Race-Neutrality in College Admission Policies

7/29/2019 Race-Neutrality in College Admission Policies

1/3

Gary Chen

Race-Neutrality in College Admission Policies

American college admissions policies on race have taken a very simple, yet very

interesting path over the course of recent American history. Up until the late 20th century,

educational institutions were clearly discriminatory against black minorities in their admissions.

Only once the ideals of the civil rights movement took hold did all students finally have equal

educational opportunities. However, admission policies on race soon took a very interesting turn

of events; the American public felt that further action was still needed to compensate for past

wrongs against underrepresented minorities. While there is nothing inherently wrong with this

attitude, the remedies put into place caused more problems than they solved. Instead of attacking

the problem at its source (i.e. strengthening community infrastructure), we took the very system

which was problematic in the first place and just turned it against a new group of people. Now,

affirmative action policies and pro-diversity initiatives mirror the discrimination of pre-civil

rights movement eras, only with new victims. Race is a factor which should be completely

neglected by college admission policies as it gives unfair and superfluous advantages to

minorities that, in the progressive educational environment of today, do not need them, while

robbing other hardworking students of those opportunities.

The very concept of race-consciousness in any selection process for the sake of

equality is paradoxical in nature. While it has been a short few decades since the climax of the

civil rights movement, American society has come a long way in equality for all people of all

races. Integration, empowerment, and suffrage are ways that we have given minorities the same

rights that all others have. Recently, however, equality has come to be interpreted in a strange

retroactive manner; compensatory action is being given in the form of affirmative action, race

goals, and other such forced diversity initiatives to groups of people who have not been wronged


2/3

Gary Chen

in their own lifetime, and who already live in an environment of egalitarianism and rights. The

government and educational institutions claim these measures are for the sake of equality, yet

these actions seem to contradict the very meaning of equality itself. Like a child who is

accidentally injured by his friend and seeks revenge, Americans have used affirmative action to

compensate for past injustices to minorities who are no longer affected by them. These actions

are puerile and unproductive, serving only to appease a primal desire for revenge and a childish

cry for retribution.

In fact, such racial reparations in educational institutions actually harm the success of

many people who would otherwise succeed in a perfectly equal environment. Students who do

not fall into the ambiguous category of a minority may lose opportunities to other students that

do, due to affirmative action and race goals. Oftentimes, a student who is unqualified forsuch

benefits is actually more qualified in credentials and would perform better, given the

opportunity. With our current skewed view of equality, however, the opportunity is instead

given to a student who is less capable of taking full advantage of his or her education. The result

is wasted resources and lost opportunities for success. Even in grade schools, this concept can be

seen in the millions of dollars that are spent to make materials available to students who do not

use them productively. In 2009, the Virginia Beach City Public School system spent $66 million

to build the Renaissance Academy, an alternative education center for returning dropouts,

students with discipline problems, and other students who need an alternative to normal public

education. While this money is not necessarily spent in vain, in comparison to the funding for

Virginia Beachs gifted education program, it is extremely superfluous. While millions were

spent on a beautiful building and high-tech resources for a new alternative education facility,

gifted schools such as Old Donation Center and Kemps Landing Magnet School still struggled to


3/3

Gary Chen

afford textbooks and paper, and Princess Anne High School (ranked 18th in all of Virginia by US

News) still contained traces of asbestos in its walls. By adopting this attitude of compensating

for groups that have been wronged in the past, resources are allocated inefficiently, and money,

time, and effort is wasted.

Even for the minorities who are receiving benefits in the college admissions process,

there are harmful repercussions. In a problem called mismatch, affirmative action tends to

place students in schools where their credentials weigh them down to the bottom ranks of their

entering classes. These students then struggle to succeed in an environment where they may not

belong, when they could have been very fruitful in a college better matched to their calibers.

Our current system of race-consciousness hurts everyone, even those on the receiving end of the

policies.

Educational institutions must adopt an admissions policy of complete race-neutrality;

only then may those who truly deserve opportunities for success receive them. Without any

judging any criteria besides personal credentials, our educational system can be more efficient

with its resources and output better adults to drive our society forward. Perhaps some diversity

would be sacrificed in a race-neutral selection process; however, diversity is meaningless

without equality. The benefits of race-neutrality even apply to persons of different genders,

physiques, socioeconomic backgrounds, and any other characteristics besides personal

credentials. Only by embracing this true equality for all people can our nation progress in the

future.

Documents

Race-Neutrality in College Admission Policies