复旦大学：《英语论辩与思辨》课程阅读材料_The Sad Irony of Affirmative Action

The sad irony of Affirmative Action Gail heriot N 2003, THE SUPREME COURT held that the University of Michigans law school could substantially relax its admissions standards in order to admit a"critical mass"of African-American and Hispanic students Many observers interpreted that decision-Grutter v. Bollinger-as an open-ended embrace of affirmative action. The University of Texas was among the many universities emboldened to ramp up its use of race-preferential admissions policies. In 2003, the university already had in plac ce an admissio ns policy designed to raise the number of under-represented minority students attending its flagship campus in Austin by admitting the"top 1o% of the graduates of each Texas high school without regard to SAT scores. Soon after the grutter de cision, however, the university announced that it was still dissatisfied with the diversity of the student body at Austin, 2r% of which was composed of under-represented minorities(16. 9%0 Hispanic and 4.5%0 African- merican), and that the school would be implementing race preferences to boost that diy n of the stu- dent body composed of Hispanics and African-Americans rose to 25% The result was a lawsuit. The plaintiff-Abigail Fishe oman from Texas whose academic credentials were good, but not quite up to the standards that whites and asians must meet in order to gain admission. They were, however, above those necessary for African- American and Hispanic students. Fisher, who is white, was rejected and wound up attending the less prestigious and ( for out-of-state stu- dents)more expensive Louisiana State University. Her case--Fisher u University of Texas-was argued before the Sur preme Court in o It will be decided sometime in the coming months GAIL HERIOT is a professor of law at the University of San Diego and a memberof the U.S. Commission on Civil rights Copyright2013.allrightsreservedSeewww.Nationalaffairs.comformoreinformation

78 Ga il Her iot is a professor of law at the University of San Diego and a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Copyright 2013. All rights reserved. See www.NationalAffairs.com for more information. The Sad Irony of Affirmative Action Gail Heriot I n 2003, the Supreme Court held that the University of Michigan’s law school could substantially relax its admissions standards in order to admit a “critical mass” of African-American and Hispanic students. Many observers interpreted that decision—Grutter v. Bollinger—as an open-ended embrace of affirmative action. The University of Texas was among the many universities emboldened to ramp up its use of race-preferential admissions policies. In 2003, the university already had in place an admissions policy designed to raise the number of under-represented minority students attending its flagship campus in Austin by admitting the “top 10%” of the graduates of each Texas high school without regard to SAT scores. Soon after the Grutter de￾cision, however, the university announced that it was still dissatisfied with the diversity of the student body at Austin, 21% of which was composed of under-represented minorities (16.9% Hispanic and 4.5% African￾American), and that the school would be implementing race preferences to boost that diversity. Under the new policy, the proportion of the stu￾dent body composed of Hispanics and African-Americans rose to 25%. The result was a lawsuit. The plaintiff—Abigail Fisher—is a young woman from Texas whose academic credentials were good, but not quite up to the standards that whites and Asians must meet in order to gain admission. They were, however, above those necessary for African￾American and Hispanic students. Fisher, who is white, was rejected, and wound up attending the less prestigious and (for out-of-state stu￾dents) more expensive Louisiana State University. Her case—Fisher v. University of Texas—was argued before the Supreme Court in October. It will be decided sometime in the coming months

Gail Heriot. The Sad Irony of Affirmative Action The Court may decide Fisher on narrow grounds. There are several mensions along which the University of Texas's race-preferential ad- missions policies are more aggressive than those in Grutter. For exampl Grutter permitted Michigan to use racially preferential admissions poli- cies to admit a"critical mass"of African-Americans and Hispanics to its overall student body. Texas, however, takes the position that it needs "critical mass"not just in its student body as a whole, but in each class- room,program, and major. Under the "top 109policy, Texas had likely already achieved a"critical mass"of minorities across its student body. Classroom-level"critical mass, "however, requires much more extensive references; it could conceivably justify racial discrimination in course registration and other more aggressive discriminatory practices Affirmative-action supporters worry, however, that the Court will take the opportunity to cut back severely on Grutter. They point to changes in the Court's personnel-most notably Justice Sandra Day O Connor's replacement with Justice Samuel Alito-as cause for con- cern. Since Grutter was a 5-4 decision, it may not take much to swing the Court in the opposite direction The biggest change since Grutter, though, has nothing to do with Court membership. It is the mounting empirical evidence that race preferences are doing more harm than good-even for their supposed beneficiaries. If this evidence is correct. we now have fewer African- American physicians, scientists, and engineers than we would have had using race-neutral admissions policies. We have fewer college professors and lawyers, too. Put more bluntly, affirmative action has backfired. THE CONSEQUENCES OF MISMATCH How could such a miscalculation about the effects of affirmative action occur?As University of California, Los Angeles, law professor Richard Sander and legal journalist Stuart Taylor, Jr, describe in their impor tant, recently released book, Mismatch: How Afirmative Action Hurts Students It,'s Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won,'t Admit It,one consequence of widespread race-preferential policies is that minority students tend to enroll in colleges and universities where their entering academic credentials put them toward the bottom of the class While academically gifted under-represented minority students are hardly rare, there are not enough to satisfy the demand of top schools. Whe the most prestigious schools relax their admissions policies in order to 79

Gail Heriot · The Sad Irony of Affirmative Action 79 The Court may decide Fisher on narrow grounds. There are several dimensions along which the University of Texas’s race-preferential ad￾missions policies are more aggressive than those in Grutter. For example, Grutter permitted Michigan to use racially preferential admissions poli￾cies to admit a “critical mass” of African-Americans and Hispanics to its overall student body. Texas, however, takes the position that it needs “critical mass” not just in its student body as a whole, but in each class￾room, program, and major. Under the “top 10%” policy, Texas had likely already achieved a “critical mass” of minorities across its student body. Classroom-level “critical mass,” however, requires much more extensive preferences; it could conceivably justify racial discrimination in course registration and other more aggressive discriminatory practices. Affirmative-action supporters worry, however, that the Court will take the opportunity to cut back severely on Grutter. They point to changes in the Court’s personnel—most notably Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s replacement with Justice Samuel Alito—as cause for con￾cern. Since Grutter was a 5-4 decision, it may not take much to swing the Court in the opposite direction. The biggest change since Grutter, though, has nothing to do with Court membership. It is the mounting empirical evidence that race preferences are doing more harm than good—even for their supposed beneficiaries. If this evidence is correct, we now have fewer African￾American physicians, scientists, and engineers than we would have had using race-neutral admissions policies. We have fewer college professors and lawyers, too. Put more bluntly, affirmative action has backfired. The Consequences of Mismatch How could such a miscalculation about the effects of affirmative action occur? As University of California, Los Angeles, law professor Richard Sander and legal journalist Stuart Taylor, Jr., describe in their impor￾tant, recently released book, Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It’s Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won’t Admit It, one consequence of widespread race-preferential policies is that minority students tend to enroll in colleges and universities where their entering academic credentials put them toward the bottom of the class. While academically gifted under-represented minority students are hardly rare, there are not enough to satisfy the demand of top schools. When the most prestigious schools relax their admissions policies in order to

NATIONAL AFFAIRS WINTER 2013 dmit more minority students, they start a chain reaction, resulting in a substantial credentials gap at nearly all selective schools. For example, according to data released by the University of Texas in connection with Fisher, the mean SaT scores(out of 24oo)and mean high-school grade-point averages(on a 4.0 scale) varied widely by race for the entering class of 2009. For Asians, the numbers were 199I and 3.07 whites were at 1914 and 3.04; Hispanics at 1794 and 2.83; and African Americans at 1524 and 2. 57. The SAT scores for the Asian students placed them in the 93rd percentile of 2009 SAT-takers nationwide; the African- American students, meanwhile, were at the 52nd percentile This has the predictable effect of lowering the college or pro school grades the averag s /ill outpem theirs, most students perform inority student earns. And the reason is simple: While some students erform their entering credential just as some students will underperfor in the range that their entering credentials suggest. No serious supporter of race-preferential admissions denies this. In their highly inFuential defense of affirmative action, The Shape of the River: Long-Term Consequences of Considering Race in College and University Admissions(discussed later in more detail), former Ivy League university presidents William Bowen and Derek Bok candidly admitted that low college grades for affirmative-action beneficiaries present a"sobering picture. "This is an understatement: The average African-American first- year law student has a grade-point average in the bottom Io% of his or her class. And while undergraduate GPAs for affirmative-action benefi ciaries aren't quite as disappointing, that is in part because, as explained below, affirmative-action beneficiaries tend to shy away from subjects like science and engineering, which are graded on a tougher curve than other subjects Oneexample that helps illustrate the consequences of mismatch-how lower entering academic credentials depress both academic performance and grades, and how lower-than-average academic performance and grades in turn harm professional ambitions -is the field of academia In 2003, too late to be cited to the Court in Grutter, Stephen Cole and Elinor Barber published Increasing Faculty Diversity: The Occupational Choices of High-Achieving Minority Students. The authors'mission was to determine why more members of minority groups are not at- tracted to careers in the academy. The authors'conclusions, reached after extensively questioning 7, 612 high-achieving undergraduates at

National Affairs · Winter 2013 80 admit more minority students, they start a chain reaction, resulting in a substantial credentials gap at nearly all selective schools. For example, according to data released by the University of Texas in connection with Fisher, the mean SAT scores (out of 2400) and mean high-school grade-point averages (on a 4.0 scale) varied widely by race for the entering class of 2009. For Asians, the numbers were 1991 and 3.07; whites were at 1914 and 3.04; Hispanics at 1794 and 2.83; and African￾Americans at 1524 and 2.57. The SAT scores for the Asian students placed them in the 93rd percentile of 2009 SAT-takers nationwide; the African￾American students, meanwhile, were at the 52nd percentile. This has the predictable effect of lowering the college or professional￾school grades the average minority student earns. And the reason is simple: While some students will outperform their entering credentials, just as some students will underperform theirs, most students perform in the range that their entering credentials suggest. No serious supporter of race-preferential admissions denies this. In their highly influential defense of affirmative action, The Shape of the River: Long-Term Consequences of Considering Race in College and University Admissions (discussed later in more detail), former Ivy League university presidents William Bowen and Derek Bok candidly admitted that low college grades for affirmative-action beneficiaries present a “sobering picture.” This is an understatement: The average African-American first￾year law student has a grade-point average in the bottom 10% of his or her class. And while undergraduate GPAs for affirmative-action benefi￾ciaries aren’t quite as disappointing, that is in part because, as explained below, affirmative-action beneficiaries tend to shy away from subjects like science and engineering, which are graded on a tougher curve than other subjects. One example that helps illustrate the consequences of mismatch—how lower entering academic credentials depress both academic performance and grades, and how lower-than-average academic performance and grades in turn harm professional ambitions—is the field of academia. In 2003, too late to be cited to the Court in Grutter, Stephen Cole and Elinor Barber published Increasing Faculty Diversity: The Occupational Choices of High-Achieving Minority Students. The authors’ mission was to determine why more members of minority groups are not at￾tracted to careers in the academy. The authors’ conclusions, reached after extensively questioning 7,612 high-achieving undergraduates at

Gail Heriot. The Sad Irony of Affirmative Action 34 colleges and universities, pointed to race-preferential admissions as he culprit. "It is a fact, "Cole and Barber wrote "that in virtually all selective schools.. where racial preferences in admission is practiced, the ma- of African American students end up in the lower quarter of their class. " Lower grades sap the academic self-confidence of African American students at elite schools, according to the authors, which in turn causes them to abandon their freshman interests in academic ca reers. Their counterparts at non-elite schools, on the other hand, are more likely to persist and to ultimately succeed. These counterparts enyoy school, in part because they correctly perceive that they are good at it, and they want to stay on campus to pursue careers in academia Cole and Barber found that the effect of grades on career ambitions was in fact substantial. The authors noted that among African-American students with GPAs at or near 2.6, only about 4% wanted to become col- lege professors. Among those with GPAs at or near 4.o, however, the number was over 2000 These findings build on long-established observations about the im- portance of grades and perceived achievement. Indeed, as early as 1966 University of Chicago sociologist James Davis published research dem- onstrating that a student who attends a school that is out of his academic league is often put at a professional disadvantage. In "The Campus as a Frog Pond: An Application of the Theory of Relative Deprivation to Career Decisions of College Men, " Davis controlled for entering aca- demic credentials and compared students at schools of different academic ank, examining their career choices to see which pursued "high perfor- (in law, medicine, science, etc. ) He found that college GPA correlated more strongly to career choice than did the academic rank of the school attended. He explained this finding in terms of the "theory of relative deprivation, under which students can be expected to measure their own potential in comparison to their immediate class- mates, generally using one another's grades as"the accepted yardstick. Davis put his conclusion in somewhat quaint terms. "Counselors and parents might well consider the drawbacks as well as the advantages of sending a boy to a fine college, if, when doing so, it is fairly certain he will end up in the bottom ranks of his graduating class, he wrote Davis's research spawned a cottage industry in sociological studies on the hazards of being a"small frog" in a"big pond

Gail Heriot · The Sad Irony of Affirmative Action 81 34 colleges and universities, pointed to race-preferential admissions as the culprit. “It is a fact,” Cole and Barber wrote, “that in virtually all selective schools. . .where racial preferences in admission is practiced, the ma￾jority of African American students end up in the lower quarter of their class.” Lower grades sap the academic self-confidence of African￾American students at elite schools, according to the authors, which in turn causes them to abandon their freshman interests in academic ca￾reers. Their counterparts at non-elite schools, on the other hand, are more likely to persist and to ultimately succeed. These counterparts enjoy school, in part because they correctly perceive that they are good at it, and they want to stay on campus to pursue careers in academia. Cole and Barber found that the effect of grades on career ambitions was in fact substantial. The authors noted that among African-American students with GPAs at or near 2.6, only about 4% wanted to become col￾lege professors. Among those with GPAs at or near 4.0, however, the number was over 20%. These findings build on long-established observations about the im￾portance of grades and perceived achievement. Indeed, as early as 1966, University of Chicago sociologist James Davis published research dem￾onstrating that a student who attends a school that is out of his academic league is often put at a professional disadvantage. In “The Campus as a Frog Pond: An Application of the Theory of Relative Deprivation to Career Decisions of College Men,” Davis controlled for entering aca￾demic credentials and compared students at schools of different academic rank, examining their career choices to see which pursued “high perfor￾mance” careers (in law, medicine, science, etc.). He found that college GPA correlated more strongly to career choice than did the academic rank of the school attended. He explained this finding in terms of the “theory of relative deprivation,” under which students can be expected to measure their own potential in comparison to their immediate class￾mates, generally using one another’s grades as “the accepted yardstick.” Davis put his conclusion in somewhat quaint terms. “Counselors and parents might well consider the drawbacks as well as the advantages of sending a boy to a ‘fine’ college, if, when doing so, it is fairly certain he will end up in the bottom ranks of his graduating class,” he wrote. Davis’s research spawned a cottage industry in sociological studies on the hazards of being a “small frog” in a “big pond

NATIONAL AFFAIRS WINTER 2013 Further support for Cole and Barber's conclusion comes from an nexpected source: First Lady Michelle Obama's 1985 senior thesis at Princeton University, titled"Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community. "The future first lady mailed a questionnaire to 400 randomly selected black alumni; though the response rate was not overwhelming, the responses of the 89 black alumni who completed the questionnaire gave reason for concern. Black alumni were asked whether they felt"much more comfortable with Blacks, ""much more comfortable with Whites, "or"about equally comfortable with Blacks and Whites"in various contexts during three different periods in their lives-before attending Princeton, while students at Princeton, and af- ter leaving Princeton Those who argue that race-preferential admissions foster integration might be surprised by Obama's findings In the category of "Intellectual Comfort, "the number of black alumni who said that they felt "much more comfortable with Blacks "than with whites in an intellectual set- ting went up upon attending Princeton. In their pre-Princeton years, 26% of the respondents were at greater intellectual ease with fellow blacks than with whites; during their Princeton years, however, the number climbed to 37%. This sense of alienation from white students did not appear in other categories of interaction: For"Sporting Comfort, " the change was in the opposite direction(26% felt more comfortable with fellow blacks prior to Princeton, compared with 25% who felt more comfortable with fellow blacks while at Princeton). In the categories of Dating Comfort"and"Business Comfort, " the proportions of respon dents who felt"much more comfortable with Blacks"were unchanged It is difficult to see how reducing the "Intellectual Comfort"that black students feel with whites can lead to greater black achievement. Yet this is just one of the many perverse effects of affirmative action and the academic mismatch it causes SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING Minority students' lack of interest in academic careers offers one ex ample of the consequences of mismatch, but the strongest evidence comes from the fields of science and engineering. Contrary to what many might expect, college-bound African-American and Hispani students are just as interested as white students in majoring in science and engineer ring. Indeed, empirical studies show that they tend to be a

National Affairs · Winter 2013 82 Further support for Cole and Barber’s conclusion comes from an unexpected source: First Lady Michelle Obama’s 1985 senior thesis at Princeton University, titled “Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community.” The future first lady mailed a questionnaire to 400 randomly selected black alumni; though the response rate was not overwhelming, the responses of the 89 black alumni who completed the questionnaire gave reason for concern. Black alumni were asked whether they felt “much more comfortable with Blacks,” “much more comfortable with Whites,” or “about equally comfortable with Blacks and Whites” in various contexts during three different periods in their lives—before attending Princeton, while students at Princeton, and af￾ter leaving Princeton. Those who argue that race-preferential admissions foster integration might be surprised by Obama’s findings. In the category of “Intellectual Comfort,” the number of black alumni who said that they felt “much more comfortable with Blacks” than with whites in an intellectual set￾ting went up upon attending Princeton. In their pre-Princeton years, 26% of the respondents were at greater intellectual ease with fellow blacks than with whites; during their Princeton years, however, the number climbed to 37%. This sense of alienation from white students did not appear in other categories of interaction: For “Sporting Comfort,” the change was in the opposite direction (26% felt more comfortable with fellow blacks prior to Princeton, compared with 25% who felt more comfortable with fellow blacks while at Princeton). In the categories of “Dating Comfort” and “Business Comfort,” the proportions of respon￾dents who felt “much more comfortable with Blacks” were unchanged. It is difficult to see how reducing the “Intellectual Comfort” that black students feel with whites can lead to greater black achievement. Yet this is just one of the many perverse effects of affirmative action and the academic mismatch it causes. Science and Engineering Minority students’ lack of interest in academic careers offers one ex￾ample of the consequences of mismatch, but the strongest evidence comes from the fields of science and engineering. Contrary to what many might expect, college-bound African-American and Hispanic students are just as interested as white students in majoring in science and engineering. Indeed, empirical studies show that they tend to be a