Summary: “This paper reviews the literature on affirmative action in undergraduate education and law schools, focusing in particular on the tradeoff between the quality of an institution and the fit between a school and a student.
Summary: “For more than three decades, critics and supporters of affirmative action have fought for the moral high ground — through ballot initiatives and lawsuits, in state legislatures, and in varied courts of public opinion.
The goal of this paper is to show the clarifying power of economic reasoning to dispel some myths and misconceptions in the racial affirmative action debates.
Findings are discussed, conclusions drawn, and wide-ranging recommendations are made at governmental and organizational levels.
The authors conclude by suggesting possible implications for policy and argue for widespread awareness-raising campaigns of both the need for positive action measures for disadvantaged groups and the benefits of such measures for wider society. Abstract: “Scholarly interest in the correlates and consequences of perceived discrimination has grown exponentially in recent years, yet, despite increased legal and media attention to claims of ‘anti-white bias,’ empirical studies predicting reports of racial discrimination by white Americans remain limited.
Research has shown that diversity experiences at college can have positive effects for students’ civic growth and their healthy participation in a globalized world.
But even if institutions of higher education only used family income, not race, as their chief criterion for diversity, many structural challenges would remain.Instead, we present evidence consistent with the idea that Proposition 209 increased the signaling value of attending UC schools for minorities.” “The Effects of Affirmative Action Bans on College Enrollment, Educational Attainment and the Demographic Composition of Universities” Hinrichs, Peter. Abstract: “Based on research conducted during a large-scale European Commission project on international perspectives on positive/affirmative action measures, the authors provide a comparative analysis of the legal context and perceptions of the impact of positive action in the United Kingdom and the United States.The study adopted participatory methods including consensus workshops, interviews, and legal analysis to obtain data from those individuals responsible for designing and implementing positive action measures.Texas residents ranked at the top of their high school class (usually the top 10%) are eligible for automatic admission and fill 75% of the available in-state spots.Those who do not meet this qualification are admitted based on factors such as academic achievement, extracurricular activities, cultural background and race.Using individual-level data on every freshman applicant to the UC system from 1995 to 2000, we find no evidence that yield rates fell for minorities relative to other students after Proposition 209, even after controlling for changes in student characteristics and changes in the set of UC schools to which students were admitted. I find that bans have no effect on the typical student and the typical college, but they decrease underrepresented minority enrollment and increase white enrollment at selective colleges.In fact, our analysis suggests Proposition 209 had a modest ‘warming effect.’ We investigate and rule out the possibility that this warming effect was driven by changes in the selection of students who applied to the UC, changes in financial aid or changes in minorities’ college opportunities outside the UC system. In addition, I use the case study methods of Abadie and Gardeazabal (2003) and Abadie, Diamond, and Hainmueller (2010) and find that the affirmative action ban in California shifted underrepresented minority students from more selective campuses to less selective ones at the University of California.” “A Comparative Analysis of Affirmative Action in the United Kingdom and United States” Archibong, Uduak; Sharps, Phyllis W.Fisher, who was part of the second group, believed that she was denied admission because of her race, claiming that several of her non-white high school classmates were admitted despite having lower grades.Her legal team argued that this is a violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.The United States District Court heard in 2009 and ruled in favor of the university, as did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in 2011.In February 2012 the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and oral arguments took place in October 2012.