Recently in class, I heard oral arguments made by my classmates for the case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. This case involves a white man named Allan Bakke who sought admission into the University of California medical school. At this time in history, integration was occurring in educational institutions. This influenced the University of California's medical school to create a quota for its admissions process. The school only accepted 100 students and the school created a policy where 14 of those seats would be reserved for African American students. Because Alan Bakke was denied because of this policy, he contended this policy in court.
In class, arguments were presented from both sides. First, representing Alan Bakke, the argument that stood out to me was the argument being made about how Bakke scored higher than those 14 African Americans that were admitted. This classmate argued that race should not be a factor at all. Eliminating this factor from applicants would allow universities to consider applicants solely based on performance and scores.
However, contrasting this argument one of my peers argued that because of previous circumstances African American students were not offered as many privileges and opportunities as white students. This is a great point because how are black students supposed to thrive if their opportunities are night as abundant as white students. We cannot expect black students to perform as well as white students because of underlying circumstances.
Overall I think that the race of an applicant should not be the sole reason they are either accepted or denied. I think that if it occurred in the opposite nature and there was a black student who got denied from the school because the 14 slots filled up that there would be a problem with that. Having a racial quota is not an appropriate or fair way to promote integration into educational institutions.
Comments
Post a Comment