so here's his piece: Racism by another name is `diversity' | Chicago Tribune
and here's mine (perhaps to appear in a newspaper near you sometime soon):
Mr. Goldberg is probably correct; if all children, across all economic and racial strata, had access to the basic building blocks for stability - adequate housing, nutrition, health care, family support and quality early childhood education from the start - then perhaps affirmative action would be moot. But we all know that hasn’t happened, yet, and perhaps Mr. Goldberg should look outside his own privileged background and take a reality check.
While we work towards a level playing field – and to date, other than to suggest black people should be happy with less challenging schools, Mr. Goldberg hasn’t offered a single recommendation how to make that happen – let’s ask ourselves what our universities and colleges would look like without affirmative action now?
To answer that question let's look at California; ten years since affirmative action was banned in California minority enrollment at the state’s best schools has plummeted. In 2000, nine African American first year law students enrolled at UC Berkely; in 1996, that number was twenty. University-wide numbers show that since 1995, African-American undergraduate enrollment dropped to 4,780 from 5,016 while white enrollment remained steady, hovering in the 50-55,000 area; in 2005 at UC Berkely alone, there were only 829 African-American students enrolled compared to the 1,200 back in 1995. In contrast, during that same period, White student enrollment remained steady.
If the white student population has not been significantly affected, why call for less opportunity for students of color? (It's not true that if you make room for Black Joe you take away from White Tom. In fact, what you've just done is make White Tom the default.)
There was a hope that eliminating affirmative action would force us to change the way we pipeline underrepresented students into higher education – we hoped that improved K-12 education would eliminate the need for so-called racial preferences. But that hasn’t happened, either. Disadvantaged school districts still lack the AP classes and counseling necessary to boost even their top students’ GPAs to the level of a student from a more privileged school district. In addition, recruiting students of color is now illegal under the California law, making it even harder to put students of color in the pipeline for higher education. And so, ten years after the California Prop 209 initiative, we can see that the desired affect has been reached; there are practically no students of color on any UC campus and Michigan wants to do the same thing in their state.
(Of course, Michigan also has a long tradition of being a racially segregated state so perhaps they're just going back to their roots. After all, it is one of the remaining states with bunches of sunset towns still operating in them.)
The privileges of the upper/middle class should be enjoyed by everyone. While affirmative action is an effective tool to give access to opportunity to students who need it, it's important to continue to ensure historically underrepresented populations have those basic building blocks necessary for a full and autonomous life – economic stability, family stability, physical and educational stability.
Maybe those who don’t like affirmative action can work on that.
3 comments:
Yeah, he's a good thinker, that Goldberg. The colored folks don't need no Ivy League—why, they might do just fine at the local community college! (Oy.)
we jus' so thankful we can go to school at all! thank yuh marse goldberg!
(ok, that was bad, but his editorial really pissed me off. no solutions, no grip on reality, just some privileged whining that more for brown folks means less for white. whatever. is affirmative action the answer to everything? no. but it's pretty clear what universities and govt contracting look like without it. gold berg may be fine with an all-white university environment, but i'm not.)
You could always take that other tack: that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. What are legacy admissions but an affirmative action program for the children of the well-educated? What are prep-schools but an affirmative action program for the wealthy? Over on churchgal we could talk about removing the log from one's own eye.
Post a Comment