As America becomes more diverse and interconnected every day, the question of how to integrate diversity into higher education reappears frequently. Currently, universities use affirmative action to answer this question, but its use remains a controversial issue. Affirmative action is defined as a system of laws put in place to stop illegal applicant discrimination. Most universities in America use affirmative action to select students to implement diversity. This action, however, has sparked numerous debates about whether race-conscious admission decisions truly help to diversify universities and provide equal opportunities. Affirmative action opponents argue that it violates equal opportunity by favoring certain groups at the expense of another racial minority: Asian Americans. While affirmative action does have some underlying issues and records of discriminating against Asian Americans, eliminating it altogether would ignore students who have grown up with limited opportunities and further entrench existing inequalities.

When affirmative action is misused, it can reveal a system that is flawed. This can lead to discrimination against Asian Americans due to unfair biases. Some colleges may also use affirmative action only to please the public and boost their reputation. Jay Caspian, an American writer, and television journalist who attended Bowdoin and Columbia University, speaks out in his article published by The New York Times about the injustices and negative outcomes of affirmative action policies at elite schools. Harvard University revealed a clear example of Asian discrimination while recruiting students from “sparse country”, which is a term that Harvard uses to describe regions where people generally are not selected for Ivy leagues. Asian Americans in sparse countries need an SAT score around 1350-1380 to be considered for admission, while Black students need a score above 1100 (Caspian). Asian Americans are clearly being biased against since they need a higher score than other minority groups to be considered in a college, and as appellate attorney and policy writer Dennis Saffran puts it, Harvard sees Asian Americans as “too successful” and “deficient in subjective measures of ‘character’” (Saffran). This creates harmful stereotypes and makes it harder for Asians to get into colleges with the high standards that colleges place on them. It also shows that affirmative action can penalize many Asian Americans for their academic success. Additionally, Harvard's admission dean, William Fitzsimmons, gave a testimony in court that showed that "Harvard believes Asian students from sparse country are Asian before they are Arkansan or Nevadan..." (Caspian). This testimony reveals that sparse country has no effect on Asian Americans since Harvard treats Asian Americans as outsiders based solely on their ethnicity, rather than members of a particular community or state. Despite this, the argument that affirmative action should be removed from colleges because it is better for colleges is a far reach. In fact, the truth is that removing affirmative action would have negative consequences for colleges and universities, as well as society.

Removing affirmative action would put many students who had few educational opportunities growing up at a disadvantage. Adzua Agyapon, the director of a college preparatory program known as KIPP, states that banning affirmative action would be reasonable if all students had the “same opportunities from birth” (Agyapon). Wealthy students, particularly wealthy White students, can afford tutoring services, standardized test preparation classes, and more internship opportunities that many students of color or those from low-income families do not have. Selecting people only based on merit would be unfair since it would disregard all the qualified students who were not able to have the same resources and opportunities as wealthier students. Some students already have built-in advantages of “legacy status, athletic recruiting and family donations” for colleges (Agyapon). These are all resources that many minorities do not have and must rely solely on their academic achievements to gain admission. If affirmative action were to be removed, minority students would lose one of the few tools they have to address these inequalities and level the playing field, resulting in a “breathtaking educational gap” (Agyapon). It is also worth noting that affirmative action has been removed from some colleges, and studies have shown that this has not resulted in improved diversity on those campuses.

The belief that banning affirmative action would not affect students of color's chances of getting a higher education is simply untrue. Colleges which have already banned affirmative action have shown a diminished proportion of students from diverse backgrounds. Stephanie Saul, a national politics reporter, reveals statistics on race composition in colleges which have already banned affirmative action. University of California, a university forced to ban affirmative action, had only 258 Black students and 27 Native American students admitted out of 6,931 in 2021 (Saul). Affirmative action plays an important role in increasing diversity in higher education. While some may argue that affirmative action causes reverse discrimination, this evidence shows that prohibiting it would result in much less diversity in universities. It's also worth noting that the University of California has spent a half-billion dollars on recruiting students of color since 2004. However, it has not shown any progress and has led to substantial loss for these universities (Saul). This implies that simply investing in recruitment efforts is not enough without policies that actively promote diversity. The lack of diversity in higher education is a systemic issue, not just a result of admissions practices. As a result, it's critical to consider how affirmative action can promote diversity and how its absence may result in a decrease in the number of students from underrepresented backgrounds.

Furthermore, affirmative action creates a more welcoming learning environment for all students by increasing cultural awareness and comfort among underrepresented groups on campus. Jackie Ferguson, an award-winning certified diversity executive and author, states in her article from Forbes that underrepresented groups often feel “ostracized and unable to succeed” when they are working in an environment that lacks diversity (Ferguson). Ferguson’s statement shows the harmful impact of a lack of diversity and inclusion which can also be seen in universities. Oftentimes, many students who come from underrepresented backgrounds may face challenges when they are in an educational setting that does not reflect on their experiences or perspectives. To solve this challenge, universities can benefit from using affirmative action policies that would bring out more diversity. Students will feel more comfortable in their environment and as a result bring out more productivity. Overall, Ferguson’s perspective on the importance of affirmative action serves as a reminder that diversity should be a priority in all types of settings, including universities, and that affirmative action can be a valuable tool that can help achieve this goal.

The disadvantage that affirmative action has on Asian American students does exist and it needs to be addressed. However, declaring that affirmative action should be repealed is not a comprehensive solution. It is critical to consider the historical context and purpose of affirmative action, which is to address past and present discrimination against underrepresented groups. Other approaches to affirmative action, such as race-neutral policies, can help address Asian American discrimination while still promoting diversity in higher education. Currently, affirmative action is just the “bare minimum” in taking further steps to ensure that minorities have equal opportunities and to advance diversity in higher education (Agyapon). It is the only way for students from poor families to have a fair chance of admission. Abolishing affirmative action would stop progress toward a more equal society. For now, colleges should preserve affirmative action and, in the future, find out how to improve these policies to ensure that no groups of people are disadvantaged.

Works Cited

Agyapon, Adzua. "Equity in higher education doesn't just happen: We need affirmative action." The Hill, Nexstar Media Group, 10 Oct. 2022, thehill.com/opinion/education/3675019-equity-in-higher-education-doesnt-just-happen-we-need-affirmative-action/. Accessed 17 Nov. 2022.

Ferguson, Jackie. "Why We Still Need Affirmative Action, Especially In The Workplace." Forbes, Forbes Councils Members, 21 Mar. 2023, www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2023/03/21/why-we-still-need-affirmative-action-especially-in-the-workplace/?sh=17c1e6c826c1. Accessed 3 Apr. 2023.

Kang, Jay Caspian. "Affirmative Action Was Never a Perfect Solution." New York Times, 31 Jan. 2022. SIRS Issues Researcher, explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2641633827?accountid=2456.

Saffran, Dennis. "Affirmative Action Is Racist—Against Asians. It's Time for SCOTUS to Overturn It | Opinion." Newsweek, 24 Oct. 2022, www.newsweek.com/affirmative-action-racistagainst-asians-its-time-scotus-overturn-it-opinion-1753623. Accessed 17 Nov. 2022