 |
||||||||
|
12/18/2002 02:51:00 AM | Timothy Fudging your way into the Ivy League Brad, you said people fudge their way into the Ivy League. Well, how exactly do people do that? I don't mean the odd person, but are there patterns (eg. use of test prep? elite private schools? alum preferences? athletic slots?) I think it is fair to say that in the past rich white males have best been able to do that. Hence the need for affirmative action to 'level the playing field', that is, if these resources have been disproptionally unavailable to historically disadvantaged groups. But I think you're right when you mention the myth that is the the image of the superbly qualified white being denied over the unqualified minority. I remember reading a newsweek article two years ago or so, about this white woman student who applied to the University of Michigan and was suing for being denied. The article began by saying something like 'she was the kind of student every college wants.' Their evidence? She had a 4.0 G.P.A. Wahoo. Dime a dozen these days. She obviously wasn't better than all the other white students were let in, so she wasn't 'superbly qualified' or at least not anymore so than everyone else that was denied. It's interesting that in the 1978 Bakke decision, the guy who sued and was ordered to be admitted, probably wouldn't have made it in had there not been racial quotas. One more thing on the argument that affirmative action promotes the view to others and to minorities themselves that they are undeserving. First, this is not a principled argument against affirmative action. I don't mean that it is unprincipled, but that it is a pragmatic consideration that depends on an empirical claim: it is a (potential) cost to be weighed against the benefits. On a pragmatic basis, I would say that those who promote this argument more often exacerbate and fan the very feelings they are claiming they wish were not there. This alone doesn't mean the argument is wrong, but it does show the danger of promoting that view, and frustrates those of us who see affirmative action framed in arguments and in the media in the terms Brad mentioned. perma link |
| 0 comments
0 Comments: |
Dartmouth The Free Press Alums for Social Change The Green Magazine The Dartmouth Dartmouth Observer Dartmouth Review Dartlog Inner Office The Little Green Blog Welton Chang's Blog Vox in Sox MN Publius (Matthew Martin) Netblitz Dartmouth Official News Other Blogs Ampersand Atrios Arts & Letters Altercation Body and Soul Blog For America Brad DeLong Brad Plumer CalPundit Campus Nonsense Clarksphere Crooked Timber Cursor Daily Kos Dean Nation Dan Drezner The Front Line Instapundit Interesting Times Is That Legal? Talking Points Memo Lady-Likely Lawrence Lessig Lean Left Left2Right Legal Theory Matthew Yglesias Ms. Musings MWO Nathan Newman New Republic's &c. Not Geniuses Ornicus Oxblog Pandagon Political State Report Political Theory Daily Review Queer Day Roger Ailes SCOTUS blog Talk Left TAPPED Tacitus This Modern World Tough Democrat Untelevised Volokh Conspiracy Washington Note X. & Overboard Magazines, Newspapers and Journals Boston Globe Ideas Boston Review Chronicle of Higher Education Common Dreams Dissent In These Times Mother Jones New York Review of Books New York Times Salon Slate The American Prospect The Nation The New Republic The Progressive Tikkun Tom Paine Village Voice Washington Monthly Capitol Hill Media ABC's The Note American Journalism Review Columbia Journalism Review CQ Daily Howler Donkey Rising The Hill Medianews National Journal NJ Hotline NJ Wake-up call NJ Early Bird NJ Weekly Political Wire Roll Call Spinsanity Search Search the DFP  |
|||||||
The opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Dartmouth College or the Dartmouth Free Press.