Diversity and Affirmative Action

Diversity and Affirmative Action - Diversity and...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Diversity and Affirmative Action Robert K. Fullinwider Item : Last year, after the Board of Regents of the University of California System voted to forbid racial preferences in admissions, Charles Young, the chancellor of UCLA, remarked that "UCLA would not have achieved its current level of diversity without affirmative action." He observed that more than two-thirds of entering students in 1996 belonged to ethnic minorities, in contrast to 1980, when two-thirds of the freshmen were Caucasian. "We are a much greater university today," he concluded, "in large measure because we are more diverse." Item: Also last year, after a federal court struck down the policy of the University of Texas Law School that reserved a portion of its entering class for blacks and Mexican- Americans, the law school petitioned the Supreme Court for review. It urged the Court to reassert the right of colleges and universities to give racial and ethnic preferences in order to promote diversity on their campuses. Two Kinds of Diversity The word "diversity," which echoes in every campus debate about affirmative action nowadays, joins ambiguity to ubiquity. On the one hand, the word has become simply a term of art that means the same thing as "minority and/or gender representation." When Chancellor Young spoke of UCLA's "current level of diversity," what he referred to is the two-thirds ethnic minority representation on his campus. When universities list their diversity policies, set up offices of diversity affairs, and measure their progress in achieving diversity, the word in every case is a synonym for minority/gender representation. On the other hand, when the University of Texas Law School asked the Supreme Court to allow colleges and universities to take race and ethnicity into account in selecting students, it invoked a second sense of diversity as a justifying reason. It appealed to the idea that a university, given the kind of institution it is, needs a diverse faculty and student body. This second sense of diversity refers to the mix of viewpoints, opinions, talents, and experiences that enrich the university and facilitate its mission. In a widely circulated report in 1996, Neil Rudenstine, president of Harvard University, justified Harvard's commitment to diversity in this second sense by invoking John Stuart Mill, who stressed the value of bringing "human beings in contact with persons dissimilar to themselves, and with modes of thought and action unlike those with which they are familiar." A diverse student body, argued Rudenstine, is as much an "educational resource" as a university's faculty, library, and laboratories. Consequently, Harvard takes great pains to assure that its admissions process results in such a student body. Elizabeth Anderson, a philosopher at the University of Michigan, makes a
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 7

Diversity and Affirmative Action - Diversity and...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online