Affirmative Action DISCLAIMER This presentation does not imply

Affirmative Action

DISCLAIMER This presentation does not imply any racial agenda or discrimination. The views that are going to be presented in this presentation are solely to show each side of the argument.

Overview • • • Definition of Affirmative Action History of Affirmative Action Opposing views of Affirmative Action Conclusion Class Discussion

Definition of Affirmative Action Specific actions in recruitment, hiring, upgrading and other areas designed and taken for the purpose of eliminating the present effects of past discrimination, or to prevent discrimination. (www. uri. edu)

July 2, 1964 Civil Rights Act signed by President Lyndon Johnson. Prohibits discrimination of all kinds based on race, color, religion, or natural origin 1960 1965 Timeline June 28, 1978 Regents of the University of California v. Bakke This case imposed limitations on affirmative action to ensure that providing greater opportunities for minorities did not come at the expense of the rights of the majority. (Reverse Discrimination) 1970 1975 1980 1990 March 27, 2001 U of Michigan Law School A different judge drew an opposite conclusion, invalidating the law school’s policy and ruling November 3, 1997 that “intellectual diversity Proposition 209 in bears no obvious or California necessary State ban on all relationship to racial diversity. ” forms of May 14, 2001 – Decision Affirmative Action. Reversed 1995 2000 2005 23, 2003 December. June 13, 2000 Supreme Courtundergrad Upholds Affirmative of Michigan July 19, U 1995 Actionon in. Action University Admissions Affirmative policy White House Guidelines Upholds the U of M Law Federal judge ruled that the use. School’s Affirmative Action policy, ruling that race can be one of of race as a of factor admissions Called for the elimination any in many factors considered… it furthers at U of a. Mquota; was constitutional. program that “a) creates b) “aunqualified compelling interest in obtaining creates preferences for thereverse educational benefits that flow individuals, c) creates from a diverse discrimination; or d) continues even student body. ” (5 -4) Ruled (6 -3) that U of M’s after its equal opportunity- purposes undergraduate admissions program have been achieved. (point system) had to be modified.

Current System • Do you believe in affirmative action and how it is currently enforced in higher education? – Enrollment in college: • White: 48% (18 -21 yrs. ) • African Americans: 11% (18 -21 yrs. ) • Hispanics: 10% (18 -21 yrs. )

Different States, Different Laws – California • “Effective January 1, 1997, the University of California shall not use race, religion, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin as criteria for ‘admissions in exception’ to UC-eligibility requirements. ” - OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY – Michigan • Supreme court ruled that race can be one of many factors considered… it furthers “a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body”.

Is CU’s policy on Affirmative Action making a positive change? CU Boulder Enrollment Fall 2002 Total Enrollment 27, 954 Total Racial Minority 3, 609 13% American Indian 209 . 7% Asian American 1, 469 5. 2% 416 1. 5% 1, 515 5. 4% African American Hispanic Latino

Affirmative Action at CU • "The only numeric formula in the admissions process that is used at CUBoulder is … calculated only on the basis of high grade-point average or rank and SAT or ACT test scores, and does not take any personal attributes of a student into account. ”- Richard L. Byyny

Class Discussion: • Is there a need for affirmative action? • How would you change affirmative action to make it more effective? – Fund high school's differently – Keep affirmative action laws at the state level – Nationalize affirmative action laws

Sources • http: //aad. english. ucsb. edu/docs/SP-1. html • http: //www. lib. umich. edu/govdocs/affirm. ht ml#summary • http: //www. colorado. edu/news/affirmativea ction/faq. html • http: //www. infoplease. com/spot/affirmativet imeline 1. html