This chapter covers four sections Admissions, Financial Aid, Student Housing, and Campus Security. Please select which question you would like to discuss and make sure everyone knows which question you are discussing.
Admissions-- Bakke vs Regents of the University of California-- this is a case in which a medical school applicant (white male) was denied admission twice. During this time there was a separate admissions process for minority students in which students were admitted to the University medical school. The school reserved 16 of the 100 slots for this process. The university cited the need for doctors to work in underserved communities. This case went to the US Supreme Court and ruled in favor of the student. Do you believe quotas are necessary in admissions? Do you think that a separate admissions process is needed for minority students? How does affirmative action and admissions co-exist? or does it need to co-exist?
Financial Aid-- It is against federal law to discriminate against race, sex, religion, age, etc in federal financial aid. At USF, many scholarships are restricted by these criteria. For example, there are scholarships for nontraditional students (over the age of 27), GLBT orientation, and race. How is this allowed at a public institution? Should this be allowed in today’s society? why?
Student Housing-- Housing cases usually involve students who do not wish to live on campus and are required to do so or students who want to live in student housing and are denied. For example, at Yeshiva University a same-sex couple wanted to live in married housing. The University required proof of marriage and since they same-sex couple could not provide that they were denied living in that section of housing. They were then provided separate single living spaces on campus. They sued the university and at the end of all state courts the decision was upheld that the University made. Do you agree with the courts? Secondly, knowing that most cases revolve about these two issues, what can you as an administrator do to prepare your university housing department?
Campus Safety-- a. The Campus Sex Crimes Prevention Act of 2002 requires colleges and universities to include information about sexual offenders who are employees or students to be published in their annual safety report. The state and federal laws do not give guidance on how to manage these issues such as should sex offenders be allowed to be students or employed on campus? Should a sex offender live in student housing if admitted? Should students in classes with sex offenders be warned? As a top level administrator, how would you handle these situations on your campus?
I thought the reading about financial aid was interesting, I hadn't thought of that conflict before. I am thinking that what determines the legality of which students can apply for scholarships depends on the benefactor. If the money comes from a private source, I wouldn't think you can tell an individual what they can or can't do with it.
I just this week had a student inform me he was chosen for a full-ride scholarship by a family who does this each year. It was a subjective process with an interview and many other requirements. I would think it is pretty clear that state or national sources would need to be more objective, which they tend to be (merit or need-based). I found this example (http://chronicle.com/blogPost/California-Judge-Strikes-Do/8430/) of a recent judgment made in California last year that prohibited the state from awarding a scholarship that gave minority applicants preference.
What I wonder is although it's not lawful for USF to grant scholarships based on racial, ethnic or gender preference, what makes it okay for the university to advertise these scholarships on it's state website (http://usfweb2.usf.edu/finaid/scholarships/) of it's state funded office maintained by a state funded employee (http://usfweb3.usf.edu/absoluteNM/templates/?a=2306)?
I am just as confused as you. My gut assumption is it has to be from the source of money. State/Federal funds may not be spent on financial aid however, if the money is coming from Alumni donations.....the donor may specify who the funds are going too.
The question regarding minority scholarship awarding is a good one and certainly eye-opening when it comes to college and university’s efforts to increase diversity within their institution and specific programs. As I understand from our class readings, the federal government and states cannot provide gender- or race-specific scholarships (the California case from the Chronicle article Troy mentioned is a good example). However, individual scholarship donors may specify parameters for their particular scholarship, and institutions may award those scholarships based upon those donor-specific parameters, as long as the parameters do not go against federal, state, or institutional regulations. I noted on the USF scholarship website (thanks for providing this, Troy!) that the initial 2 scholarships which appeared when I searched for “minority scholarships” were from private donors (both businesses within the greater Tampa Bay area), and are clearly labeled with the name of the donor as well as the eligibility requirements for the scholarship, so the source of funding is clearly identified.
Our text, using individual cases (such as Bakke, and Grutter v. Bollinger) attempts to clarify the distinction between an institution specifically selecting students for admission based upon minority status and providing private scholarship assistance to a minority student, but I think the topic remains a little clouded and confusing. This topic was especially timely for me since I chair our College’s scholarship committee and we have received a request from our Multicultural Student Affairs and Equity Office to set aside several scholarships specifically for minority students. This is a laudable request, and one which our scholarship committee would likely vote to support when we meet. However, if we don’t have donors who have specifically requested that their scholarships be awarded to a minority student, can we as an institution make the decision to do so? We are in the fortunate position of having a strong Foundation, with a comparatively large number of scholarships to award (some based upon academic scholarship, some based upon financial need, and others which are donor-selected) – does this diversity of options make a difference? What do you think?
1. First, I think it's important that we differentiate affirmative action from quotas - it's not the same. A quota would be a required number versus affirmative action providing extra points to minority students that meet admissions requirements. I think affirmative action IS necessary still - there is still too much bias in admissions and we need to make sure we provide opportunities for students of all backgrounds. Do I believe that quotas should happen? As a minority woman, I can honestly say no BUT I think it's important to consider the educational background that the student is coming to the university with. Is it fair to not allow a student to be admitted to a university because he/she has not gotten the education required at a school he/she has to attend because his/her school district tells him/her that is where he/she has to attend (something completely out of the student's control)? I think when admitting students into a university, we need to create an environment that is similar to the real world as that is really the only way to provide a real educational environment for our students. Unfortunately, until there are more stable ways to provide an equal secondary education to students of all backgrounds and neighborhoods, we have to provide minority students who are not getting a good education an outlet to come to college despite of the district they are coming from. I know this gets sticky, as then we have to consider the question of "are we setting these students up for success by them not being ready for college?" That is where programs aimed at this population (such as SSS) come in and help to provide that extra step in preparing and supporting these students. I know this may be a controversial view point, but I also believe that educational opportunities should be provided to all those who wish to have them in some way, shape, or form.
Stephen - Very thought provoking questions. I appreciate your willingness to create dialogue on controversial subject matters. Thank you for the opportunity to participate. I am answering question on Affirmative Action.
Some critics suggest that affirmative action should no longer be a viable option for people of color in America. Conceding that it has effectively opened the doors of opportunity to traditionally excluded participants, they argue that these numbers can now be maintained without these measures. In 1978, Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote in University of California Regents v. Bakke, that “the position of Blacks today in America is the tragic, but inevitable consequence of centuries of unequal treatment measured by any benchmark of comfort or achievement, meaningful equality remains a distant dream." Interestingly, Justice Marshall’s poignant words were a foreshadowing of what was to come. In most instances where affirmative action has been eliminated, the participation level of minorities and women has also decreased significantly. Professional and skilled labor opportunities for people of color remain underrepresented. Despite decades of gradual integration through affirmative measures, white males still dominate executive jobs. While I do not believe pre-designated admissions slots is fair and equitable, for any category (i.e., legacy, race, etc.), there is still evidence which suggests that affirmative action, in some form, is warranted.
While I optimistically await the day that this country moves beyond the legacy of segregation, which necessitated the creation of affirmative action, I cannot ignore the evidence of persistent discrimination in American life. When we discuss the University of Michigan point systems and affirmative action, critics always highlight the 20 points that were “given” to minorities for being a part of a particular race/ethnicity. However, no one ever discusses the 28 points that were nearly impossible for minority students to attain. For example, 6 of the 28 points were allocated for students who lived in rural Michigan – counties that were and remain largely white. Furthermore, 4 points were given to students whose parents attended the University of Michigan. Since we are still debating the need for affirmative action and first generation students in 2010, I would suspect that the majority of the students who received these points in 2003 were non-minorities. As such, Affirmative action remains vital in helping us to balance the different sets of obstacles women and people of color face in American society.
In 1996, California voted to end affirmative action and upheld by the California Supreme Court in 2000. The passage of proposition 209 not only eliminated affirmative action programs, but also outreach programs designed to encourage minority student participation in colleges and non-traditional fields such as math, technology, and science. In addition, the preparation of teachers and health professionals that serve minority communities was put at risk as some of the most effective programs that trained minority teachers and doctors were also eliminated. At UC-Berkeley, Latino student enrollment fell from 14.5% in 1997 to 7.5% in 1998, the first year Proposition 209 went into effect.
Today, enrollment of Native-American freshman has declined by approximately 2/3 from pre-209 levels. Moreover, outside of the higher education setting, a recent study found that Asian and Pacific Islander prospective renters experienced consistent adverse treatment relative to comparable whites in 21.5 percent of tests, about the same as the level for African American and Hispanic renters.
So, I pose the following question, have things gotten better or worse?
My opinions about affirmative action and quotas changed dramatically after taking Dr. Cobb-Roberts's course last summer (if you haven't taken it, and have room in your program, I'd strongly recommend it).
Admissions quotas and restrictive scholarships address the “compelling interest” of an institution. It seems, based on the text and my own observations, that the need for institutions to increase diversity trumps the reverse-discrimination issues that these policies might occasionally render.
Like Dionne, I’m hopeful that one day the need for quotas and affirmative action policies will be nullified by an equally accessible K-12 system that would offer all students equal footing from the get-go.
Higher education has been extremely unfair for a long time; desperate measures are warranted, by all means.
I believe that every person who desires to change for the better deserves a second chance. However, there are consequences of certain behaviors that still must be addressed after someone has committed an egregious act. This includes the restriction and/ or revocation of some benefits, such as privacy, that were once available to that person before the act was committed. I do not believe that sex offenders should be allowed to live in campus housing. Strange and Banning (2001) stated, “being free from physical threat and harm and experiencing a fundamental psychological sense of belonging on campus are important conditions for the pursuit of opportunities to learn, develop, and grow.” I believe that allowing a sex offender to live adjacent to, for instance, a first year student, would impede upon their sense of safety and could negatively impact their successful integration into the campus community. Additionally, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs designates safety as a top priority just after breathing and food. This would need to be closely considered when creating a master plan on how to address sex offenders on campus.
Just as sex offender information is public record, students in classes should have access to information about sex offenders on campus. As an administrator, I would not promote the broadcast of information but I would help to ensure that the information is readily available upon request. I would want to protect the safety and sense of belonging of the sex offender who may be attempting to re-gain a new life, but my first priority would be that of the general population of students who expect to earn a quality education in a safe environment.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Financial aid - Troy and Stephen, from my days of working in financial aid...yes that is true regarding where the money is coming from as to whether or not the scholarship funds can be specified for race or some other. If the money is coming from a private source, it can be specified for any factor (such as being left-handed) the donor wants it to be. Troy, regarding your question about it being advertised on a state funded website, I think that is an interesting issue. I think you bring up a good point about it being state money used to operate the website. I hope that never gets challenged, though, because I personally think we need to make these as easy to find as possible.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Financial aid - Troy and Stephen, from my days of working in financial aid...yes that is true regarding where the money is coming from as to whether or not the scholarship funds can be specified for race or some other. If the money is coming from a private source, it can be specified for any factor (such as being left-handed) the donor wants it to be. Troy, regarding your question about it being advertised on a state funded website, I think that is an interesting issue. I think you bring up a good point about it being state money used to operate the website. I hope that never gets challenged, though, because I personally think we need to make these as easy to find as possible.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Posing as Cynthia Newhouse Bacheller, here's your instructor relaying her post:
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Financial aid - Troy and Stephen, from the reading and from my days of working in financial aid...yes, is does appear true regarding where the money is coming from as to whether or not the scholarship funds can be specified for race or some other factor. If the money is coming from a private source, it can be specified for any factor (such as being left-handed) the donor wants it to be. Troy, regarding your question about it being advertised on a state funded website, I think that is an interesting issue. I think you bring up a good point about it being state money used to operate the website. I hope that never gets challenged, though, because I personally think we need to make these as easy to find as possible.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Financial aid - Troy and Stephen, from the reading and from my days of working in financial aid...yes, is does appear true regarding where the money is coming from as to whether or not the scholarship funds can be specified for race or some other factor. If the money is coming from a private source, it can be specified for any factor (such as being left-handed) the donor wants it to be. Troy, regarding your question about it being advertised on a state funded website, I think that is an interesting issue. I think you bring up a good point about it being state money used to operate the website. I hope that never gets challenged, though, because I personally think we need to make these as easy to find as possible.
Well I would like to thank all participants for responding over their holiday. You all deserve bonus points!!! Secondly, affirmative action and financial aid post are truly thought provoking.
I have mixed emotions about this from a personal perspective. I like and appreciate the diverse opinions in our classes here at USF. It opens the discussions to a broad perspective and sheds light into other's thought processes.
As a former teacher, I hope that the K-12 system and head start would offer equal footing for all students regardless of race/ethnicity/socioeconomic status.
While higher education has historically been set up for the elite/upper class, diversity measure have gone a long ways. However, as a graduate of an HBCU I have seen some obstacles that students may face. For example, before I was attending USF for this PhD program, I had applied to NC State University (home of Dr. Knowles and principles of andragogy). My master's was from an HBCU and I had met all of the requirements for the PhD program at NCSU. All of the faculty from the HBCU stated that no one from there had been admitted into the NCSU program. True to their advice, I was declined admission. I set up an appointment to meet with the chair of the admissions committee and was waiting for her outside her office. She walked past me about 3-4 times and started talking about how she was supposed to meet this guy from the HBCU and "true to form he was late." Mind you I was sitting right there in front of her office; so I walked up to her and introduced myself and her entire demeanor changed immediately. She stated that I could take 3 classes and reapply for admission in the spring again and that would be the only thing that I could do to improve my ratings in admission process.
Now, do I think there was a thought that I might be black, I do. If someone had better scores, GPA, etc. I could understand not being admitted. However, just because I was coming for the HBCU, I don't think that is grounds for not admitting.
In the future, I hope higher education can not have a need for affirmative action. However, I am just not sure it's time is right now, right this second.
I'm sure we all agree that diversity in higher education institutions is necessary for the education of our students. The courts have ruled that affirmative action based on quotas or additional points is discriminatory; however, admissions decisions that look at race as part of the holistic application or look at race as a plus factor are acceptable. I think public institutions in particular need to focus more on the concept of access to the university and determine the best procedures to promote this access.
At the Undergraduate Admissions Office at USF, you don't really see a competition between applicants in the initial admissions process. Decisions are based on a grid that looks at academic success predictors (GPA, Standardized Test Scores, college prep courses, additional sciences, maths, foreign language, etc.). Basically, the applications aren't evaluated side-by-side.
There are Summer Bridge Programs (FSI and SSS) that assist in access for those who are first generation college students. (A lot of times, those considered have a solid GPA but low test scores.) These students are afforded the opportunity to start courses in the summer with a cohort. They take the same courses, attend the same seminars and receive hand-on advising. Essentially, they are provided with a supportive community to ease the high school to college transition. These programs increase the diversity at USF, as a lot of first generation college students are in racial and socio-economic minorities. These are fantastic programs, because they not only provide access to university, but set students up for success by providing the support they need.
Professional schools (Medical, Law, Vet, etc.) have a tougher time in the access/affirmative action process as their application processes bring in more subjective measures (interviews, references, etc.). I liked Justice Douglas's explanation of the uniform or race-neutral plan. He states that institutions should look at "an applicant's prior achievements in light of the barrier that he had to overcome" (p. 353). The text's 17 guidelines are worth noting as schools decide what they can do to improve access.
While I think we all should strive to create diverse institutions, I am not always positive the heart of the debate lies with admission standards but rather with ensuring all schools are affordable options for all students. I support admissions offices using their professional disretion with regards to applicants of level qualifications such as equal test scores and gpa. For instance, if two students have the same academic credentials and institutions are seeking increased diversity, then the student in the minority should be given a fair and equal shot. This is where I think Affirmative Action should focus. There shoudl be more scholarship opportunities for minority students. Scholarships are not typically considered federal aid, but more merit based or privately funded and this should be implemented in most recruitment plans. When I worked at Duke they used concentric financial aid modeling and had a huge endowment to make it highly affordable for students in need. While I understand Duke may be an exception to the rule, I think it was highly admirably. The other issue again lies with public v. private institutions. Affirmative Action typically only applies to public institutions and there are no admission regulations regarding this issue for private schools.
This chapter covers four sections Admissions, Financial Aid, Student Housing, and Campus Security. Please select which question you would like to discuss and make sure everyone knows which question you are discussing.
ReplyDeleteAdmissions--
Bakke vs Regents of the University of California-- this is a case in which a medical school applicant (white male) was denied admission twice. During this time there was a separate admissions process for minority students in which students were admitted to the University medical school. The school reserved 16 of the 100 slots for this process. The university cited the need for doctors to work in underserved communities. This case went to the US Supreme Court and ruled in favor of the student. Do you believe quotas are necessary in admissions? Do you think that a separate admissions process is needed for minority students? How does affirmative action and admissions co-exist? or does it need to co-exist?
Financial Aid--
It is against federal law to discriminate against race, sex, religion, age, etc in federal financial aid. At USF, many scholarships are restricted by these criteria. For example, there are scholarships for nontraditional students (over the age of 27), GLBT orientation, and race. How is this allowed at a public institution? Should this be allowed in today’s society? why?
Student Housing--
Housing cases usually involve students who do not wish to live on campus and are required to do so or students who want to live in student housing and are denied. For example, at Yeshiva University a same-sex couple wanted to live in married housing. The University required proof of marriage and since they same-sex couple could not provide that they were denied living in that section of housing. They were then provided separate single living spaces on campus. They sued the university and at the end of all state courts the decision was upheld that the University made. Do you agree with the courts? Secondly, knowing that most cases revolve about these two issues, what can you as an administrator do to prepare your university housing department?
Campus Safety--
a. The Campus Sex Crimes Prevention Act of 2002 requires colleges and universities to include information about sexual offenders who are employees or students to be published in their annual safety report. The state and federal laws do not give guidance on how to manage these issues such as should sex offenders be allowed to be students or employed on campus? Should a sex offender live in student housing if admitted? Should students in classes with sex offenders be warned? As a top level administrator, how would you handle these situations on your campus?
I thought the reading about financial aid was interesting, I hadn't thought of that conflict before. I am thinking that what determines the legality of which students can apply for scholarships depends on the benefactor. If the money comes from a private source, I wouldn't think you can tell an individual what they can or can't do with it.
ReplyDeleteI just this week had a student inform me he was chosen for a full-ride scholarship by a family who does this each year. It was a subjective process with an interview and many other requirements. I would think it is pretty clear that state or national sources would need to be more objective, which they tend to be (merit or need-based). I found this example (http://chronicle.com/blogPost/California-Judge-Strikes-Do/8430/) of a recent judgment made in California last year that prohibited the state from awarding a scholarship that gave minority applicants preference.
What I wonder is although it's not lawful for USF to grant scholarships based on racial, ethnic or gender preference, what makes it okay for the university to advertise these scholarships on it's state website (http://usfweb2.usf.edu/finaid/scholarships/) of it's state funded office maintained by a state funded employee (http://usfweb3.usf.edu/absoluteNM/templates/?a=2306)?
I am just as confused as you. My gut assumption is it has to be from the source of money. State/Federal funds may not be spent on financial aid however, if the money is coming from Alumni donations.....the donor may specify who the funds are going too.
ReplyDeleteThe question regarding minority scholarship awarding is a good one and certainly eye-opening when it comes to college and university’s efforts to increase diversity within their institution and specific programs. As I understand from our class readings, the federal government and states cannot provide gender- or race-specific scholarships (the California case from the Chronicle article Troy mentioned is a good example). However, individual scholarship donors may specify parameters for their particular scholarship, and institutions may award those scholarships based upon those donor-specific parameters, as long as the parameters do not go against federal, state, or institutional regulations.
ReplyDeleteI noted on the USF scholarship website (thanks for providing this, Troy!) that the initial 2 scholarships which appeared when I searched for “minority scholarships” were from private donors (both businesses within the greater Tampa Bay area), and are clearly labeled with the name of the donor as well as the eligibility requirements for the scholarship, so the source of funding is clearly identified.
Our text, using individual cases (such as Bakke, and Grutter v. Bollinger) attempts to clarify the distinction between an institution specifically selecting students for admission based upon minority status and providing private scholarship assistance to a minority student, but I think the topic remains a little clouded and confusing. This topic was especially timely for me since I chair our College’s scholarship committee and we have received a request from our Multicultural Student Affairs and Equity Office to set aside several scholarships specifically for minority students. This is a laudable request, and one which our scholarship committee would likely vote to support when we meet. However, if we don’t have donors who have specifically requested that their scholarships be awarded to a minority student, can we as an institution make the decision to do so? We are in the fortunate position of having a strong Foundation, with a comparatively large number of scholarships to award (some based upon academic scholarship, some based upon financial need, and others which are donor-selected) – does this diversity of options make a difference? What do you think?
1. First, I think it's important that we differentiate affirmative action from quotas - it's not the same. A quota would be a required number versus affirmative action providing extra points to minority students that meet admissions requirements. I think affirmative action IS necessary still - there is still too much bias in admissions and we need to make sure we provide opportunities for students of all backgrounds. Do I believe that quotas should happen? As a minority woman, I can honestly say no BUT I think it's important to consider the educational background that the student is coming to the university with. Is it fair to not allow a student to be admitted to a university because he/she has not gotten the education required at a school he/she has to attend because his/her school district tells him/her that is where he/she has to attend (something completely out of the student's control)? I think when admitting students into a university, we need to create an environment that is similar to the real world as that is really the only way to provide a real educational environment for our students. Unfortunately, until there are more stable ways to provide an equal secondary education to students of all backgrounds and neighborhoods, we have to provide minority students who are not getting a good education an outlet to come to college despite of the district they are coming from. I know this gets sticky, as then we have to consider the question of "are we setting these students up for success by them not being ready for college?" That is where programs aimed at this population (such as SSS) come in and help to provide that extra step in preparing and supporting these students. I know this may be a controversial view point, but I also believe that educational opportunities should be provided to all those who wish to have them in some way, shape, or form.
ReplyDeleteStephen -
ReplyDeleteVery thought provoking questions. I appreciate your willingness to create dialogue on controversial subject matters. Thank you for the opportunity to participate. I am answering question on Affirmative Action.
Some critics suggest that affirmative action should no longer be a viable option for people of color in America. Conceding that it has effectively opened the doors of opportunity to traditionally excluded participants, they argue that these numbers can now be maintained without these measures. In 1978, Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote in University of California Regents v. Bakke, that “the position of Blacks today in America is the tragic, but inevitable consequence of centuries of unequal treatment measured by any benchmark of comfort or achievement, meaningful equality remains a distant dream." Interestingly, Justice Marshall’s poignant words were a foreshadowing of what was to come. In most instances where affirmative action has been eliminated, the participation level of minorities and women has also decreased significantly. Professional and skilled labor opportunities for people of color remain underrepresented. Despite decades of gradual integration through affirmative measures, white males still dominate executive jobs. While I do not believe pre-designated admissions slots is fair and equitable, for any category (i.e., legacy, race, etc.), there is still evidence which suggests that affirmative action, in some form, is warranted.
While I optimistically await the day that this country moves beyond the legacy of segregation, which necessitated the creation of affirmative action, I cannot ignore the evidence of persistent discrimination in American life. When we discuss the University of Michigan point systems and affirmative action, critics always highlight the 20 points that were “given” to minorities for being a part of a particular race/ethnicity. However, no one ever discusses the 28 points that were nearly impossible for minority students to attain. For example, 6 of the 28 points were allocated for students who lived in rural Michigan – counties that were and remain largely white. Furthermore, 4 points were given to students whose parents attended the University of Michigan. Since we are still debating the need for affirmative action and first generation students in 2010, I would suspect that the majority of the students who received these points in 2003 were non-minorities. As such, Affirmative action remains vital in helping us to balance the different sets of obstacles women and people of color face in American society.
In 1996, California voted to end affirmative action and upheld by the California Supreme Court in 2000. The passage of proposition 209 not only eliminated affirmative action programs, but also outreach programs designed to encourage minority student participation in colleges and non-traditional fields such as math, technology, and science. In addition, the preparation of teachers and health professionals that serve minority communities was put at risk as some of the most effective programs that trained minority teachers and doctors were also eliminated. At UC-Berkeley, Latino student enrollment fell from 14.5% in 1997 to 7.5% in 1998, the first year Proposition 209 went into effect.
Today, enrollment of Native-American freshman has declined by approximately 2/3 from pre-209 levels. Moreover, outside of the higher education setting, a recent study found that Asian and Pacific Islander prospective renters experienced consistent adverse treatment relative to comparable whites in 21.5 percent of tests, about the same as the level for African American and Hispanic renters.
So, I pose the following question, have things gotten better or worse?
My opinions about affirmative action and quotas changed dramatically after taking Dr. Cobb-Roberts's course last summer (if you haven't taken it, and have room in your program, I'd strongly recommend it).
ReplyDeleteAdmissions quotas and restrictive scholarships address the “compelling interest” of an institution. It seems, based on the text and my own observations, that the need for institutions to increase diversity trumps the reverse-discrimination issues that these policies might occasionally render.
Like Dionne, I’m hopeful that one day the need for quotas and affirmative action policies will be nullified by an equally accessible K-12 system that would offer all students equal footing from the get-go.
Higher education has been extremely unfair for a long time; desperate measures are warranted, by all means.
Campus Safety:
ReplyDeleteI believe that every person who desires to change for the better deserves a second chance. However, there are consequences of certain behaviors that still must be addressed after someone has committed an egregious act. This includes the restriction and/ or revocation of some benefits, such as privacy, that were once available to that person before the act was committed. I do not believe that sex offenders should be allowed to live in campus housing. Strange and Banning (2001) stated, “being free from physical threat and harm and experiencing a fundamental psychological sense of belonging on campus are important conditions for the pursuit of opportunities to learn, develop, and grow.” I believe that allowing a sex offender to live adjacent to, for instance, a first year student, would impede upon their sense of safety and could negatively impact their successful integration into the campus community. Additionally, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs designates safety as a top priority just after breathing and food. This would need to be closely considered when creating a master plan on how to address sex offenders on campus.
Just as sex offender information is public record, students in classes should have access to information about sex offenders on campus. As an administrator, I would not promote the broadcast of information but I would help to ensure that the information is readily available upon request. I would want to protect the safety and sense of belonging of the sex offender who may be attempting to re-gain a new life, but my first priority would be that of the general population of students who expect to earn a quality education in a safe environment.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Financial aid - Troy and Stephen, from my days of working in financial aid...yes that is true regarding where the money is coming from as to whether or not the scholarship funds can be specified for race or some other. If the money is coming from a private source, it can be specified for any factor (such as being left-handed) the donor wants it to be. Troy, regarding your question about it being advertised on a state funded website, I think that is an interesting issue. I think you bring up a good point about it being state money used to operate the website. I hope that never gets challenged, though, because I personally think we need to make these as easy to find as possible.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Financial aid - Troy and Stephen, from my days of working in financial aid...yes that is true regarding where the money is coming from as to whether or not the scholarship funds can be specified for race or some other. If the money is coming from a private source, it can be specified for any factor (such as being left-handed) the donor wants it to be. Troy, regarding your question about it being advertised on a state funded website, I think that is an interesting issue. I think you bring up a good point about it being state money used to operate the website. I hope that never gets challenged, though, because I personally think we need to make these as easy to find as possible.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Admissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Posing as Cynthia Newhouse Bacheller, here's your instructor relaying her post:
ReplyDeleteAdmissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Financial aid - Troy and Stephen, from the reading and from my days of working in financial aid...yes, is does appear true regarding where the money is coming from as to whether or not the scholarship funds can be specified for race or some other factor. If the money is coming from a private source, it can be specified for any factor (such as being left-handed) the donor wants it to be. Troy, regarding your question about it being advertised on a state funded website, I think that is an interesting issue. I think you bring up a good point about it being state money used to operate the website. I hope that never gets challenged, though, because I personally think we need to make these as easy to find as possible.
Posting for Cynthia:
ReplyDeleteAdmissions - Viancca, thank you for stating the fact these two concepts (affirmative action and quotas) are not synonymous. Also, I completely agree with you about the issue being at the K-12 level and spilling over into higher education. If our K-12 education system provided a more equal education for all, then we would not be in the business of having a need for affirmative action, so long as the admissions procedures only addressed academic competitiveness components like GPA, test scores, and other aptitude measures. However, since there is a great discrepancy in the education provided, for instance, by my neighborhood area schools (Old Seminole Heights - primarily minority and low-income) versus New Tampa area schools, my children would receive a much poorer education in the public school assigned to our area. If I was a single parent, I could not afford to transport my kids to a better public school (selected through Hillsborough County choice) or to a private school. I completely recognize that it is the privilege I have been afforded by growing-up in a middle-class, military family that provided me with the education I received which equipped me for college level academic work. I also acknowledge that I am lucky to be able to transport my children to better-equipped schools in Hillsborough County so that they, too, can get a better education. But why should it be that if I can afford to live in a certain part of town or self-transport my kids to a better district, that my kids will get a better education (in the public school system)? I have that choice, but parents in low-income neighborhoods do not have that choice. It is the K-12 system that needs to be fixed; however, the burden falls to post-secondary education.
I don't think that we need to provide certain points or require a certain number of openings to be given to certain people based on race, ethnicity, etc. However, I do think we do need to find a way to provide advanced educational opportunities for those who did not get an equal foundation to from the start. If we can't fix the K-12 system, then I think we most certainly have a responsibility to provide access (with ample support) to advanced education for anyone desirous of seeking it. So, Viancca, I concur with your insight and concerns on this issue.
Financial aid - Troy and Stephen, from the reading and from my days of working in financial aid...yes, is does appear true regarding where the money is coming from as to whether or not the scholarship funds can be specified for race or some other factor. If the money is coming from a private source, it can be specified for any factor (such as being left-handed) the donor wants it to be. Troy, regarding your question about it being advertised on a state funded website, I think that is an interesting issue. I think you bring up a good point about it being state money used to operate the website. I hope that never gets challenged, though, because I personally think we need to make these as easy to find as possible.
Well I would like to thank all participants for responding over their holiday. You all deserve bonus points!!! Secondly, affirmative action and financial aid post are truly thought provoking.
ReplyDeleteI have mixed emotions about this from a personal perspective. I like and appreciate the diverse opinions in our classes here at USF. It opens the discussions to a broad perspective and sheds light into other's thought processes.
As a former teacher, I hope that the K-12 system and head start would offer equal footing for all students regardless of race/ethnicity/socioeconomic status.
While higher education has historically been set up for the elite/upper class, diversity measure have gone a long ways. However, as a graduate of an HBCU I have seen some obstacles that students may face. For example, before I was attending USF for this PhD program, I had applied to NC State University (home of Dr. Knowles and principles of andragogy). My master's was from an HBCU and I had met all of the requirements for the PhD program at NCSU. All of the faculty from the HBCU stated that no one from there had been admitted into the NCSU program. True to their advice, I was declined admission. I set up an appointment to meet with the chair of the admissions committee and was waiting for her outside her office. She walked past me about 3-4 times and started talking about how she was supposed to meet this guy from the HBCU and "true to form he was late." Mind you I was sitting right there in front of her office; so I walked up to her and introduced myself and her entire demeanor changed immediately. She stated that I could take 3 classes and reapply for admission in the spring again and that would be the only thing that I could do to improve my ratings in admission process.
Now, do I think there was a thought that I might be black, I do. If someone had better scores, GPA, etc. I could understand not being admitted. However, just because I was coming for the HBCU, I don't think that is grounds for not admitting.
In the future, I hope higher education can not have a need for affirmative action. However, I am just not sure it's time is right now, right this second.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure we all agree that diversity in higher education institutions is necessary for the education of our students. The courts have ruled that affirmative action based on quotas or additional points is discriminatory; however, admissions decisions that look at race as part of the holistic application or look at race as a plus factor are acceptable. I think public institutions in particular need to focus more on the concept of access to the university and determine the best procedures to promote this access.
ReplyDeleteAt the Undergraduate Admissions Office at USF, you don't really see a competition between applicants in the initial admissions process. Decisions are based on a grid that looks at academic success predictors (GPA, Standardized Test Scores, college prep courses, additional sciences, maths, foreign language, etc.). Basically, the applications aren't evaluated side-by-side.
There are Summer Bridge Programs (FSI and SSS) that assist in access for those who are first generation college students. (A lot of times, those considered have a solid GPA but low test scores.) These students are afforded the opportunity to start courses in the summer with a cohort. They take the same courses, attend the same seminars and receive hand-on advising. Essentially, they are provided with a supportive community to ease the high school to college transition. These programs increase the diversity at USF, as a lot of first generation college students are in racial and socio-economic minorities. These are fantastic programs, because they not only provide access to university, but set students up for success by providing the support they need.
Professional schools (Medical, Law, Vet, etc.) have a tougher time in the access/affirmative action process as their application processes bring in more subjective measures (interviews, references, etc.). I liked Justice Douglas's explanation of the uniform or race-neutral plan. He states that institutions should look at "an applicant's prior achievements in light of the barrier that he had to overcome" (p. 353). The text's 17 guidelines are worth noting as schools decide what they can do to improve access.
While I think we all should strive to create diverse institutions, I am not always positive the heart of the debate lies with admission standards but rather with ensuring all schools are affordable options for all students. I support admissions offices using their professional disretion with regards to applicants of level qualifications such as equal test scores and gpa. For instance, if two students have the same academic credentials and institutions are seeking increased diversity, then the student in the minority should be given a fair and equal shot. This is where I think Affirmative Action should focus. There shoudl be more scholarship opportunities for minority students. Scholarships are not typically considered federal aid, but more merit based or privately funded and this should be implemented in most recruitment plans. When I worked at Duke they used concentric financial aid modeling and had a huge endowment to make it highly affordable for students in need. While I understand Duke may be an exception to the rule, I think it was highly admirably. The other issue again lies with public v. private institutions. Affirmative Action typically only applies to public institutions and there are no admission regulations regarding this issue for private schools.
ReplyDelete