
Every year, students across America and around the country begin the application processes in order to achieve desired admission into one's college or university. These students come from a variety of backgrounds, which can often be characterized through one's race, academic merit, extracurricular activities, and race. The latter point, race, has recently come under scrutiny of the U.S. legal court system. In these cases, applicants convey that they have been denied admissions to a particular college based upon the concept of affirmative action, which argues that race is a necessary factor when considering college applicants. Most colleges and scholars would agree that race is the primary way in which colleges and universities can achieve diversity. This argument insists that in order to reconcile the past wrongdoings in American history, particularly those which limited the educational quality of the African American community, the color of one's skin must be taken into account. From this argument, supporters of race-based admissions give a reason for the black disadvantage in school and within their communities. In contrast, claim that not only do race-neutral practices work, but they also argue that racial indifferences during the period of Jim Crow and the 1960s have dramatically decreased. 'Race-neutral' groups have worked to prove that the basis of race-based college admissions wrong and to show how race-neutral policies have worked. However, I propose that the affirmative action process is not the most effective way to achieve diversity within the American collegiate system; diversity can be found in areas in which prospective students exhibit the achievement of adversity. Primarily, college applicants should base their chosen applicants upon the basis of where they come from  -- socio-economically and physically. 

It is without a doubt that African Americans were unfairly treated and unfairly represented during the Era of Jim Crow and continuing onwards through the Civil Rights Movement. Beginning shortly after the Civil War, the concept of segregation emerged as a system that was designated to separate whites and blacks. While segregation was very apparent across the Southern United States and the Deep South, there was also similar sentiments stirring within urban cities across the North, including Chicago. In contrast to other locations across the country, Chicago was unique in the aspect that a multitude of cultures, such as Czech, Polish, and Jewish, that assimilated with the present white and African American communities. However, the plurality of these ethnic minorities did not diminish the woes placed upon black Chicagoans. Kathryn Neckerman points out the disadvantages that the African American community of not only Chicago, but many urban cities experienced. First, with the stark contrast in skin tone, African Americans distances themselves from immigrants, who could easily land a job based upon the similarity of their skin color to that of whites. 

In addition, African Americans were seen as a group that did not accredit their educational status to that of their social status, and they did not have the "alternative routes" that European immigrants could utilize as another source to begin a career (Neckerman, 65-66). This disparity between the minorities continued, as a black appointee was not made to the Chicago City School Board until thirty years after the Jewish, Czech, and Polish communities were given appointments to the board (Neckerman, 82). When it came to the quality of education for the inner-city black children, conditions were even worse. Since many of these children lived in communities of poor quality, their educational standards were also of poor quality. If a black student were to enter his classroom on the first day of class in 1940, there was over a one-out-of-three chance that his or her teacher would be brand new; at a school comprised of immigrants, the likelihood was lower at 22% (Neckerman, 89). With this turnaround over teachers, these students, both black of immigrant, were unable to establish relationships with their teachers, severing the possibility of achieving the highest possible educational outcome. One-on-one time was also very difficult to find within many of these schools, as many of the "Black Belt" schools were so overcrowded, that some schools ran on double and triple shifts (Neckerman, 89) (Neckerman, 94). Whether designed to do so or not, this system resulted in many students garnering a sense of helplessness, often resulting to dropping out. This educational disparity was a pandemic within the African American community across the United States, as less than 5% of American college student were African American in 1965 (Bowen, 2). After completing undergraduate school, most black students came to the grim realization that their chances of entering medical school or law school were very, very low. During the same period, the combined percentages of African American students in law school and medical school were only 3% (Bowen, 5). With this limitation set upon their community, educated African Americans had a very difficult time finding upward mobility during the Civil Rights Era. While arguments have been made these groups have achieved prosperity since this point in American history; proponents argue that the court systems are still in the midst of an ongoing fight for equality. 

As supporters of affirmative action argue their claims from the current situation of the African American community, there is mounting evidence that supports their point. The initial pattern of affirmative action bans have shown the number of minority students, particularly those of Hispanic and African American ethnicity, have decline drastically at selective law schools across Washington State, Texas and California. In addition, shortly after Californians voted for California Proposition 209, which banned public institutions from implementing affirmative action policies, " ... Black and Latino undergraduate enrollment at UC Berkeley fell by half immediately" (Cashin, 77). These numbers support the valid claim that with the passage of race-neutral policies, the representation of minority groups will decline. This decline, believed by affirmative action supporters, will weaken student's exposure to diversity. In addition, the Texas Ten Percent Plan, which was formed in order to allow in-state students in the top ten percent of their class to attend an in-state school, did not raise the proportion of African American students; the percentage dropped by over three percent (Hoover). These actions appear to show the failure in trying to eliminate race as a factor to expand diversity; thus supporters of affirmative action are able to bolster their claim.

It is very obvious that minorities, particularly African Americans, were subjected to unfair and corrupt practices during the first half of the twentieth century. These individuals were barred from attended the schools that they desired to attend, resulting in a lack of those that were granted a post-high school education. However, while critics of the race-neutral position argue that this disparity persists into the present day, supporters claim that the facts show that this is not the case. The amount of blacks that pursue a four-year degree is indeed rising; shortly after the Civil Rights Movement, the percentage of African Americans granted admissions into Ivy League schools "rose from 2.3 percent in 1967 to 6.3 in 1976" (Bowen, 7). In addition, the amount of  African American high school graduates rose by nearly 33% from 1950 to 1972 (Sander & Taylor, 261). While critics may argue that this is due to an increase in the generally population, it must be noted that the communities are becoming more and more diverse. The concept of a "majority minority" country in not too far in the near future, as many schools have found. Projected numbers indicate that in seven years, only 15 percent of school-age children will be white in (Fullwood). When this occurs, should the race of white Americans be considered in the application process? For those that oppose this solution, a contradiction of their own words are formed. 

In order to eliminate race-based affirmative action, colleges and universities across the country have implemented a number of programs that eliminate one's skin color as a factor. This includes the ban of the actions, which have been highly scrutinized by 'race-based' supporters. They argue that in the states where affirmative action bans are in place, the representation of minority groups have continued to decline. However, this claim is quite narrowed, is this is only true at "selective" locales (Cashin, 77). The state of California is one of the states that have initiated a ban of race-based affirmative action, and the numbers that come from the University of California and its satellite locations only speak to progress. A composite of in-state residents within the fall class of 2012 show that "36 percent were Asian American, 28 percent white, 27 percent Latino, and 4 percent African American". This should not come as a surprise, as the race demographics of California are 14% Asian American, 40% white, 38% Latino, and 7% African American (Cashin, 77). With these numbers being so close, it gives critics little room to fight the differences. In addition, the Texas Ten Percent plan were formed during the mid-1990s in order to eliminate the bias of race. The plan's objective was to grant admissions to all high school students that were in the top ten percent of their class. With the bias of race gone, the percentage of African Americans entering Texas colleges had risen to 4.5 percent by 2003 (Strauss). Just across the Gulf from Texas, Florida also began a successful race-neutral program across the state. At the time, Jeb Bush was governor of the Sunshine State and he signed the One Florida Initiative, which eliminated race as a factor at state public colleges. The results of the initiative can be seen at Florida State University today, as not only has the Hispanic population increased by 7%, but the generally admissions of non-white students has grown by 10% (Hoover). By showing that race indifferences are narrowing in the college admissions process, the failures the affirmative action system can be pointed out. For example, it was discovered at the University of Michigan that college admissions officers would automatically add an additional twenty points to an applicant's "score" if they were Hispanic or African American (Sander & Danielson, 1013). This demonstrates an unfair and unequal opportunity for all racial groups, as this college has blatantly given preferences to a particular group. It does not matter whether the groups were white, black, Asian, or Hispanic; to enact this type of practice upon the grounds of 'racial diversity' is inherently wrong and is a very inappropriate to consider within this caliber of academes.  

While there are a number of considerable points in the previous arguments, it must be noted that neither arguments are suited to achieve equal chances of admission and the full spectrum diversity. While race does play a part in the college admissions process, it is an implicit factor. This factor, along with others, are needed to be taken into consideration as those that oppose affirmative action believe. However, as proponents of the argument insisted upon, there are historical injustices that need to be corrected  -- and the American college and university system is the best place to do so. However, this change should not be based upon the color of one's skin; on the contrary, an applicant should be consider upon the basis of his or her adversity that he or she has overcome. As researchers have stated, these factors include, but are not limited to, "family wealth", "neighborhood poverty", "school quality", socioeconomics, religion, and parent-student involvement (Sander & Danielson, 999). Higher adversity for high school students typically reduces the likelihood of a student continuing to a four-year college. One case example of this can be seen by just simply driving across the state of South Carolina, where one can see these limited chances along a rural portion of the Palmetto State known as the "Corridor of Shame". 

While many oppose this stance, there are those that provide a valid argument, as seen in the following sources. Bowen analyzes the numerical disparity amongst achievement and race in The Shape of the River: Long-term Consequences of Considering Race in College and University Admissions, and the conclusion is made that current race-neutral policies are not doing their job. He also argues that an applicant's socio-economic background is not as effective in achieving diversity as race. The author also speaks to the historical past, and identifies varying perceptions of diversity.  In Thinking Hard About "Race-Neutral" Admissions, Richard Sander and Andrew Danielson argue that the race-neutral college environment is something that should, and will, be taken more seriously. They point to a number of factual points that justify the elimination of affirmation action while narrowing the admissions gap between white and minority students. Alternatives to the race-neutral college admissions process are presented in Colleges Contemplate a 'Race-Neutral' Future by Eric Hoover. Hoover accounts the effects of the Fisher v. University of Texas  -- Austin case, analyzes its impact at Florida State University, and speaks about the proposed question of race-neutral admissions on the Colorado ballot in 2008. In the book Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It's Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won't Admit It, Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor argue that the affirmative action process actually inhibits the growth of diversity on college campus, and they provide three alternatives in how true diversity can be achieved. Through these sources, it will be proven that the counterargument will not suffice as a true formula to obtain diversity in the college admissions process. 

My resolution to the affirmative action controversy can be resolved through the consideration of location. In Race, Class, or Place? by Sam Fullwood III, a conclusion is made that in order to achieve true diversity, college admissions offices should look at the location in which the applicant lives. Through data inserted in the article Fullwood justifies that the rigor of academia in inner-city schools should be calibrated differently those schools that are filled with students of a high socio-economic background.   

The next few articles analyze this concept of location and its effect on the college admissions process. In her remarkable history on the decline of the urban education system, entitled Schools of Failure: Failure in Inner-City Education, Neckerman looks at why the system is in its present state, and how not only African Africans, but other minorities are also effected. Based in Chicago, this problem was particularly due to the issue of segregation and the achievement gap that emerged. Through her innovative work, Place, Not Race, Sheryll Cashin establishes her argument that although race is important in the college admissions process, the location in which an applicant lives should weigh much heavier. In addition, Cashin proposes steps for educational leaders to take in order to demonstrate her argument, and she supports this with collected data. In the documentary Corridor of Shame, Pat Conroy introduces viewers to the deplorable conditions of the South Carolina educational system along the I-95 corridor. By taking the location into account, those that are interviewed show their concern behind the lack of resources due to the rural setting. This first-hand account serves as a primary example to the limitations of this and similar forms of education.. Despite my position on the controversy, there are those who believe in the upholding of affirmative action in the college application process. In the Washington Post article, Why we still need Affirmative Action for African Americans in College Admissions, Valerie Strauss stresses that we must acknowledge the wrongdoings of American history, and as a result, affirmative action must be implemented to correct this disparity. Scholars raise an argument that the higher-educational system of the United States needs to be de-segregated as it has been done in other arenas of education in Defending Diversity: Affirmative Action at the University of Michigan. It is proposed the racial diversity is needed to expand a student's boundaries, and that we must be on the right side of history. This idea is derived from a period of American History in which segregation flourished throughout the educational system. The authors also look at the changing concept of diversity, and how that strengthens their claim of race-based college admissions.

The "Corridor of Shame", which consists of the I-95 corridor from Dillon County to Beaufort County, South Carolina, is notoriously known for its lack of educational resources. The educational facilities of this "corridor" are in deplorable condition; as of 2005, some of the schools had been standing, despite their disrepairs, for over a century. Sewage backed into many of the older schools, such as Britton's Neck Elementary School in Marion County, and Ridgeland Elementary School in Jasper County, South Carolina ("Corridor of Shame"). Without a sufficient learning environment for these children, it makes learning an even more difficult task. On average, the high schools across this region graduate 46% of their senior class. In other terms, of the one-third of the South Carolina population that makes up the Corridor of Shame, less than half of them complete the necessary requirement to achieve fiscal and educational mobility ("Corridor of Shame"). Of those that do complete high school within the Corridor of Shame, the chances of gaining admissions are very narrow. Marva Tigner, a mother of two sons attending Jasper County High School expresses her concern:

Every year, I hold my breath when they do their schedule because I don't know, as a parent, the quality of teachers that my sons will have in front of them from year to year. One aspires to go to Duke. Because he is being educated in Jasper County, his chances are greatly diminished ("Corridor of Shame").

Note that this mother does not account his lack of opportunity to the color of her son's skin. Despite the fact that he is African American, she is more concerned about the location in which her son is attending high school. While it cannot be accurately determined from Mrs. Tigner's commentary, it may be that she is a single-mother of her two sons. While this is surely difficult upon the mother, it is an occurrence that happens too frequently; thirty years ago, the number of female-headed households for African American children stood at 75%, whereas this number was still high within white households at 42% (Gurin, Lehman, & Lewis, 45). In addition, of the percentage of children that are born to unwed mothers, 75% of African American, 53% of Hispanic 29% of white, and 17% of Asian American children fall into this statistic (Sander & Taylor, 263). Generally speaking, single-parent families tend to accrue a lower net income in comparison to households that consists of dual parenting. These influences of financial and socioeconomic standings establish high or low odds of a child gaining college admission. It is a fact that black students are disproportionately located in the lower strata of socioeconomics; however, they are not the only racial group there. Twenty-three percent of African Americans live within "high-poverty neighborhoods"; in addition, seven percent of white Americans live in similar locales (Strauss). While this number may not seem like much, it does show that those mired in poverty are not exclusively African American; however, this group makes up a very large proportion. However, in order to understand the greater influence of class over race, historical data must be interpreted. Through the latter quarter of the twentieth century (beginning in 1972), the percentage of blacks that were accepted from the lower part of the socioeconomic ladder declined at a rate that more than halved the number of applicants admitted every ten years ( Sander & Taylor, 248). However, the number of 'black' acceptances have increase, with immigrant 'black' Americans making up more than 20% of the African American population (Sander & Taylor, 252). With this in mind, and with the concept of "majority minority" in mind, how will race be defined in the future? With the presumable increase in the occurrence of interracial marriages and the decrease of single-raced individuals, the answer to the question is cloudy and unsure. It will inevitably become much more difficult to discern distinct racial difference, and the idea of race-based affirmative action will crumble. 

As the future of the affirmative action process is currently in the hands of the Supreme Court, many fear that it will only complicate the 'rules' in which applicants are admitted. However, as the concept progress with time, the 'race-based' affirmative action position has lost steam. In order to appease their concerns, there must be an agreement made that compliments both parties. When analyzing all characteristics of a given applicant, diversity is strengthened upon a number of levels that race does not even reach. With a diverse notion of diversity, students are able to learn from each other in a number of ways that would have been limited by the arguments of those opposed and for 'race-neutral' policies. Through learning from other's diverse perspectives, an individual beings to consider alternative positions than their own. The future of America, and the world, will depend on people that hold a diverse background, as new and innovative thoughts will emerge with technological advances. The compromised argument towards the affirmative action issue is the most efficient and logical way to do so, and the welfare of society's future may depend upon how humanity handles this controversy. 

