« early Saturday sleeping =p | Home | And now a second to relax. »
Why Race Shouldn’t Matter In The Public Education Setting
By Ana | April 28, 2012
At work the other day, one of my tasks was to compile a spreadsheet of applicants to a certain program of study. I was asked to look up students’ names, colleges within the university, majors/minors, GPAs, and ethnicity/race.
I couldn’t help but ask one of my supervisors–why does ethnicity/race need to be added to this data compilation? The answer I was given was something along the lines of needing to know how many applicants to this program were of one race, how many were of that race, etc. My next question was: why does that matter?
I was told that public institutions need to know that kind of thing, because apparently if enough minorities aren’t being accepted into programs, then that institution does not get government funding. Furthermore, I learned that students of certain races are offered scholarships that students of other races do not, regardless of merit. Meaning, a student could be getting a scholarship not because they deserve it because they work hard in school, but simply because they happened to be born a particular race. My question still remains: why should that matter?
If someone wants to learn, what does it matter what race they are? Why should someone who has poorer grades than I do be offered a scholarship or even admission to a school over me simply because I am not of a particular race? Why should someone get a free ride to college because of their race, even when they can afford going to college without financial aid, but I have to take out high-interest loans because I cannot afford college and because I am not of that particular race? Why is the emphasis on race and not on intellectuality?
It seems to me as though things are not at all equal. Shouldn’t the playing field be level for everyone? It is rare that I am disappointed in my university, but this is one of those times. And I know it isn’t just this university–it is EVERY public institution of education in the country. And that disheartens me. We should be rewarding people on the basis of who works hard and excels , not on the basis of factors that are uncontrollable, such as race or ethnic background. Private scholarships are one thing–if I wanted to, I could set up a private scholarship that only gives money to people with green eyes and purple hair–but it needs to be different in the public setting. The taxpayer’s money should not be used on such a biased form of financial aid. It looks at qualities that we are consistently told are not supposed to matter–”it’s what’s on the inside that counts”–but what is being preached is not being practiced.
This type of blatant racial discrimination is something we should all be ashamed of. Didn’t the equal rights movement happen fifty years ago? Why are we even still having this discussion? I am deeply saddened by the current system. By deciding which races are “desirable” and which we need “more” and “less” of, we are no more equal and no more tolerant than the our parents and grandparents’ generations.
I can only hope that one day, my children and grandchildren will live in a world that looks beyond race and places the highest value on a person’s character, capabilities, and work ethic.
Topics: Ana, On-campus work | 6 Comments »
April 29th, 2012 at 8:31 am
Exactly! If we want our country to be free of racial bias, we have to be “colorblind” – not just fair to minorities that have faced discrimination in the past, but giving equal opportunities to all races. It shouldn’t matter.
April 29th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
I am not trying to be the devil’s advocate here, but I would not go as far as to say that special consideration for college is “blatant racial discrimination.” Blatant racial discrimination is not hiring someone or not admitting someone to a university because they are a minority; that is discrimination. I agree that race should NOT be a primary factor in decision making, but it should be a factor. At one point in American history, employers/admission counselors could deny a person a job or admission into college soley based on their minority status. Because of programs like affirmative action, employers and universities were forced to consider race so that people could blatantly discriminate in that way. Contrary to popular belief, racism is still alive and well in America, and if people could, I’m sure some would try to get away with discriminatory actions. I believe that merit should be the primary focus of any applicant but race is an important factor as well. Without it, America would have less minorities in professional careers, and that is a fact. Look at the statistics. It would be great is race never had to be a factor, but for now, it is necessary.
May 1st, 2012 at 1:10 pm
I certainly know that minorities were denied employment and admission to institutions in the past, but attempting to rectify that by discriminating against the majority (or what is perceived to be the majority) now is not going to fix the past, nor will it cool off racial tensions. It is simply the wrong way to go about it. The past is the past, and we cannot progress if we do the same thing we did in the past. Continuing to choose to see race as a relevant factor in employment or admission is a continuation of the racist institutions of the past, regardless of who is the victim now.
May 1st, 2012 at 10:10 pm
I definitely respect your take on this issue. Although we disagree, this conversation is one of the reasons why I am extremely excited to attend OSU. I can have intense and passionate, yet respectful debates about pressing issues with great minds! :)
May 1st, 2012 at 11:53 pm
Hey, Ana. First off, nice blog post. Not everyone is brave enough to voice their opinions. You took a bold stance in your title and proceeded to defend it. I applaud you on that. However, I’d say that this is a bit… under-researched.
Now, I’m not necessarily saying you’re wrong (I do disagree, but I’ll get to that part later), but, for such a huge issue, you should have went further than asking your supervisor, or at least followed up with more questions. Also, their answer of “because we get more funding” is the worse answer that they could have given you next to “because I said so,” and “get back to work.” I’m not mad at you. I’m not disappointed. I’m not even offended. I actually understand completely. We were all taught that America used to be racist but it’s all fixed now because Dr. King, Obama, or whatever the popular topic is now. I used to think there wasn’t anything wrong with the way women were portrayed in the media until I learned about it. Same thing here.
Now that that’s out of the way, let me tell you why I disagree. The truth is that, currently, there is a movement towards eliminating race completely from admissions ( http://schoolsofthought.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/16/should-race-be-a-factor-in-college-admissions/ ), and a lot of students our age are offended ( http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=124735&page=1 ). That being said, I understand. The idea of it seems silly in the 21st century and, above all else there is very little, if any at all, education on why that is. Because of this lack of education and willful ignorance on the true state of race-relations in the U.S., it would make total sense for one to take the stance that this is a problem. In fact, there are several reasons why race is still a factor in college admissions.
I’m going to start with the biggest reason first (mostly because this is supposed to just be a comment, but also because I get off work in 30 minutes). The big reason is because there is a noticeable educational gap between the minorities and the majority ( http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/10/education/education-gap-grows-between-rich-and-poor-studies-show.html?pagewanted=all ). The fact remains that minority schools (I’m going to focus on black schools for reasons of ease and consistency) are largely underfunded, face behavioral problems, and are unable to compete with their white counterparts ( http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=15666 ). Now, there are reasons for this—lower-income neighborhoods also have high crime rates, parent participation, stigmas, etc. This means that the playing field is not level, like we grow up thinking. To give you a frame of reference, my friend was a salutatorian (it was actually a three-way tie for valedictorian) at a Cincinnati High School. Their ACT was an 18. Compare that to Ohio in 2009 (21.7) and nationally (21.1) ( http://www.act.org/newsroom/data/2009/states.html ). There’s no way that they would be able to compete with a school that had the proper funding and resources. By denying them a chance at a quality, higher educational institute, you’re keeping the educational gap open and helping to contribute to the cycle of uneducated parents, not being able to help their children. Even with their parents help, it’s still behind those with an educational level much higher.
To give an example, it’s like a youth football league. You have a team—some of them good, some of them not. You, of course play the good kids, but leave the others out. Not only do those kids not get a chance to start, they never get the opportunity to get better. By the time they do develop their skills, they’re still behind the rest. It’s also why, here, Appalachians also get more discretion—they need it.
The second reason colleges give a higher discretion to minorities is to try and mimich the demographic of a real-world setting. For example, these are the 2010 estimates of the U.S population by race (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html ):
Whites – 72.4%
Blacks – 12.6%
Native American – 0.9%
Asian – 4.8%
Two or more races – 2.9%
Here is Ohio State’s freshman profile of 2011 (http://undergrad.osu.edu/admissions/quick-facts.html ):
Whites – 76.7%
Blacks – 6.5%
Native American – less than 1%
Asian – 4.8%
Two or more races – 3%
So, even with more discretion towards minorities, Ohio State is still more white than you’d find in the rest of America. Remember, one of the goals of college is to get you prepared for the “real world” in which diversity is a major factor. Truth is, you’re no more likely to be denied admission to Ohio State by race than you are losing your parking space at Kroger.
Another problem with excluding race as a factor is that you’re denying race as a problem in America. If you said it wasn’t, many people might agree with you. Truth is, it’s still a problem—it’s just ignored now. I’m not saying that everyone’s racist or everyone is a bit racist, that’s stupid. In fact, the next time you hear someone say that, karate chop them in the thorax and tell them to find out what the real definition of racist is ( http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racist ). What everyone DOES have is a set of biasis that they can influences them. Brianna V up there made a good point about minorities in professional fields, but it goes far beyond that. The same reason Blacks are unfairly targeted by police is the same reason, say, women are still under-represented when it comes to leadership (http://www.nationalforum.com/Electronic%20Journal%20Volumes/Growe,%20Roslin%20Women%20and%20the%20Leadership%20Paradigm%20Bridging%20the%20Gender%20Gap.pdf ). It’s the same reason homosexuality is still portrayed in either a negative or inaccurate light ( http://www.unc.edu/~jermaine/images/portrayal.pdf ), and the same reason Zimmerman walked free (initially). It’s because there is still unresolved issues regarding race that are being ignored.
Now, I agree with you that you aren’t going to necessarily “fix” the past. You can’t go back in time. That doesn’t mean that you can’t make things better for the future. Even though the days of Jim Crow are long gone, we are still feeling the effects post-civil war racism. For example, the high black-male incarceration is a result of the stereotypes of all Black males as criminals during that time period ( http://zocalopublicsquare.org/thepublicsquare/2010/03/17/is-mass-incarceration-the-new-jim-crow/read/the-takeaway/ ). There are still cities in the U.S. that are virtually all-white as a result of the racial cleansings in the early 20th century ( http://cdn.itvs.org/banished_discussion.pdf ). Even today, those same cities are unwelcoming to blacks.
I’ll admit, just being around a different culture is going to be as effective in solving race-relations as going to a boat show as being around a surfer is going to convince you to surf. Sure one or two people are going to be persuaded, but the rest of us are going to look around and say “yup, that’s definitely a thing that exist.” It’s going to take a more active role than that. You’re going to go have to seek out minorities and find out more about them. I didn’t become a better climber by working at the OAC, I actively climbed and had conversation with other climbers.
I think that race in admissions gets too much credit. It’s hardly the biggest deciding factor and almost always comes down to a pinch, and colleges tend to look at an entire body of work instead of a strict count of requirements (http://www.nacacnet.org/issues-advocacy/policy/Documents/diversity_mythvsfact.pdf ). Even then when race becomes a factor, only those academically eligible to attend are considered. Who’s not to say someone like me got in because I was qualified? Who’s not to say someone didn’t get admitted because they were white? It’s easy to put the blame on race when you have no other answers.
Finally, and I’m not saying that this is your position, just a position I hear a lot, is that there has been a claim that White Americans are now the “victims.” It’s hard to claim that you’re the victim when you’re 1. The overwhelming majority ( http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/ ) 2. Household income is incredibly higher than minorities (over $62,000 for whites compared to $38,400 for blacks and $39,700 for Hispanics) ( http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0695.pdf ), more employed ( http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htm ), and portrayed in a higher light ( http://www.cracked.com/article_19549_5-old-timey-prejudices-that-still-show-up-in-every-movie.html ).
If you want to know who the real victims in America are, it’s mostly women and the GLBTQ community.
Like I said earlier, this isn’t meant to be an attack on you, but more the movement. You were never taught any of this. I wasn’t taught any of this; I had to find out on my own. If you want to talk more about it, you should come to the Multicultural Center. I’m here, all the time!
May 6th, 2012 at 10:53 pm
Thank you all for your comments, although I must reiterate that I do fully research everything I blog about. Clearly my supervisor was not one to have all the answers, nor did they have the time or desire to.
As the child and grandchild of (100% legal) immigrants, I can say that there is one group that is completely underfunded and overlooked, but that is a different story.
I wrote this piece because of the unfairness I felt for a friend’s situation here. This friend of mine is white, and has a single mother who could not afford to send her child to college and can barely support the two of them. My friend is taking out incredible amounts of loans to pay for school. Another friend I have is of a minority, and both of her parents are highly educated and very wealthy. Both of these people are high-achieving Honors program students. But who got a full ride? My friend who is the minority. My friend who is white got a $1000/year scholarship for her high GPA. The rest is on her and her overworked mother. Perhaps, my beef should be with the financial aid office. I think it’s great if people who deserve scholarships get them–if they have high GPAs and no way to pay for college, they’re the first ones who should be considered, regardless of race. But when race is clearly the only factor, as was in the situation above, then I am disappointed and saddened by a system that fails to recognize people on a basis other than race. This is not “equality”.
Finally, the admissions office that worries me most is not the of the undergrad offices–it’s that of professional schools. It’s common knowledge the minorities are underrepresented in the professional setting, but that is no reason why an equally (or higher) qualified person of the majority should be denied admission. That’s one of my biggest concerns for law school, and it’s why I never include my race on any such applications. I don’t want to be on the wrong end of a “quota”.