At institutions of higher education across the country, students have challenged the use of affirmative action in admissions policies. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court is currently being asked to review the case of Gratz v Bollinger, in which a white student who was denied admission into the University of Michigan is confronting the use of race as a factor in admissions at the institution.
This seems to be at the forefront of the collegiate mindset elsewhere, with challenges from opponents of affirmative action and defenses from student body governments. But here at the University, the issue goes un-addressed, if not ignored. Although we see columns addressing the need for diversity on Grounds via The Cavalier Daily and forums hosted by the Sustained Dialogue group, serious discussion specifically regarding affirmative action policy is low on the U.Va. radar. Our confined view of the world outside of Charlottesville, and our ignorance regarding what is going on at other institutions may continue to render us blind until legal challenges begin to occur here.
To combat the institutional ignorance about affirmative action policies that is pervasive here will require both white and black students alike to reassess the value of affirmative action and the myths that opponents use to deem it unnecessary.
The nature of the collective institutional ignorance at this University is pervasive and existent on at least two levels. On one hand, our collective mis-education about what affirmative action is can be perpetuated by misconceptions of equality in America's racial landscape. Many students have become so comfortable with their perceptions of black life in the mainstream media and with black student life on campus, that these perceptions can foster an error in judgment about equality among the races in America.
Students can see black athletes running and jumping, black rappers posing and posturing on television, and become so comfortable with the images of blacks in music and the media, that somehow these images can develop a sense that blacks and whites now see eye-to-eye and are doing it on a level playing field.
In addition, students can look around and often enough, there goes a minority passing by on Grounds -- so that must mean that black, Hispanic and Asian-American students do have equal access to educational opportunities. The changing patterns of diversity in today's classroom and work force might lead us to believe that the economic and social groundwork of our society exists on an equitable scale for all races. However, this pattern has not yet fully formed and affirmative action has not yet taken a perverse effect nor run its entire course.
In reality, according to The Digest of Education Statistics, only 35 percent of African-American high school graduates actually attend college, and of those only 25 percent graduate and enter the workforce with a college degree in four years. Even less can be said of Hispanic high school graduates. Meanwhile, 50 percent of white high school students go on to college -- and although Asian American high schoolers attend colleges on a comparable level to whites, the playing field between black and white is obviously not so equal.
Students at universities across the country can mistakenly identify "the black kid" in their discussion section as proof that African-Americans do have access to the best form of education possible. This idea, coupled with images of black Americans achieving success in sports and entertainment, can lead students to believe in the myth that life is equal economically and socially in the real world. The existence of a Latina sorority or an Asian-American cultural organization on campuses can enforce that notion -- and sway individuals to believe that affirmative action's course is complete.
The fact is that economic, political and social statuses of whites, blacks, Hispanic and Asian-Americans are not equal. Though affirmative action policies and the use of race as a factor in admissions has encouraged progress in leveling out the playing field over the past 30 years, the field is not yet even. Prior to college, most minority students don't have equal access to comparable resources in their high schools, tutoring for college entrance exams, the proper guidance, advisorship or understanding of the college environment.
On the whole, without using race or socio-economic status as a factor in college admissions, universities nationwide would be missing out on some of the brightest students in the country, due to factors outside the control of those students.
In another instance, the ignorance of students who share an apathetic or historically blind viewpoint to the value of affirmative action can hurt its future as well. We can all easily forget that because we are at a privileged institution of higher education, and because we can take advantage of all the avenues for personal and professional development here, that the idea of struggle is at the very root of combating the discriminatory ideals that governed this institution for so long.
We take for granted the fact that minority and women students only matriculated to this university in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and even then, only in small numbers. Coveted organizations, offices and departments through which minority and women students can become connected to the greater University were only founded in the last 30 years of this institution's 200 year existence. None of these departments, centers or pillars of diversity were added to the University's mission or landscape with ease. Only because the Office of Admissions uses an array of factors in determining who should be admitted to the University does this institution continue to benefit from the diverse cultural and educational perspective of its students.
The problem today is that far too few students understand that those milestones were not achieved overnight, and that to maintain the diversity that is becoming more and more of a hallmark of this institution, admissions will need to take into account a wide variety of factors in building a diverse student body.
If the point of using race as a factor in admissions is to equalize the college market so that diverse communities of students have access to the education they deserve, we should be able to really judge whether the quality of life for all socio-economic classes is shifting toward equilibrium. If we are to rectify this dysfunction of our nation, attributable to years of discrimination and oppression, then we need to understand the purpose of the policies behind affirmative action and be able to assess their effectiveness. As students, and potential defenders or challengers of affirmative action, we won't be able to readily assess these issues if we are not able to see beyond the present -- yet limited -- success of affirmative action policies. We need to be able to understand affirmative action so we can avoid deeming it unnecessary prematurely.
(Kazz Alexander Pinkard is a Cavalier Daily viewpoint writer.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 6 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
