There's a lot of news stories out there recently, including the Saudia Arabia killing of a journalist causing international indignation, shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue that killed 11 people (last year at this time we were still talking about the Las Vegas shooting, but these shootings have seemed to maintain if not picked up in intensity.) Plus the pipe bombs sent by a Florida man targeting the Clintons, Barack Obama, etc. Oh and a senseless killing of a 21-year-old college student at University of Utah by her ex-boyfriend who was threatening her with compromising photos. The world is so wacky. One ongoing story that I've been following that's not as depressing but nonetheless controversial is the Harvard University affirmative action lawsuit. It's a lawsuit brought by a nonprofit group of Asian Americans who feel like Harvard University's admission standards discriminates against Asians, and the outcome of the case might change the face of affirmative action in America forever.
Affirmative action, when put into the dictionary, doesn't have a direct translation in Chinese or Japanese (there might be one in Korean, not sure because my skills are not that high yet). Makes sense, because in Japan and China they don't really have this problem, but in America Asian Americans like myself struggle to understand sometimes why they can't get into their dream schools despite stellar resumes and admissions applications, and why other minorities seem to get "a boost" due to their race. When applying for college, I was deeply against affirmative action as it directly affected me and my explicit goal of getting into a top university. I ultimately was rejected from several Ivy League-caliber schools like Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc. despite really good SAT (admittedly not perfect 1600) scores. So I can understand why Asian students get upset about affirmative action, it's like you work so hard in school in hopes of achieving your goals, but then the schools don't want you just because of your race? Seems like reverse discrimination. On the other hand, the schools are also in a difficult position because they're try to ensure a diverse student body with many different types of backgrounds, which includes race. And they're not trying to reverse discriminate, but part of the process requires a bit of selecting by race when it comes down to it.
1.) All Asians are not alike. Yes a lot of us look similar (I get mistaken for different types of Asians all the time), but many have different interests, pursue different activities, come from different backgrounds, etc. Some have gone through the difficult childhood and come from a "diverse background" just like other races, but Asians usually get lumped in with the category of "hard worker," "too smart," "only care about grades," etc. We don't all want to become doctors or computer programmers, or lawyers (I did become a lawyer).
2.) I think some races do need a "lift up" by society to do well and have success stories that become positive role models in society, like Barack Obama becoming president and proving to the African American population that you can have a career in the most powerful positions in America, or Sonia Sotomaier in the Supreme Court, or other pillars of the society. This social boost is one of the most positives of affirmative action, to try to expand the possibilities (not saying that Obama or Sotomaier got into great schools because of their race, but it allows more opportunities for the next generation)
3.) Getting into an Ivy League school isn't the end all and be all. It carries prestige on one's resume and stays with you for life, but so does that enormous student debt. I personally went to my state school university, graduated in 3 years without paying much in student loans, and saved for law school. When I was in high school, I didn't see that far ahead, all I saw was this big banner at the end of the marathon of childhood that said "you need to get into an Ivy League school!" I didn't even think that maybe I could try again for grad school, maybe way down the line.
4.) Personally, I wasn't ready for an Ivy League school, and some of the Asian students clamoring to get in might not be, neither. Just because you get a perfect SAT or ACT score, doesn't actually mean you are entitled to getting into an Ivy League school. I do understand that schools consider other factors besides grades and test scores including "soft skills" like community involvement, maturity, achievement in sports, etc., so I do think there should be other qualifications, and adjusting the admissions criteria for these other factors that determine eligibility for one of the top schools is a good solution, especially if you can say beforehand what weight those carry. The achievement tests were artificially created to help weed out students anyway, schools can add other factors in addition to those tests, and students (especially 1600 or now 2400-score Asian students who spend all 4 summers of high school studying exclusively for those tests) should understand that those tests aren't the end-all be-all.
5.) One of Harvard's arguments in its defense of the lawsuit is that "they don't punish a student for being Asian, but they do reward points for being a certain race." I understand the sentiment behind that, but ultimately it's a zero sum game- if you bump up one student for his or her race, doesn't that bump him above the student right above him that didn't have that race, and thus disadvantage that student? Seems like a
6.) I feel pretty strongly against racial quotas, and so does U.S. law. "We can only let in so many Asians" should not be a valid reason for not admitting someone. The Harvard suit claims that Harvard uses a "soft quota" to get the number of students they want of a certain race. To avoid adopting a blatant quota system, Harvard introduced subjective criteria like character, personality and promise. Apparently, Asian Americans scored the lowest out of those personality traits, which I believe. When I was 17 years old applying for Harvard, I had an interview with a local alumni. I pretty much bombed the interview, couldn't discuss in-depth issues about what I was doing and what my dreams were, and at the end of the interview the alumnus asked me what other schools I was applying to and that "it's good you're applying to so many schools." Aka, "you're not getting into Harvard." I look back and agree with his analysis: I was immature and not ready for Harvard, and had only focused on grades and tests and didn't have an understanding of the world yet. I think there's something to be said for this "personality test" without being discriminatory, where interviews can be used to dig deeper into a candidate's understanding without just identifying the candidate's race.
Regardless, affirmative action has been and remains a hotly debated issue, especially for Asian Americans. I look for the Harvard lawsuit to draw lines on having quotas for race but maybe suggesting some alternatives to satisfying racial quotas. Repeal and replace racial balancing; enact diversity balancing based on personality and background factors.
Fantasize on,
Robert Yan
No comments:
Post a Comment