<p><strong><em>First this is intended to count the pervasive notion that somehow affirmative action is unfair, or repugnant, or takes away a white or asian person’s spot in college.</em></strong>*********</p>
<li><p>Affirmative action legislation must first be placed within contet of when it was initially introduced in a very different America. One where minorities who were equally qualified and better qualified where denied access to the upper echoloens of education. the concept of technology drag can be attributed to the legality of a state, as the laws of a country are often the last things changed in the progression of socitey, therefore the “indigination” towards minority groups is ridiculous as none of them crafted the laws, nor have any ability in influenigncing their implementation.</p></li>
<li><p>A siginificant proportion of individuals who do well on the SAT and the ACT are of a wealthy variety. Although this does not hold true unequivocally minority group tend to reside in the lower income brackets within America. (Bear in mind this functions not as an independent arguement, bc it can easily be cross applied to whites as well, but rather as a framework arguement)</p></li>
<li><p>The difficulties of being a minority adversely affects one capabilities to preform well in school related subjects dominated my majority individuals. This is true from anedoctal evidence. In my precalcus honors class I was the only black person and for the first couple of weeks I doubted my capabilities simply on the basis that i was different and considered dropping the class. This in lue of the fact that I am one of the top students in my entire school, reveals that sociological factors affects one’s performance as much as innate intelligence.</p></li>
<li><p>Minority achievement is adversely impacted bu relationships within minority cultures. The preponderance of education is not reflect within minority communities, placing a burden on those few who do excel to be ostracised from their respective communities, which decreases the number who are actually successful. </p></li>
<li><p>Minorities are often not as connected are knowledgable about activities that may bolster thier application. I.e. Science research which is larger an asian and whtie dominated field, requires not only intelligence and capabilities but also the knowledge that said programs exist. Minorities whose parents do not have a technical background may lack the knowledge of how to apply to these programs as well as thier existence.</p></li>
<li><p>Minorities educational institutions are often subpar. This is a general statment as not all minorities attend subpar schools, but a larger proportion of minority students encounter the dilenma of lack of funding, or ineffective teaching. Ancedotal evidence 2: A student (all honors) transferred to my suburban school from the urban school district, this student struggled because his background did not adequately prepare him on the same level as our school did.</p></li>
</ol>
<p><b>7. The historical implications of past abuses by the United States legal system as well as policies toward minorities. Many people would argue (as I have personally heard) that minorities today are not affected by past discrimination such as slavery. Although that arguement is valid, it skews the timeline for the possiblity for minorities to attain an equal education, it was not until the Brown Decision (1954) that schools were legally supposed to be integrated. But integration did not fully begin because Johnson was a states righter and so schools were not even integrated until the 60’s. This contextual adjustment means that minorities have only had 1 generation that had the capabilities to achieve what white individuals have had generations to accomplish. In that light affirmative action helped to expedite the process by reducing barriers that stood in the way of successful minorities to rise to positions of power. Ex. Colin Powell, Barack Obama, Thomas Sowell, Condelzza Rice, Clarence Thomas. This functions two-fold to not only present an explanation of why affirmative action should be implemented but also shows that boone that affirmative action has held.<\b></b></p><b>
<p>What this represents in an economic sense is a basic supply and demand. Due to this limiting factors occuring more so in minority communities, there are fewer that do excel. The desire for diversity then is seen as trumping the application of others. Note however, that noone takes anyone else’s spot as no person is guaranteed a spot in college, nor does any one deserve a spot until an admission officer denotes it as such. The point is that there seems to be a lot of sentiment that if a person did not get into a school, they revert to blaming minority ppl for “taking thier spot” which is ridiculous. Especially in light of the fact that colleges accept a wide spread of individuals, with higher or lower stats or whatever. But these individuals do not attack white applicants or Asian applicants with lower scores who are accepted, did they not also take thier spot?
One could argue that it is the institutionalization that causes the indiganation, but that again is false, although Affirmative Action is a policy that many private schools utilize, many schools do not use race in admission decision (Such as good state schools, UT&Berkeley). But moreover, without an institualized policy admission commitees will still use diversity issues in admission decisions, such as geography. A person from Idaho may get in over a person from Maine, but then again there is not a sense of indigination. Why?</p>
</b>