Affirmative Action

DISCLAIMER This presentation does not imply any racial agenda or discrimination. The views that are going to be presented in this presentation are solely to show each side of the argument.

Overview Definition of Affirmative Action History of Affirmative Action Opposing views of Affirmative Action Conclusion Class Discussion

Definition of Affirmative Action Specific actions in recruitment, hiring, upgrading and other areas designed and taken for the purpose of eliminating the present effects of past discrimination, or to prevent discrimination. (

July 2, 1964 Civil Rights Act signed by President Lyndon Johnson. Prohibits discrimination of all kinds based on race, color, religion, or natural origin Timeline June 28, 1978 Regents of the University of California v. Bakke This case imposed limitations on affirmative action to ensure that providing greater opportunities for minorities did not come at the expense of the rights of the majority. (Reverse Discrimination) July 19, 1995 White House Guidelines on Affirmative Action Called for the elimination of any program that “a) creates a quota; b) creates preferences for unqualified individuals, c) creates reverse discrimination; or d) continues even after its equal opportunity purposes have been achieved. November 3, 1997 Proposition 209 in California State ban on all forms of Affirmative Action. December 13, 2000 U of Michigan undergrad Affirmative Action policy Federal judge ruled that the use of race as a factor in admissions at U of M was constitutional. March 27, 2001 U of Michigan Law School A different judge drew an opposite conclusion, invalidating the law school’s policy and ruling that “intellectual diversity bears no obvious or necessary relationship to racial diversity.” May 14, 2001 – Decision Reversed June 23, 2003 Supreme Court Upholds Affirmative Action in University Admissions Upholds the U of M Law School’s policy, ruling that race can be one of many factors considered… it furthers “a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.” (5-4) - Ruled (6-3) that U of M’s undergraduate admissions program (point system) had to be modified.

Current System Do you believe in affirmative action and how it is currently enforced in higher education? –Enrollment in college: White: 48% (18-21 yrs.) African Americans: 11% (18-21 yrs.) Hispanics: 10% (18-21yrs.)

Different States, Different Laws –California “Effective January 1, 1997, the University of California shall not use race, religion, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin as criteria for ‘admissions in exception’ to UC-eligibility requirements.” - OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY –Michigan Supreme court ruled that race can be one of many factors considered… it furthers “a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body”.

Is CU’s policy on Affirmative Action making a positive change? CU Boulder Enrollment Fall 2002 Total Enrollment27,954 Total Racial Minority3,60913% American Indian209.7% Asian American1,4695.2% African American4161.5% Hispanic Latino1,5155.4%

Affirmative Action at CU "The only numeric formula in the admissions process that is used at CU- Boulder is … calculated only on the basis of high grade-point average or rank and SAT or ACT test scores, and does not take any personal attributes of a student into account.”- Richard L. Byyny

Class Discussion: Is there a need for affirmative action? How would you change affirmative action to make it more effective? –Fund high school's differently –Keep affirmative action laws at the state level –Nationalize affirmative action laws

Sources ml#summaryhttp:// ml#summary ction/faq.htmlhttp:// ction/faq.html timeline1.htmlhttp:// timeline1.html