Public Controversy

For our public controversy group project, my group and I discussed several different topics. At one point, the topic of affirmative action came up (spoiler: we didn’t pick it), and it definitely brought up several opinions. As a minority in America, it’s simple for me to make an opinion about it since it is something that personally affects me.

I believe that affirmative action policies have good intentions, and they are by no means meant to add difficulty to others’ lives. However, by giving advantages to others solely based on race, even though it is an effort to lessen the hardship faced by groups in the past, it is discriminatory by nature. This is known as reverse discrimination. Affirmative action functions on the assumption that all people of a certain race have the same advantages, disadvantages, income, opportunities, etc., and that can’t possibly be true. Perhaps it would be more beneficial to consider things such as income instead, which I believe is a better representation of hardship than race. Honestly, I think it would be very progressive of our society to support race-blind applications and opportunities. This is not a topic that many organizations like to openly discuss because discrimination of any kind is strange to talk about. In fact, many organizations do the exact opposite and always add that they are an equal opportunity organization, which means that no one can be discriminated against due to gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. Penn State falls under this category, and they maintain that they do not consider race when looking at applications. However, I find it peculiar that there is always an optional area to mark your race on applications of any kind. It’s always for “statistic purposes” and I believe that,  but perhaps it would be better after the decision is made, or could be done with more anonmity just in case.

I have held this opinion regarding affirmative action since I first learned about it in my government class, and at this time, I was under the assumption that these types of programs helped all minorities alike. However, I actually found out that affirmative action policies put Asians at a disadvantage. For example, I have to score, on average, 140 points higher on my SATs to be given the same consideration as my white counterpart when applying to colleges. The fact that a group of people would have to score higher based on generalizations made about their race is just absurd.

Diversity is of course important, and it should be to any organization. Diversity of thought is necessary, and, as the melting pot, it is a great advantage for America to have. Penn State knows the benefits of diversity, and it also knows that it is lacking in it. I feel certain that this is something that they actively try to improve, but Penn State claims to not consider race in admissions. Instead, it just tries to recruit students from more diverse areas within the country and state. Penn State also tries to strengthen and create new ties with schools in other countries through exchanges or other methods. This encourages more international students to apply here. I’m supportive of these methods, because they are seem much more ethical and less controversial by far. There are several ways that we can improve our diversity without having to consider race in applications.

 

One thought on “Public Controversy

  1. I also learned about affirmative action in my high school government class but what I found surprising was the issue that not all minorities are regarded equally under this policy. The fact that you would have to score 140 points higher on your SATs just to be competitive for college admissions is ridiculous and undermines that point of affirmative action in the first place. I think that this is an important issue in America and that people are going to be talking about this for a long time and that it was interesting to read your point of view as someone who was been directed affected by this.

Leave a Reply