racial “quotas” that do this.
Plus, only 3.4% of colleges even report race as a “considerable influence” on their admissions process, and 11% say it’s a “moderate” influence. Affirmative action is usually more common at the most selective universities, who get tens of thousands of applications that they need to narrow down dramatically (sometimes down to the top 7% or less). At that point, you know those folks are among the best regardless.
If anything, we should really be looking closer at the legacy students and children of school donors and faculty who get huge advantages in the admissions process. For example, white legacy students at Harvard had a 34% chance of admission, compared to the 5% for normal applicants.
Why is This So Important?
For one, it works to correct centuries of racial discrimination that actively excluded people of color from higher education. And the fact is, systemic barriers to education still exist today, so not everyone is operating on a level-playing field to begin with.
It makes us rethink how we define merit. Should we weigh the work of a student with college-educated parents and a tutor equally as that of a student from working-class parents and no outside help? What about a student who had to overcome racism and over-policing in their school to excel academically? Or an undocumented student who successfully navigated school amid concerns over their family’s immigration status?
Although race doesn’t tell us the whole story, it’s been shown to be a better indicator than even economic status when it comes to gauging a students’ access (or inaccess) to educational opportunity and advancement.
What is this Supreme Court Case About?
The overarching argument in Students for Fair Admissions v. President & Fellows of Harvard College is that race should not be a factor at all within college admissions and that they should adopt a “race-neutral” process instead.
This anti-affirmative action group claims that the current Harvard admissions process unfairly penalizes Asian-American applicants by using race as a primary decider for admission and that the college “racially balances” their classes.
Harvard denies this, saying that race is one of many factors in a students’ admission, and that they stand by their efforts to look beyond test scores or GPA to find a diversity of talent and ability in their classes.
(It’s also important to recognize that Asian-American students are, of course, not monolithic. There are Asian-American voices on both sides of the affirmative action debate, as you’d expect with any group.)
What Could Happen?
So far, lower courts have sided with Harvard in this case, but it’s far from settled. If the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, their decision has the potential to gut protections for affirmative action at universities nationwide -- and with a 6-3 conservative majority, it’s definitely a possibility.
How Could This Impact Students?
Studies tell us that with bans on affirmative action, the number of underrepresented students in higher education continues to decrease long-term. In California, a decades-long ban set back an entire generation of Black and Latinx students. They applied to, attended, and graduated from college at much lower rates and went on to earn less in their careers than they had during the pro-affirmative-action era. (Meanwhile, white and Asian-American students saw little benefit in their educational and career outcomes.)
Research also shows that learning in a diverse environment benefits all students. It reduces students’ racial bias, promotes better learning outcomes, and prepares students to live and work effectively in a diverse global society.
ICYMI… no charges have been filed against officers in the death of Daniel Prude. The 41-year-old Black man was experiencing a mental health crisis when police put a hood over his head and pressed his body into the pavement until he stopped breathing.
Why aren’t more people talking about… how hundreds of tribes are battling for federal recognition and funding to help them overcome the pandemic (which disproportionately impacts Indigenous people)?
The good news is… women and girls over 13 can now be screened for anxiety as part of a routine checkup under the Affordable Care Act.
Even more good news… a major US evangelical adoption agency announced that it will no longer discriminate against LGBTQ people.
Meanwhile, in Myanmar… 18 protestors were killed in pro-democracy demonstrations demanding the end of the country’s current military rule.
My heroes today are… the troop of Girl Scouts experiencing homelessness who are selling cookies in all 50 states, as well as the first class of female Eagle Scouts.
This week in Black joy… two dads created a line of Black dolls dressed in Cameroonian-inspired attire, and a stranger bought a basketball hoop for a boy he saw shooting hoops into a trashcan.
Today in viral cuteness… TikToker LaRon Hines interviewed preschoolers about the late Chadwick Boseman and the Golden Globes, and it was adorable.
I’m obsessed with… YouTuber Lily Alexandre and her debut video essay with one of the most thoughtful and empathetic takes I’ve ever found on Tumblr’s MOGAI (Marginalized Orientations, Gender identities, And Intersex) community.
Finding this newsletter useful? Forward today's edition to a friend and encourage them to subscribe. Copyright © 2021, All rights reserved. Our mailing address is: 1202 Lexington Ave, Suite 305, New York, NY 10028 View in Browser | Help Center | Manage subscriptions | Unsubscribe |