Download
affirmative action n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Affirmative Action PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Affirmative Action

Affirmative Action

160 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Affirmative Action

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Affirmative Action Hannah Reiss Erin Pealer Brandon Twombly

  2. History • •Call for civil rights and more equal opportunity (late 1900’s) • •Civil Rights Act of 1964 • •Adams vs. Richardson- charged department of health, education, and welfare of being behind in enforcement of Title VI of 1964 Civil Rights Act

  3. Title VI • •“Title VI of [the Civil Rights] act mandated the desegregation of public elementary, secondary and postsecondary educational institutions. These institutions needed to provide equal educational opportunities to all students” (Bickel 1998). • •Bickel, R. D. (1998). A Brief History of the Commitment to Inclusion as a Facet of Equal Educational Opportunity. In D. D. Gehring (Ed.), Responding to the New Affirmative Action Climate (pp. 3-13). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

  4. Result of Adams vs. Richardson • •The department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) published a statement: • –“the goal that the proportion of black high school graduates entering state institutions of higher education should equal the proportion of white high school graduates entering such institutions, including graduate and professional school; allocation of financial aid; and implementation of remedial education programs to reduce the disparity between the graduation rates of white and blacks” (Bickel, p. 7, 1998). • •Bickel, R. D. (1998). A Brief History of the Commitment to Inclusion as a Facet of Equal Educational Opportunity. In D. D. Gehring (Ed.), Responding to the New Affirmative Action Climate (pp. 3-13). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

  5. Then 'Till Now • •DeFunis v. Odegaard (1974) • •Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) • •Ended up in Supreme Court • •Dealt more with classifications and bias’ within the admissions system

  6. Pros and Cons • Good • -Diversity is desirable and won't always occur if left to chance. • •Students starting at a disadvantage need a boost. • •Affirmative action draws people to areas of study and work they may never consider otherwise. • •Some stereotypes may never be broken without affirmative action. • •Affirmative action is needed to compensate minorities for centuries of slavery or oppression. • http://www.balancedpolitics.org/affirmative_action.htm • Bad • •Affirmative action leads to reverse discrimination. • •Affirmative action lowers standards of accountability needed to push students or employees to perform better. • •Students admitted on this basis are often ill-equipped to handle the schools to which they've been admitted. • •It would help lead a truly color-blind society. • •It is condescending to minorities to say they need affirmative action to succeed. • •It demeans true minority achievement; i.e. success is labeled as result of affirmative action rather than hard work and ability. • •Once enacted, affirmative actions are tough to remove, even after the underlying discrimination has been eliminated.

  7. Interest Groups • •For affirmative action: • •African American Policy Forum (AAPF) • –Believe in affirmative action in college admissions- mainly for African Americans • •Americans United for Affirmative Action (AAUA) • –Support all fields of affirmative action and do advocate for it in college admissions • Against affirmative action: • •Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO) • –Do not support affirmative action anywhere in society- college admissions is included

  8. Increased Diversity in Higher Education • Source: U.S. National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, annual • .http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/09s0289.pdf

  9. Proposition 209: the aftermath • University of California, Berkeley (entering class) • 1995: 6.5% African American • 2005: 3% African American • 1990: 20% Hispanic • 2005: 8.6% Hispanic • University of Califorinia, Los Angeles (entering class) • 1995: 7.3% African American • 2005: 2.7% African American • 1995: 16.1% Hispanic • 2000: 12.5 Hispanic • Source: Nittle, Nadra Kareem. "Affirmative Action Bans in Universities: Who Gains?". About.com.

  10. SAT gaps: whites vs. blacks • University of California, Los Angeles • 235 points • University of Virginia • 206 points • Stanford University • 171 points • Crosby, Faye J., Sharon D. Herzberger, and Richard F. Tomasson. Affirmative Action: The Pros and Cons of Policy and Practice. Washington DC: American University Press, 1996.

  11. Additional evidence • Early 1990's: substantial increase in African American college freshmen... only 26-28% of them graduated • 1982 graduation rates from UC Berkeley • Admitted under Affirmative Action: • Hispanics: 22% • African Americans: 18% • Center for Equal Opportunity Study: African Americans and Hispanics are 500 times more likely to be admitted to University of Wisconsin- Madison over similarly qualified white or Asian applicants.

  12. Recent Developments • Fisher vs. University of Texas at Austin (January 18, 2011) • UC Berkeley Affirmative Action Bake Sale • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2fAakr7uM8

  13. Gallup Poll- from USA TODAY

  14. Cartoons

  15. Political Parties positive view on affirmative actionopposing views on affirmative action