(MENAFN- The Conversation) In 2003, predicted that the Supreme Court's sanctioning of race-conscious affirmative action in higher education would spark future litigation for years to come. And right he was. From against the University of Texas at Austin to an against Harvard, colleges continue to come under attack for considering race as a factor in admissions decisions.
The recent report of the Department of Justice's of 'intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions' demonstrates that the assaults aren't likely to end anytime soon.
As a dedicated to ensuring equal educational opportunities for students of color, I believe now is an important time to earnestly consider other methods for diversifying student bodies. Race-neutral alternatives could effectively consider such factors as socioeconomic status and educational background, while supplementing more traditional affirmative action.
Lawyer Bert Rein and his client, Abigail Fisher, failed in their discrimination case against UT Austin's affirmative action policies. AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite 'Race-based' vs. 'race-conscious'
When thinking about affirmative action, it's important to first define (and debunk) a few key terms, starting with 'race-based' and 'race-conscious' affirmative action.
'Race-based affirmative action' is a misnomer often used to describe some college admissions policies. 'Race-based' implies that an admissions decision is made , which could not be farther from the truth. A university's decision to admit, deny or waitlist an applicant is based upon , ranging from standardized test scores to state of residency. Race is a university may consider.
This approach is more appropriately termed 'race-conscious.'
Schools that employ race-conscious admissions policies do so in order to achieve the of a diverse student body.
As the Supreme Court held in , race is not and cannot be the determining factor under a constitutional race-conscious plan. Therefore, when people claim that an African-American or Hispanic student was admitted because of race, they're often not only inaccurate but also dismissive of the student's other numerous attributes that played a role in the university's decision.
Race-neutral alternatives
Opponents of race-conscious affirmative action often assert that such policies are or from middle- and upper-class backgrounds.
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor delivered the majority opinion in Grutter v. Bollinger, which asserted that schools must consider 'workable race-neutral alternatives.' AP Photo/Susan Walsh
For its part, the Supreme Court is also skeptical of using . As a result, it has held that institutions of higher education must afford serious consideration to ' before implementing a race-conscious policy.
Importantly, the court's use of the term 'race-neutral' does not mean 'race-blind.' That is, universities are permitted to think about how alternative admissions criteria could help them achieve their diversity goals. could include socioeconomic background, high school or undergraduate institution, or class rank. In other words, these are factors that may contribute to a school's racial diversity, but applicants themselves are not considered based on race.
In some cases, it's for race-neutral admissions policies to achieve the same levels of racial diversity as those achieved through direct consideration of race. However, such measures in helping to diversify student bodies when used in conjunction with or in lieu of race-conscious affirmative action.
The viability of race-neutral alternatives
When coupled with the stark that continue to plague some professions, the uncertain future of race-conscious affirmative action calls for a renewed focus on alternatives that look beyond race alone.
TV isn't the only place where the legal profession remains one of the whitest. USA Network
My co-researchers, and , and I recently took a look at one particular aspect of higher education diversity: law school admissions.
Law schools play a unique role in training . It is, in fact, that we continue to provide students from historically underrepresented racial groups with access to legal education. And yet, the legal profession was recently determined to be '.'
To help law schools improve their diversity, we examined the relationship between race and race-neutral identity factors in law school admissions. The project, which was funded in part by a grant from , surveyed over a thousand first-year law students at schools throughout the country and asked about various aspects of their identity, such as socioeconomic status and educational background.
Our findings indicated that African-American and Hispanic students were than both white and Asian/Pacific Islander students to have qualified for free or reduced lunch programs in elementary or secondary school, had a parent or guardian who received public assistance when the student was a dependent minor, and received a Pell Grant during their undergraduate studies – all of which are race-neutral factors that schools could consider in admissions decisions.
Race-neutral affirmative action can help identify first-generation students and students from low-income families. AP Photo/Pat Sullivan How admissions could change
Based on the sample of participants in our study, it's clear that privilege did not catapult all students of color to law school. Many of them had to overcome the structural inequalities of poverty, race and public education to embark on a legal career. Expanding opportunities for these and other minority students will benefit not only legal education and the legal profession, but also society more broadly.
Race-neutral admissions policies could help identify and create opportunities for these students.
To be clear, I do not advocate for the wholesale substitution of traditional race-conscious admissions measures with the factors we studied. Race-conscious policies continue to be the means by which to create diverse student bodies.
However, we encourage law schools and other institutions of higher education to utilize these and other race-neutral admissions factors as a means of complying with the Supreme Court's affirmative action mandates and testing the viability of policies that take such factors into account.
Doing so will help ensure that traditionally underrepresented students of color will continue to have access to colleges and universities that serve as gateways to career, financial and life opportunities.
MENAFN2108201701990000ID1095755299
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.