a bum from jersey

and he is not holding anything back.

Thursday, March 24, 2005

legacy preferences and affirmative action are different said the bum

mr. speckles wrote about affirmative action and legacies and basically explained why each one exists.* personally, the bum isn't fine with either but does see the necessity for affirmative action but not for legacies.

first the bum would like to inform people about who 'benefits' from affirmative action. sadly, most people (probably more white people than any other racial group) do not know its not just minorities who benefit but so do white women. in fact, white women are the biggest beneficiaries. sorry to disappoint you white folks, but your people benefit too so stop saying affirmative action is racist because its not. a few civil right statutes aren't going to change centuries of oppression and/or break down a well established caste system.

anyway, the bum sees no need for legacies. in mr. speckles piece he states the argument that the the children of alumni are likely to succeed in the environment that their parents succeeded in. the bum understands the argument. if the parent was successful and recognized that they were successful, they would probably instill in their children the same values that they were taught, better preparing their children to succeed in the same environment that they too succeeded in. still though, the bum does not sees a need for legacies.

if these children are given the skills to succeed in the environment that their parents succeed in why should they need the legacy? they should be able to get in on their own merits. also, the bum is not even sure if their parents success means they are likely to succeed too. the bum assumes colleges and universities have evolved over time so the environment might be different even though the location is the same. who is to say that the child or even the parent would succeed in this new environment? the fact of the matter is legacies are no guarantee of success, they are just a backdoor available to a select few.

affirmative action is quite different. as mr. speckles more or less said, affirmative action take into account the intangibles. a student who goes to an underfunded school district and gets a 1200 on his/her SATs is probably as good of a student (when only looking at SAT score) as a student who went to a top notch school and scored a 1350. imagine if the student from the underfunded school was in the same school district as the 1350 student, is it unreasonable to believe s/he could get that score or better? no need to think about it because the answer is yes. and you know what, that's pretty much what affirmative action does...it takes into account issues other than gpa and test scores and poses the question - if all things were equal could the underrepresented applicant do as well as the well represented applicant? despite what many people would like to believe, affirmative action isn't charity. just because you are black, latino, or a woman, it doesn't mean you are guaranteed entrance into your favorite school or get that job that you want. there is a lot of hard work that must be done and quite a bit of success to achieve first.


*the bum would like it to be known mr. speckles has not endorsed or condemned either legacies or affirmative action. the bum just ripped off his topic idea in typical bum fashion.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home