Francfort: Rethinking Diversity
By Kevin Francfort, Contributing Columnist
Published on Wednesday, February 22, 2012
There has been increased discussion lately about the impact of race on admissions at Dartmouth and its peer institutions. A recent article highlighted a few very telling statistics and perspectives on the bias that has become part of admissions departments here at Dartmouth and throughout the country. The article points to a 2009 study conducted by Princeton University theology professor Thomas Espenshade, which found that Asian-American applicants must have a score of 1550 out of 1600 on the SAT exam in order to compete with white applicants scoring 1410 and African-American applicants scoring 1100. Dartmouth’s former Assistant Director of Admissions Michele Hernandez also confirmed that different admissions standards exist for different races, notably Asian-Americans.
It may be the case that this disparity between SAT scores is not as meaningful as it first appears since it does not take into account other aspects of a student’s application, such as extracurricular activities. But this great discrepancy reveals an underlying prejudice in the system. It is true, according to Hernandez (“Race poses challenges to admissions,” Feb. 13), that our admissions office and those of other top schools around the nation have different standards for applicants of different races. The purpose of this policy is a worthy one. Universities believe that it is in the best interest of its students to maintain a diverse environment in which learning can occur through dialogue between students who harbor different perspectives. The benefits of such a diverse community are numerous. I doubt, however, that this process as it is currently practiced is truly the best way to achieve such diversity.
The current system of admissions at elite universities depends on an oversimplified method of achieving and portraying diversity. Upon inquiry into the topic of diversity at an American college, one may look toward statistics on the demographic makeup of the student body. But the percentage of Asians, Caucasians, African-Americans and Hispanics at a college is not indicative of the diversity of an institution. It is not the color of one of my fellow students’ skin that enhances my learning experience at Dartmouth. In fact, the color of somebody’s skin should be of little importance to any of us. I’ll bet that each and every Dartmouth student knows more than a few people for whom the stereotypes associated with their race do not apply.
However, there is great value in a wide range of experiences and perspectives among individuals in the Dartmouth community. Our admissions process ought to reflect that sentiment and employ an approach that delves deeper into what each applicant offers to the school with regard to their unique life experiences. It may be that this uniqueness has been shaped in part by a person’s background or culture, but those factors are not always directly related to or encapsulated by race. Why not include a short answer or optional essay on the Dartmouth application to identify an applicant’s potential impact on the diversity of our community? This would provide a much more comprehensive means of achieving the goal that we have in sight and could help avoid the stereotyping in admissions that this recent study illuminates.
Ultimately, we as a college must reflect on the role that race should play in admissions decisions. I count myself among the majority of students here who value the benefits of interactions between people of different backgrounds. It is when members of our community see past physical differences and come to appreciate the plethora of perspectives at the College that we learn and grow. If we continue to employ our current system of placing people into racial categories, we will only perpetuate the kind of stereotyping that leads to the statistics found in the study. As a student body and a college, we ought to make it a priority to examine what each applicant may bring to campus. We must do so because it is these unique, personal traits and not the color of our skin that defines us.
As Martin Luther King, Jr. famously said, people should be judged on the content of their character, not on the color of their skin. Race should play no role in admissions or anything else. Race and racial quotas are a backward, immoral basis for making decisions of any kind, they serve no good purpose and in fact serve the nasty purpose of discrimination. The Constitution guarantees equality of the law, Dartmouth College should live up to that standard, or close up shop.
By Bobo on Feb 22 | 10:06 am
I don’t see how anyone can say “race shouldn’t play a role in admissions or anything else” as if racism is nonexistent in our society. Wake up. White people have had “affirmative action” since basically forever. The truth of the matter is, there are still inequalities in education and educational opportunities with regards to race. You can’t expect an ethnic group that has been historically oppressed and dehumanized to just catch up and get ahead by means of their own, especially when the ethnic group that IS ahead did not do so by means of THEIR own. (hello, slavery).
By Ola on Feb 22 | 5:49 pm
I don’t see how anyone can say race should play a role in admissions or anything else as if choosing people on that basis is not racism. Wake up. Martin Luther King, Jr. was against preferences, he was against affirmative action and quotas, he was against discrimination of any kind at any time for any reason. You may think you know better than he did. I submit that you do not. Racial discrimination is not and never has been the way “To catch up and get ahead” and it never will be.
By Kirby on Feb 22 | 10:07 pm
Affirmative action can and should be implemented at Dartmouth.
Suggesting that you can appropriate one piece of Martin Luther King’s legacy, that all men should be treated equal, while ignoring the reality of a legacy of racism and prejudice in this country demonstrates that you fail to understand King. A legacy that didn’t begin and end with slavery, or with Jim Crow laws. Dartmouth’s obligation to look beyond institutionalized racism that has crafted generational problems is a terrific obligation that I am proud my alma mater continues to fulfill.
I’ll side with the consensus expressed by the American military leadership, who famously wrote the persuasive amicus brief in the 2003 US Supreme Court decision that upheld affirmative action in some forms (namely, not as a “quota”). In order to achieve the very best in society and the world, the very best alumni, and the very best students in each class, Dartmouth can and should continue to practice affirmative action policies.
I’ll note that as a white christian non-jock non-legacy heterosexual male from the northeast, I derived no special treatment from Dartmouth in terms of an affirmative action policy. And aside from any tangential benefits of a legacy, neither will my kids.
By Brian on Feb 23 | 9:58 am
Suggesting that the moral centerpiece of Martin Luther King’s legacy (equality) is “one piece,” while you go on to oppose it, shows that you are a morally lost soul. Siding with the American Military leadership opposing equality is just a way to hide in the bushes of an unprincipled position. Proud of institutional discrimination at the College but didn’t get any preferences and neither will the “kids.” This is racial condescension of a most insidious nature. Martin Luther King, Jr. didn’t think that his race needed preference, but you do, he was repelled by the idea, that kind of thinking is a racial slur.
By Kirby on Feb 23 | 2:35 pm
Martin Luther King Jr. “was well aware of the arguments used against affirmative action policies. As far back as 1964, he was writing in Why We Can’t Wait: ‘Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic.’
King supported affirmative action-type programs because he never confused the dream with American reality. As he put it, ‘A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro’ to compete on a just and equal basis (quoted in Let the Trumpet Sound, by Stephen Oates)."
Source: http://academic.udayton.edu/race/04needs/affirm25.htm
By ‘10 on Feb 23 | 4:04 pm
“Something special”? What?
By Anonymous on Feb 23 | 7:48 pm
@Anonymous from 7:48—
Let me explain Dr. King’s quote to you. The “something special against the Negro” refers to slavery and multi-generational institutionalized repression and discrimination, such as Jim Crow. The “something special for the Negro” refers to ameliorative actions, such as affirmative action policies, that improve our colleges, nation, and society by helping repair hundreds of years of damage.
By bill 09 on Feb 23 | 8:12 pm
I appreciate the explanation but don’t see any reference to what King said regarding affirmative action. Racial preferences don’t have anything to do with improving our colleges, nation and society from hundreds of years of racial discrimination, they are racial discrimination. Where is affirmative action in the criminal justice system? Would that improve our colleges, nation and society? Blacks murder whites at 18 times the rate that whites murder blacks. Should blacks who murder whites get something special? Is black society to blame for this and should whites get something special for being murdered by blacks? Blacks are 13% of the population but suffer 50% of all murders, almost all of those murders are committed by other blacks, should blacks who murder blacks get something special or should the surviving family members of black families get something special as a result? Are whites responsible for blacks murdering blacks and blacks murdering whites? Should there be a quota of whites that blacks can murder to repair hundreds of years of damage? IS making hate-crime only white on black crime and not black on white crime, repairing the racial damage of hundreds of years? As you can see, making preferences based on what has happened and what is happening is problematic at best.
By Anonymous on Feb 23 | 11:15 pm
@Author: “The benefits of such a diverse community are numerous. I doubt, however, that this process as it is currently practiced is truly the best way to achieve such diversity.”
It is easy to criticize. Can you write an oped on what is “the best way” and enlighten this community? Warning, here lie true dragons.
By Anonymouse on Feb 28 | 1:08 pm