Them vs. Me
Fixing educations flaws, Moll and Jones clash over affirmative action
Moll v Jones
Issue date: 2/21/05 Section: Op/Ed
David Moll says
While the practice of considering minority status with regard to college admission was banned in California by the passage of Proposition 209, the rulings made in its wake are notably vague. As a result, the issue of minority status as an influence upon the college admission process still persists.
As recently as last June, the Supreme Court ruled in Grutter v. Bollinger that universities were justified in considering minority status to preserve a "critical mass" of minority students, even if students with higher test scores and grade point averages are denied admission. This ruling seems to fly in the face of Prop 209, and reaffirms its 1978 decision in Bakke v. Board of Regents, the landmark case in which the US Supreme Court ruled that schools can take race into account in admissions, but cannot use a quota-based admissions process.
But beyond the legal issues lies a much more grave problem of students being accepted into colleges under-prepared for the curriculum.
The fundamental problems with these policies are that they place ill-fitting patches on the lackluster preparation public schools provide. The quality of instruction varies widely across the economic strata of American society, and students who are educated in school districts with small budgets and small tax-bases suffer the most. As illuminated by the shortcoming of Bush's No Child Left Behind program, public schools in small tax-base communities (read minorities) have shown serious issues with turnover and budget limitations that directly affect the quality of education they can provide.
The end result is saddening. High schools are graduating students who are not truly ready for college-level instruction. These deficiencies need to be corrected before these students are handed their diplomas. By admitting under-prepared students, the universities take on a burden they were never supposed to face. The additional support programs raise tuition rates across the board and even with such programs in place; there is a strong tendency for these under-prepared and hence overworked students to simply drop out.
While the practice of considering minority status with regard to college admission was banned in California by the passage of Proposition 209, the rulings made in its wake are notably vague. As a result, the issue of minority status as an influence upon the college admission process still persists.
As recently as last June, the Supreme Court ruled in Grutter v. Bollinger that universities were justified in considering minority status to preserve a "critical mass" of minority students, even if students with higher test scores and grade point averages are denied admission. This ruling seems to fly in the face of Prop 209, and reaffirms its 1978 decision in Bakke v. Board of Regents, the landmark case in which the US Supreme Court ruled that schools can take race into account in admissions, but cannot use a quota-based admissions process.
But beyond the legal issues lies a much more grave problem of students being accepted into colleges under-prepared for the curriculum.
The fundamental problems with these policies are that they place ill-fitting patches on the lackluster preparation public schools provide. The quality of instruction varies widely across the economic strata of American society, and students who are educated in school districts with small budgets and small tax-bases suffer the most. As illuminated by the shortcoming of Bush's No Child Left Behind program, public schools in small tax-base communities (read minorities) have shown serious issues with turnover and budget limitations that directly affect the quality of education they can provide.
The end result is saddening. High schools are graduating students who are not truly ready for college-level instruction. These deficiencies need to be corrected before these students are handed their diplomas. By admitting under-prepared students, the universities take on a burden they were never supposed to face. The additional support programs raise tuition rates across the board and even with such programs in place; there is a strong tendency for these under-prepared and hence overworked students to simply drop out.