Affirmative Action is a Joke

Why the system hurts more than it helps

Three minutes.

Thousands of students sit nervously in front of their computer, counting down the time. In minutes, the decisions to hundreds of colleges will be released through their respective online portals. On the other side of the screen, four outcomes typically await these students: accepted, deferred, waitlisted, and denied.

Two minutes.

For some, the decision merely conveys how and where the student will spend the next four years of his or her life. For others, it’s a judgement of self worth. Counselors and teachers communicate the contrary. “Where you go to college doesn’t determine who you are as a person.”, they say. Unfortunately, this is a difficult concept for 18 year olds to grasp. It’s every student’s biggest fear, watching all of your friends get accepted to prestigious colleges while you don’t.

One minute.

Sixty seconds will mark the beginning of the end. The culmination of four years of hard work. Four years of carrying textbooks that are too thick in backpacks that are too heavy. Four years of making sure the pencil marks fit inside the scantron bubbles. Four years of adrenaline rushes caused by submitting assignments seconds before the deadline. All the questions of “what if” or “am I good enough” will be answered in seconds.

Three.

Two.

One.

Zero.

Amidst the flurry of simultaneous mouse clicks is a system administrator hoping that the website can support the overwhelming surge in traffic. At this point, one of two emotions is present — euphoria or disappointment. Soon, (some take longer than others) the student comes to acceptance and the

feeling begins to dissolve. Nevertheless, the student deserves whatever outcome he or she received, as college decisions are a purely the result of the student’s academic and extracurricular efforts, right?

Wrong.

There was a day and age when if you studied hard enough and your grades were high enough, you would gain admission to a top tier university. Nowadays, that’s not nearly not enough. First come the academic factors — the GPA (used to determine academic performance in the context of one’s school) and SAT/ACT (used to compare one’s performance relative to that of students across the country). The next tier is comprised of what I like to call personality factors — extracurricular involvement, letters of recommendation, and essays. The last tier is comprised of predetermined factors — gender, geographic location, and ethnicity.

It frustrates me to share that predetermined factors even play a role in determining college admission. After all, these factors don’t represent the academic merits or the personality of the candidate. The reality is that their significance becomes relevant when colleges try to maintain balances of gender, geographic distribution, and race. Of these, the factor of race ties into a much larger system, the system of affirmative action.

For those unfamiliar with affirmative action in the context of education, its objective is to promote the educational opportunities of defined disadvantaged or minority groups (please note that disadvantaged and minority are not interchangeable). Sounds good, right? Sadly, that’s not the case. Affirmative action is a prime example of something that sounds good on paper, but when executed, fails to do its job.

The main premise of higher education is to specialize and gain in depth knowledge of an academic area of study. By that assertion, the selectivity of an academic institution should be based purely on academic standards.

So, why are we using skin color as a determinant for post-secondary admission?

The purpose of affirmative action is to equalize the playing field and assist the economically disadvantaged.

Last I checked, skin color is not equal to economic status.

Yes, there are certain correlations, but there are still economic disparities within each race. Should a rich minority benefit from affirmative action while a poor Caucasian doesn’t? So once again I ask the question, why are we using skin color as a determinant for post-secondary admission?

To answer this question, it’s important to investigate the origins of affirmative action. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, in 1965, only five percent of undergraduate students, one percent of law students, and two percent of medical students in the country were African American. To combat this disparity, LBJ passed an executive order that mandated that government contractors adopt affirmative action in regards to hiring practices. Colleges and universities quickly followed suit and enrollment rates for minorities were higher than ever.

Today, the situation is much different. In 2014, The University of California system admitted more Latino students (29%) than white students (27%). Furthermore, the number of Hispanics enrolled in college tripled over the past decade and for the first time in 2012, their college enrollment rate was higher than that of Whites (49% compared to 47%). Additionally, colleges are admitting and enrolling more Blacks than before (up 9% to 14%). While this 5% jump is not an incredible feat in itself, African American students are on pace to meet the number of white students that attend college directly after graduating high school (66% for Blacks, 70% for Whites).

There is no question that the demographics of students in the United States are changing. That being said, it’s critical to ask whether a rule that was implemented in a vastly different socio-economic context is still relevant in this day and age.