Hi, Roger.
Two caveats -- I don't believe in quotas, and I'm speaking about admissions to the limited number of slots in colleges, graduate and professional schools, not hiring. There are several related issues in choosing applicants for the limited number of slots in these schools. First, it goes without saying that all admitted applicants must be qualified. But is "best qualified" the only basis for admission? Well, there went the "alumni and donor preference," which most anti-AA types want to continue excepting (of course, the vast majority of donors and alumni are white, but I'm sure that's mere coincidence, right?
)
There are really three factors that lead me to give SOME preference to those who come from underprivileged/minority backgrounds (note the slash -- almost all academic AA programs now consider economic disadvantage, not merely "minority" status):
1) Diversity is of value in education -- society is diversified, so to prepare students for society it's better to have a student body that's a fair reflection of society, not one that's more uniform.
2) The "objective numbers" (typically GPA at the next lower academic level and preformance on the requisite standardized exam, be it SAT, GRE, MCAT, LSAT, or whatever) are much more likely to reflect a majority student's potential than those of a student from a poorer school who's had to struggle more for an education -- perhaps working a part-time job, has English as a second language, etc.
3) Admission to college/graduate/professional school is not just a benefit to the student, but also to society, which typically pays part of the student's way in the form of government aid to education, scholarships, etc. The return to society is that the successful student is equipped for important jobs that require more advanced education, and which serve society, be it as a teacher, scientist, doctor, lawyer, or whatever. It's important that ALL of society be served by the graduates (as a whole). Yet numerous studies show that after schooling is finished, there's a fairly good chance that students will return to (or at least serve) the environment in which they grew up. Thus the best way to ensure that minority/disadvantaged populations continue to be underserved would be to choose primarily students from a socially privileged/majority environment. But that's precisely what abolishing all preferences in school admission would do -- preserve the historical advantage of the shrinking majority, both in employment and service.
-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com
The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!