Since John F. Kennedy ’35 created affirmative action, a government initiative to educate and employ marginalized groups in the United States, race and background have become important factors in college admissions. In 2014, a group known as Students for Fair Admissions sued Harvard University, accusing the institution of discriminating against Asian-American students and setting a quota for the number of Asian students they accept. Many legal experts believe this case has the potential to reach the Supreme Court — most likely determining the future of affirmative action in the U.S. While Harvard appears biased against Asian applicants, eliminating race as a factor in its admissions process is not the solution.
Historically, college admissions were racially blind, so they focused solely on qualifications such as test scores and essays. However, in the 1920s, Jewish students were rising in number and about to become a quarter of each class. Harvard, instead of implementing a quota, which would be more clearly perceived as anti-semitic, responded by adding diversity criteria to acceptances. For example, Harvard promoted ‘geographic diversity’ because Jewish populations were more condensed in the Northeast. By 1930, Harvard successfully reduced the Jewish population of their incoming class to one in ten students.
Over time, colleges have shifted their diversity goals to accept more students of color, specifically black and Latinx students. This is due to the implementation of affirmative action. By promoting diversity in college admissions, the quality of education is improved because students now learn from their peers’ diverse backgrounds and experiences.
Moreover, tests and grades cannot accurately tell a student’s story. In fact, research has often shown that they are ineffective at gauging potential collegiate success. Additionally, students from marginalized backgrounds may have lower grades or standardized test scores simply because they lack the resources of their white peers — for instance, less access to academic tutoring or test-prep services. Students of color often have to work harder to achieve the academic qualifications of white students because of systemic discrimination, and school admissions should account for this. Severing a student’s scores from his or her background paints an inaccurate picture.
Race and ethnicity are often integral parts of one’s identity. As Sarah Cole, a black Harvard Student from the class of 2016, has said, “Race-blind admissions is an act of erasure. To not see my race is to not see me.” Race should obviously not be the only factor in college admission, but to not consider it at all is deeply misguided.
Although affirmative action might benefit certain minority groups, the case shows that for Asian Americans, racially-influenced admission is harmful. For example, Harvard sends out letters each year to students with high test scores, encouraging them to apply. White male high school students in rural regions with PSAT scores of 1310 or above receive a recruitment letter, but Asian male students need a PSAT score of 1370, clearly indicating that Harvard employs higher standards for Asian applicants. Furthermore, Harvard reported lower personality scores — the combination of teacher recommendations, alumni interviews, and essays to determine the character of the applicant — for Asian students despite the group having interview scores comparable to white students. The school’s admissions system must address this obvious bias and account for it in their application process through the continued use of affirmative action.
