Specifically, we identify a number of disadvantages black students—across class—likely experience prior to and in the context of applying to colleges and universities.
Specifically, we identify a number of disadvantages black students—across class—likely experience prior to and in the context of applying to colleges and universities.Tags: Maths Solve ProblemsAnswers To Statistics HomeworkThesis Papers On LinguisticsEssay On Goal For CollegeEssay Writing About PlanNature Vs Nurture Research EssaySolving Behavior Problems In AutismEssay Validity Reliability Essay EssayNano Car Research PapersCheerleading Is A Sport Essay
The underinclusive argument posits that affirmative action does little to remedy the extent to which, across the country, African American students are forced to attend failing primary and secondary schools whose pipelines lead to prisons, not universities.
The claim is that most students who attend these schools are simply too disadvantaged to benefit from policies that presume college eligibility at a minimum.
In advancing this argument, we hope to make clear that racial inequality is not exhausted by class inequality, that affirmative action is not a racial preference but a mechanism to level the admissions playing field, and that the inclusion of middle-class African Americans in affirmative action programs is not an effort to displace working-class or poor blacks but a way of achieving an important and insufficiently acknowledged diversity benefit: namely, intraracial diversity, or diversity among and between black students, including along the class spectrum.
The remainder of the essay is organized as follows.
Indeed, perhaps the only thing easier in the United States, racially speaking, than questioning black intellectual ability is associating African Americans with crime.
That the mismatch theory at least implicitly relies on longstanding “reasonable doubt” about black intellectual competence and capacity makes it all the more important that scholars and policymakers carefully examine the empirical basis for the theory. We invoke the theory of mismatch here for a more limited purpose: to reveal how it facilitates the underinclusive argument against affirmative action. The overinclusive critique of affirmative action posits that affirmative action benefits African Americans who are not disadvantaged.Cheryl Harris has suggested that the reason arguments about mismatch are almost always rehearsed with reference to African Americans is because the mismatch thesis aligns with preexisting notions of black intellectual deficit.Black intellectual inferiority has long been an important part of the social transcript of American life.Think about the matter this way: If people believe that colleges and universities employ affirmative action to admit African Americans who are not economically disadvantaged, the conclusion that affirmative action is a racial preference is easy to reach—black students who are not disadvantaged are getting preferential treatment because of their race.Liberals defend this preference because it advances diversity and contributes to the “robust exchange of ideas.” This Article reframes the debate.People who argue that affirmative action should focus more on working-class whites, not middle-class blacks, rarely invoke the possibility of mismatch as a concern.The assumption seems to be that, unlike African American beneficiaries of affirmative action, white working-class beneficiaries will not be in over their head.Like many of the arguments against affirmative action, the over- and underinclusive claims against the policy are not new.Writing in 1994, Harris and Narayan observed that: This juxtaposition of the middle-class Black against his poor Black counterpart often has the purpose of setting up an insoluble dilemma between whose horns any possible justification for affirmative action seems to disappear.African Americans students, not just those who are class-disadvantaged.Developing this argument is crucial against the backdrop of the argument that affirmative action is both over- and underinclusive.