Collegiate Times

I am in the majority and you are completely misled. Seems to me like you got into Virginia Tech so I wouldn't really complain.

Thank you Mike. I could easily get on here and crucify this article (and the author) but the truth is, what she said has been said many times before and the argument she's making NEVER evolves... its a stagnant viewpoint and she's just mad which is evident by the complete lack of proof or any kind of statistics whatsoever to at least help her prove her point. The quality of some people's education is much of the time directly linked to the areas they live and grow up in. Schools where I am from are sub par when up against schools 15 minutes up the road from me. The quality of those students' educated reflects that. So are they supposed to suffer because some bureaucrat refuses to put more money into their schools or pay their teachers more? You need to be writing an article about why we dont level the playing field starting with high schools FIRST before arguing about why some people with lower grades get into colleges when others dont. Its at that point, the point at which most schools are getting the SAME quality of education, that affirmative action will cease to have its own justification. Its at that point when people who get bad grades wont be able to say its because of the schools they went to. Your rant is misplaced at best.

well said Lee.

Yet another uninformed column by a regular CT writer, first about Columbia and now this. The normative claims of dubious grammatical construction that are offered here ("This baffles countless people who, like myself, spent their years at a high school in which a person's race made no difference at all") ("...genuinely 'discriminated'") are contradicted by empirical research. Even if they weren't, we can't generalize based on one person's experience - that's not good science; so you'll have excuse my disgust at this vulgar display of jealousy of people of color and their cars. We understand from critical race theory that "formal" conceptions of equality only address the most brazen and violent forms of discrimination, failing to take into account the everyday aspects (Delgado, Stefancic 2001). But the author is alright with addressing those things, by giving people who deserve it a leg up, we are consistent with many school's stated policies. Regardless of what Fox News tells us, "blanket policies" are unconstitutional, and not used widely. I'd recommend this columnist engage in some journalism and do research before writing next. In this case, it would have helped to read Regents of the University of California v Bakke (1978) and its more familiar follow-up, Grutter v Bollinger (2003), the University of Michigan Law case. Had the author done this very basic research, we would have been spared this waste of space, consisting of nothing but spiteful envy and a panegyric about high school.

I am a white male and I was the beneficiary of the school's racist policies. But for the good luck of being in the same gene pool as my two brothers that attended Tech, I wouldn't have been given the "legacy" consideration that others paving their own way do not receive. Now that I think about it, this legacy policy is ultimately racist in that it benefits the majority (whites), because the odds are, in being the majority, there is a built-in race-based benefit. The decendants of all of those whites that attended Va Tech prior to 1953, when all but whites were barred from attending, receive a preference when it comes to admittance. I wonder if the author will take a stand against this blanket policy that perpetuates injustice?

Seriously, does the affirmative action argument always have to come up every single semester? I mean, it's the same misguided and uninformed opinion of affirmative action every time I read this paper. Please look up the correct definition and delineation of Affirmative Action, before you begin to make baseless arguments about it and about admissions processess at various institutions. #1, if you are not involved in the admissions process of a university/college, and have not known anyone who has been in a position to accurately explain the process to you, then you, and anyone else who is upset that they didn't get into their top choice for schools shouldn't make UNFOUNDED assumptions about their failure to get into a particular university. Contrary to what you may believe, ACADEMICS is NOT the end all and be all in gaining admittance into college. Look at it like this, if 1000 4.0 GPA students applied to University XYZ, and there were only 500 spots to fill, GUESS WHAT? 500 4.0 GPA A+ students aren't getting into that particular school...get over it! Attempting to blame it on Affirmative Action is just an excuse you and others use to explain why you didn't get into the school you believed you were a shoe in for. Sorry, but sometimes things just come down to a matter of logistics. Have some self-esteem, stop being insecure and toughen up! You will be okay attending Duke instead of Stanford, Cornell instead of Yale, Virginia Tech instead of UVA; the world will still turn. I'm really just tired of every year the CT having some op-ed columnist talk about the ills of affirmative action and how it's the reason for why Johnny didn't get into the college of his choice. I'm beginning to think raising this same issue with nothing new or enlightening to add is just a ploy to increase readership. I'm over it!

Uche Mba: are you saying that UVA is better than Tech?! Anyone with a degree from VT can do just as well as anyone who spends four years in Charlottesville. But about the article - I mostly agree with Lee - the article was poorly written and researched, and the author seemed bitter. I also agree that our high schools are the main problem. That being said, affirmative action is wrong. Race should not be a factor in college admissions. I strongly support colleges helping students from poor schools, but that should be based on the high school - not the student's race. Affirmative action is an oversimplification of a much more complex problem and implies that minorities are inferior. I read an essay about affirmative action fueling racial tensions on campus because today's white students are not responsible for discrimination, yet some feel that they are still being punished for it (perhaps this column is an example of that?). Anyway, affirmative action is idealogically flawed. I find it ironic that Tech claims to be an "equal opportunity/affirmative action institue." It's either one or the other - not both.

It is very interesting to me that people who are concerned about the "bias" of affirmative action, never point out the legacy admissions policies of many universities, including Virginia Tech. It is so insulting, and incorrect, to assume that non-White students get into college solely based on race. Non-white students have to meet the same GPA and SAT requirements that White students are required to meet. In addition, it is ignorant...or a calculated move to prey upon the divisiveness of the affirmative action issue...to assume that the only students that benefit from affirmative action policies are non-White students. White women, veterans, those with disabilities, and people who are classified under other categories, also benefit from affirmative action policies. In fact, there are some who have effectively argued that White women, more than anyone else, benefits from affirmative action policies. In addition, White people benefit from affirmative action policies at historically Black colleges and universities. To indicate that affirmative action is a race based policy that allows non-White students to have free access to any public university is completely wrong. I am a Black female alumnus of Virginia Tech and I had to work just as hard as anyone else to get into Virginia Tech. In my opinion, many students who are wait-listed or denied admission into colleges like to assume that they were not accepted into those colleges due to affirmative action, when...as hard as it is to accept, they were wait listed/denied admission because their qualifications didn't measure up to the school's requirements.

Right, how could anyone possibly argue with the intention of 'leveling the playing field?' We all want fairness for everyone, right? We want everyone to have an equal opportunity, right? What nobody seems to realize is that affirmative action in college admissions is not a positive-sum game; affirmative action creates instead a zero-sum game, one in which a spot is offered to one student because of ethnic considerations rather than on the merits of his educational potential. It is bogus social science to assert that students from poor neighborhoods are incapable of learning the same material as students from rich neighborhoods; but even if it were true, white students from such neighborhoods don't receive any sort of leg up. At the end of the day, we need to realize that college isn't a right. Indeed, not everyone deserves to go to college. That having been said, it seems important that, in the interests of ACTUALLY creating a level playing field, we eliminate affirmative action programs such that the intellectual potential of individual students becomes the sole consideration in admissions considerations.

In a perfect world, you're right: we wouldn't need equal opportunity or affirmative action policies. However, unfortunately, there are people who would deny qualified students access to college education; just like there are people who would deny jobs to qualified applicants based on gender, race/ethnicity, religious background, and the other ridiculous reasons that people discriminate against others. However, because we live in a society that is still bigoted, affirmative action policies are needed to level the playing field. Until we can stop using terms such as "minority" and "majority", and until we can stop defining each other in terms of race and other categories, affirmative action is needed to level the playing field. Kyle, White students do receive a leg up. This probably isn't the forum to discuss how being born White in the United States already gives one a "leg up" over others. However, as I stated in my previous post, White students are eligible for affirmative action safeguards at historically Black colleges and Universities. In addition, affirmative action often ensures that colleges/universities allow for geographic diversity. In other words, a White student from the North, the mid-West, or West, may get into a college due to policies that work to ensure geographic diversity. Again, as stated in my previous post, it is incorrect to assume that affirmative action is simply a program designed to boot White students out of colleges so that Black students can be admitted into those schools. Affirmative action is designed to ensure that students who meet a college's admission requirements, is not denied access to that college based on pre-set biases.

Please excuse the overuse of the word "However" and any grammatical mistakes that appear in my previous post.

You missed the point. . . I'm trying to tell you that diversity as some kind of 'higher standard' ought to be wholly irrelevant in the college admissions process. Social engineering is a bogus science, and one which was recently called out in a recent Supreme Court decision. So bias exists; it always will. Ther eis no objective standard by which people can be measured; not for a job, and certainly not for education. What admissions boards ought to look at are qualities like GPA, extracirricular activities, criminal records, work expereience. . .things that paint an accurate picture of what sort of citizen and student the individual might be. It doesn't matter if you are black or white, rich or poor, or anything else.

I didn't miss your point...that's why I said that in a perfect world, you're right. But, we live in a society where a person's race, economic status, gender, sexual orientation, et cetera, will often determine the opportunities that they have access to. Until our society becomes one in which a person is solely judged based on their intelligence, work experience, criminal records, et cetera, affirmative action and equal opportunity policies will have to level out the playing field.

Also, let me again point out that affirmative action does not solely grant a person admission into a college solely based on gender, religious affiliation, veteran status, et cetera. The college admissions process uses a series of factors to determine whether or not a student should be admitted into a particular college, including GPA, extracurricular activities, and so on. Example: a Black female transgendered Buddhist with a 2.0 GPA would not be admitted into VT, even though that person fits into several categories that are part of affirmative action guidelines, because their 2.0 GPA would be far below the school's admissions requirement. What the affirmative action policy would do is say that a White female with a 3.9 GPA, who is active in her community, works part-time, and volunteers with local special olympic activities, could not be denied admission into a college based on her gender. Affirmative action ensures that qualified people who meet a university's admissions guidelines are allowed access to the opportunities that would otherwise be denied to them, given the biases that exist in our culture.

But you aren't really explaining why any of it matters. Why is it the responsibility of college admissions boards, for instance, to rectify percieved social wrongs? Your point seems to be that admissions specialists are racists who are actively looking for ways to keep minorities down - I would argue that this is quite presumptuous. But you have to keep in mind that for every less-qualified applicant accepted to a college, a more-qualified applicant has to be rejected. You seem to neglect the fact that there are a lot of white kids, too, who work hard to get into college only to find themselves unable to be accepted because they don't stand out among their white peers. What I advocate is letting each individual stand on his own background and accomplishments; affirmative action amounts to little more than a bogus way of saying that being of a particular race is an accomplishment.

I am saying that there are many people who have racial bias and some of those people very well may sit on college admissions boards; for example, your presumption that qualified White students are booted out of college to make room for un-qualified non-White applicants is an example, in my opinion, of the pervasive racism that still exists in our society. And, people who take issue with affirmative action, try to indicate that affirmative action is a race based policy that allows blanket admissions to non-White, specifically Black, students. As I pointed out in a previous post, there are people who have effectively argued that affirmative action policies have actually helped White women, more than anyone else. However, many White males never have an issue with White women getting into college based on affirmative action policies...people don't mind that affirmative action policies provide protection to White students seeking entry into historically Black colleges, or that affirmative action provides safeguards for those who are physically disabled, people from different religious backgrounds, et cetera. It's only an issue that affirmative action also provides safeguards for qualified Black applicants. The fact that Virginia Tech, for example, has approximately 27,000 students, at least 22,000 of whom are White, would indicate that for the most part, qualified White applicants don't have any problems getting accepted into credible college programs--to me, it indicates that the 5,000 (general number given for this example, there may be less than 5,000 non-White students at VT) non-White students at Virginia Tech had to work extra hard to gain admission; not that they were allowed entry simply because of their race. Affirmative action matters because there are still people in this society who assume that non-Whites who get into college got in solely based on their race; affirmative action matters because people still believe that for every Black student, some White student was denied college admission because they were White, instead of believing that the Black student got into college based on their qualifications. Affirmative action is not designed to allow non-qualified non-White applicants to get in because of their race, it is designed to say this: if you meet and/or exceed the admission requirements of our university, you will not be denied admission based on your gender, religious affiliation, level of physical disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, or race.

Affirmative action gives less qualified applicants a far higher probability of being admitted, getting offered a job, or getting a promotion. In many cases, slots are only reserved for blacks (i.e. during hiring freezes at most Universities where blacks are the only allowed to be hired). A large number of blacks and women owe their jobs and promotions to affirmative action and would not have gotten them based on merit. I know this because I see these things directly in action every single day. If you really don't know that this is true, then get a job in an admitting, hiring, or promoting capacity and keep a little notepad where you write down every time sex and race is brought up as a factor.

In order to be booted out of college, Lia, you must first be accepted to college. Generally speaking, once you're in you're in, and that isn't really the concern here anyway. I'm having a difficult time understanding why you effectively called me a racist; there are many highly qualified students of a variety of ethinc backgrounds, each of whom deserves ample and thoughtful consideration when it comes to things like college acceptance. The trouble with affirmative action is twofold. For one thing, it is prima facie racism: you can't argue that a policy is 'not racist' when that policy by definition extends special considerations to individuals based specifically upon their race. Some argue that it is 'positive racism' since it is correcting some sort of societal wrong; I would challenge that belief by asserting that all racism is inherently evil. There is no such thing as 'good racism' because any sort of racism reduces people to their ethnicity and disregards in tot their accomplishments. The second major problem of affirmative action is that it tends to invalidate the accomplishments of certain ethnic populations. The message that affirmative action sends is "we don't think you're good enough to get into our school on your own merits, so we're going to give you special consideration." This is bogus social science. I think your perception of affirmative action is wholly illogical; the whole point is that, if a university is faced with a choice between two equally qualified candidates, the ethnic minority gets the benefit of the doubt. There are a lot of reasons to accept people to a university; race should never be one of them.

What legacy admissions preference? My father went to VPI, as did my grandfather. My grandfather, in fact, ended up being on the Board of Visitors. None of this helped me because I did not have the grades to get in on my own merit. I had to transfer from a lesser university in order to earn my place at Tech.

Let me try to respond to all of your very interesting points. Number 1: with most colleges, even with legacy admissions, you have to at least meet the school's academic entry requirements or meet the minimum GPA of the average student applying to that college during the year that you are applying. So, for instance, having a 3.2 GPA in high school may not be enough to get you in, based on legacy admissions, if the average applicant had a 3.8. Legacy admissions, just like affirmative action, is not a blanket policy that will allow you into a given academic institution. Secondly, Kyle, I didn't mean to call you a racist; however, from my perspective, I am always going to feel like it is wrong/biased for anyone to assume that affirmative action gives unqualified applicants a leg up over qualified applicants, when in actuality, that is not the case. Just because I am a Black woman, doesn't mean that I will automatically be considered for every job or graduate program that I apply for. I have to at least qualify for the job. The affirmative action policy only says that I cannot be denied a job/college admissions/et cetera because of my race and/or gender. Thirdly, Kyle, I can somewhat agree with this statement that you made "The second major problem of affirmative action is that it tends to invalidate the accomplishments of certain ethnic populations." I do agree that many people in our generation did not grow up in a society that was as divided by race, like our parents and grandparents did; in that sense, I can understand how some people may not feel like there's a need for affirmative action; if you aren't someone who has experienced or seen racism, then your opinion regarding affirmative action is going to be based largely on that experience. However, because I have had the misfortune of experiencing racism first hand, I believe that there are people who are inherently racist and if given the chance, they would do whatever they could to ensure that non-White people did not have access to certain opportunities. Do I think that an unqualified person should get a job or college admissions, simply because they fit into a certain category? No. That's why quotas are now illegal in our society. However, I do believe that we still need equal opportunity and affirmative action policies to ensure that qualified applicants--regardless of their gender, religious affiliation, veteran status, level of disability, race, et cetera--should not be denied jobs and college admission simply because they fit into a certain social category.

Lia, I don't disagree with you that racism exists. I simply think it is a bit presumptive to assume that people in admissions departments may be racist, and so we need a system to prevent those individuals from making detrimental decisions. In effect, the MOTIVATIONS behind affirmative action are inherently good - an equal footing for all, an end to racism, etc. - but in PRACTICE, affirmative action harms far more than it helps. It harms, for instance, the black population by reducing the perception of their accomplishments. It harms white students because the system is compelled to hold them to a higher standard than others (a higher standard is not a bad thing. . . .but an inequitable standard is a bad thing). This is what I have been advocating all along - a colorblind admissions process. Because in the end, and I apologize for sounding cynical, color just should not matter.

Our society shouldn't have to have policies in place to provide equal footing for anyone: regardless of their gender, religious affiliation, veteran status, level of disability, race, et cetera. But, they are needed because we don't live in a society that doesn't judge people based on certain characteristics. Because racism is so pervasive in our culture, I think that equal opportunity and affirmative action laws are necessary to ensure that we all get an equal footing--which again, affirmative action policies are not simply designed to protect people from racial discrimination. Also, I have not seen anything to indicate that White students are harmed by affirmative action, when in actuality, White students can, depending on the circumstances, be covered under the protections of affirmative action; however, I don't mind reading any literature that anyone could provide that would indicate that my opinion is wrong. People are are wait-listed should look at athletic programs and realize that they were possibly wait-listed to make room for an athlete who finished high school with a 2.0 GPA, but is really good at baseball, or football, or basketball, et cetera.

Did this guy Kyle REALLY just say that racism doesnt exist? That has to be the second most ignorant and borderline retarded thing Ive heard anyone say. Right up there next to "The holocaust is a myth". You cannot be serious? PLEASE tell me that you just meant that it doesnt exist in the ADMISSIONS process... at least if thats what you mean, i can wave it off as just your opinion. But to say racism just doesnt exist is downright buffoonish and idiotic. PLEASE tell me thats what u meant... please!

No, Lee, I said actually the exact opposite: "I don't disagree that racism exists." And if you read the body of my comment, as well as the bodies of the other comments I've made on this thread, you would understand my point better. Please be more careful before you try to 'call someone out,' and make sure first that you actually read that to which you desire to respond.

Lee, Kyle has said in previous posts, as he stated in his most recent post, that he does agree that racism exists in the society.

Hey, 80s Alum, the legacy policy is, grades first, legacy second, SAT third. So if you didn't have the grades, sorry. But you could get some fudging if your SAT result wasn't great. Having a grandfather on the BOV probably hurt you too. He probably didn't want it to appear that you received preferential treatment. In the long run, it probably made you appreciate Tech even more, right? For me, it just perpetuated the belief that I am a lucky slacker. Still am.

ACF, you cite "many cases" in which colleges and others freeze hiring whites and continue to hire blacks. Aside from when your dad told you that, could you pleas cite just one instance of such behavior. Really, just one would do. I'll wait...

Hi Edward, The University of Michigan did this for several years in the late 1990's. Here's how they did it. They announced a hiring freeze so that no new professors could be hired. Then, they removed funding from every single academic department. They gave that funding to the diversity office. They then announced that there were special funds in the diversity office for funding the hiring of blacks. They said that this money could not be used to hire whites because whites don't add "diversity." So, they prevented whites from even applying. (I also know for a fact that they routinely discriminate against men in order to hire women. In one case where I have direct knowledge, they actually said that a more qualified male was denied a position because a less qualified female was offered the position.) Every other university for which I have intimate knowledge has done this, and one that I am very closely associated is doing it now. Anyone who knows anything about university hiring knows about this trick.