28 Nov Debunking Myths About Affirmative Action in Universities

As the academic year has just begun, one difference already felt across the nation has been the striking down of Affirmative Action in higher education, removing almost 60 years of precedent. While the Supreme Court decision removed race-conscious considerations from the admissions process, the topic is still extremely polarized and has warranted significant debate and discussion over the years. These debates have often come from misunderstandings and misconceptions of the purpose and impact of Affirmative Action. So, despite the recent ruling, this blog post aims to debunk common lingering myths surrounding Affirmative Action in universities, clarifying its critical role in promoting diversity and equal opportunity and why its return should be fought for. 

Myth #1: Affirmative Action Means Quotas

One prevalent misconception of Affirmative Action is that to fulfill it, there is a strict quota system for admissions. To ensure diversity, colleges would only accept a certain number of students with different identities, meaning no more students would be accepted once a quota is reached. Instead of actual assessment, rigid quotas decide a student’s prospects. 

In reality, there is nothing further from the truth. On the surface level, quotas have been found unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court. As in the cases of Bakke (1978) and Grutter (2003), the court has repeatedly assessed that universities are not allowed to use strict quotas in admission decisions. While this unequivocally destroys the myth, some critics of Affirmative Action still believe this quota system remains. But again, in reality, universities have replaced any form of a quota system with a holistic approach that considers race and other identities as a factor but also involves personal essays, recommendations, and extracurriculars. 

Myth #2: Affirmative Action Discriminates Against Socially Privileged Students

Another myth is that Affirmative Action policies inherently discriminate against non-privileged students. By focusing on promoting and placing emphasis on racialized students, non-racialized students suffer and are ignored. People often fear the rise of “reverse racism” from the use of Affirmative Action. 

Again, the truth of Affirmative Action does not line up with this misconception. It has been found that diverse environments encourage more innovation and problem-solving and that affirmative action does not damage non-minority students. When there is an emphasis on striving to promote the historically disadvantaged, the non-minority students typically are unaffected by the choices, and the minority students do better. However, in past studies and statistics, this misconception needs to be corrected on the moral level as there must be a push past this developing victim mentality. An effort to involve those who have been disbarred and systematically discluded from certain institutions and spheres must not be seen as a threat to those who have not been historically discriminated against. People are not punishing those for the sins of their ancestors or somehow trying to promote white guilt for the vital reason that it is not about non-racialized students. Affirmative Action is simply about destroying barriers and opening locked entrances for those without access. 

Myth #3: Affirmative Action is No Longer Necessary

A common saying before the Supreme Court ruling in 2023 was that society had advanced past the need for Affirmative Action policies. Affirmative action had become obsolete, as civil rights and overall societal equality had suppressed the need for government interventions. Critics often cite statistics about increased diversity levels at college to prove this claim. 

However, examining Affirmative Action as a solved solution ignores the existing disparities in college admissions graduation rates and the often ignored systematic barriers that hinder educational opportunities for racialized groups. Still, to this day, historically underprivileged groups are not all proportionally represented among admitted college students, even less so than graduated ones. This can play in part to historical factors, as socioeconomic forces that have historically been wielded against racialized groups, such as segregation and redlining, have placed barriers to accessing higher education, which can be felt to this day. The rising cost of college can have a severe impact on who attends, and the effects of discriminatory policies have created a lasting wealth gap, which makes it hard for students in racialized groups to be able to afford to attend. This highlights the need for affirmative action, as education can be an escape from poverty, and promoting policies that give the disadvantaged access to these spheres allows countless people to overcome these societal ills. 

Myth #4: Affirmative Action Leads to Unqualified Students Being Admitted

Additionally, an oft critic of Affirmative Action believes it means the end of a meritocracy. Instead of being judged for the content of their character, students are assessed only on their identities. While this may seem similar to the myth about the quota system, this claim is dangerous on its own and must be challenged as such. 

Again, much like the first myth and the rest on this list, this claim falls flat upon further inspection. There is no evidence that well-qualified students are being turned away based on not having a “desired” identity. However, This is often claimed, especially when a non-racialized is turned away and a racialized student is accepted. This belief, while incorrect, can still have a disastrous impact on not only disparaging the hard work of any racialized student who had been admitted to a university but can place a sense of imposter syndrome in those same students. Furthermore, the idea of being “unqualified” must also be addressed. The notion that there is only a certain way an individual can succeed ignores the barriers that prevent it from being so, as well as the reality that qualification can exist in many forms. Following a near-cookie-cutter definition of qualification can reduce the experiences of those who exist outside of the general norm. That is why colleges take this holistic approach, as it allows a broader definition of the understanding of the idea of “qualified.”

Conclusion

In summary, the myths surrounding Affirmative Action in universities often stem from misunderstandings about its purpose and implementation. By debunking these myths, we can better appreciate the role of Affirmative Action in fostering diversity and ensuring equal opportunity in higher education.

As advocates for education, it is essential to engage in informed discussions about the necessity of these policies and support equitable admissions practices that benefit society as a whole.

By Toby Keeler

If you haven’t yet had the opportunity, make sure to order a copy of Elmer Dixon’s powerful memoir DIE STANDING: From Black Panther Revolutionary to Global Diversity Consultant and check out what others have been saying about Elmer and his story. 

Check out these other opportunities to see what folks are saying about Elmer and his continued work. 

• See Elmer speak at Stories from the Revolutions’ Front Lines at his keynote at TEDxUTulsa
• Listen to Elmer talk on NPR’s The Jefferson Exchange
• Read about Elmer’s story in a piece featured in The Seattle Times
• Listen to Elmer on The Medium