Adam                                                                                         April 20, 2004

Writing for the 21^st Century                                                                   Ms. Gokturk

Moving to an era of Need-Based College Admission Preferences

In the early 1960s, colleges instituted admissions policies that provided advantages to under represented minorities (URM) on their campuses in an effort to achieve a diverse student body.  Such race-based preference policies have been the subject of debate as being discriminatory to non-minorities and several lawsuits have reached the Supreme Court over the years in the hope of providing clarification to the forty-year old initiative of Affirmative Action.  Many people now believe that a policy of providing preferences on a need (not race) basis would be more equitable in assisting those might not otherwise be able to gain admission to an institution of higher learning.

In an effort to mitigate long standing social injustices, the policy of Affirmative Action was instituted as part of Lyndon Johnson’s goal of creating his, “Great Society.” Almost immediately, these race-based preferences became the subject of dispute, especially when used as part of college admissions procedures.  The policy of admitting someone less qualified than another, solely on the basis of their race resulted in litigation that has done little to salve the wounds of those on either side the issue.

In 2003, the Supreme Court ruled in the landmark, Gruter/Gratz cases where white individuals sued the University of Michigan’s Law and Undergraduate schools respectively for admission, alleging their rejections were illegal.  The court ruled that Ms. Gruter was not discriminated against at the law school since their review policy took race into consideration only as part of a larger review.  However, Ms. Gratz was ordered admitted since the undergraduate school used a point system that systematically awarded additional admission points for being in a racial minority.  The Court found this blanket policy illegal and ordered the school to develop a policy that would meet the need of achieving diversity without resorting to a strictly numerical or quota system.     

In addition to the legal challenges, public opinion has moved markedly away from using race as a criterion for preferences.  In a study conducted by the Washington Post, 65% of the respondents indicated that they prefer providing preference to low-income students regardless of race.  Such a policy would address what are felt to be the major reasons for academic disparities: parental education and socio-economic disadvantages of children. 

At the University of California, when race-neutral policies were put in place as a result of Proposition 209 being passed by voters in 1997, black enrollment at UC Berkeley (arguably the most prestigious of the eight school system) decreased markedly, but minority enrollment at many of the other UC schools increased to the point that more minorities are enrolled in the UC system now than before Proposition 209 was passed.

There are certainly valid reasons for providing admissions preferences to those have not had the same advantages as other through no fault of their own.   By using a need-based system, colleges can provide deserving students a chance to better themselves while moving towards the Supreme Court’s stated vision of eliminating race-based preferences in the next twenty-five years.