Racial and Ethnic Diversity Leads to Equity
By Doug Chin, May 2005
The introduction of two bills that would allow the use of race, ethnicity and national origin as a factor in determining admissions to our state public colleges and university has rekindled the I-200 debate and the need for affirmative action.
Opponents of the bills - namely John Carlson, Tim Eyman, and Times editorial columnist Bruce Ramsey - argue against the use of racial preference and claim that, at the least, I-200 has had no impact on the racial mix of the student body at the University of Washington and, at best, resulted in the most diverse class in the history of that institution.
Comparing the population percentages of each of the major racial groups in 2000 with the incoming UW freshmen class for 2004, they suggest that:
· A substantial over-representation of Asian Americans (28.5 percent compared to 5.4 percent of the total population in 2000); and
· A substantial underrepresentation of white students (53.9 percent compared to 78.9 of the state population). “So much for 'white privilege,'” Ramsey sarcastically remarked.
There is no mention of Washington State University, whose student body is about 12 percent students of color including an Asian American student population of 5 percent.
Nonetheless, a perplexed Ramsey found it “interesting,” that the “voice of Asians” is for affirmative action when they are substantially “overrepresented.” In other words, how could Asian Americans be in favor of racial preferences and affirmative action, when the application of such mechanisms would likely reduce their admission?
The answer is that most Asian Americans believe in equal opportunity, fairness, and inclusion. In fact, 61 percent of Asian Americans opposed California's Proposition 209 and a similar percentage of Asian Americans voted against Initiative 200 here in Washington.
Like the U.S. Supreme Court, we believe that racial diversity on our college and university campuses is important and beneficial. Unlike Ramsey, we believe that there are many who think that diversity is a threat to the status quo or, let's say, “white privilege.”
We believe that the student bodies of our colleges and university should closely mirror the racial and ethnic composition of the population they are intended to serve. That does not mean the total population of the state because our institutions of higher learning are primarily targeted for students (i.e., K-12). And, if we were to agree with that assumption we could see that, in 2004, the school population of the state, and the UW and WSU freshmen classes (if their diversity mirrored that student population) would be: 5.7 percent African American, 7.8 percent Asian American, 2.8 Native American, 12.3 Hispanic and 71.4 percent White.
For all practical purposes, however, the UW is primarily serves students west of the Cascade and WSU serves those east of the mountains. Consequently, the racial demographics indicate that the percentage of African Americans and Asian Americans students is much greater than their respective statewide totals. For example, the African American and Asian American student percentage in the Seattle School District is 25 percent for each. An adequate representation of African American students at the UW would be a lot higher than the 5.7 statewide total of K-12, but still, the total for all Asian American students there would be higher than its 7.8 statewide percent but not be near the 28 percent of current UW freshmen. While the total percentage of Asian American is high at the UW, it is suspected that there are some Southeast Asian American groups like, Laotians and Cambodians, and Pacific Islander groups that are underrepresented.
Clearly, racial and ethnic discrimination has left a legacy of limited educational opportunities for African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, and some Asian American groups at the undergraduate level. At the graduate and professional school level, there is under-representation across all minority racial groups.
Past and current admission standards have the effect of providing a racial preference for white, and some racial and ethnic groups. There is a racial bias or preference as to what constitutes “merit” and admission standards. Can anybody say truthfully that the SAT and ACT tests don't have an ethnic bias? Why do colleges give points to potential students whose parent attended the same institution? Why are points given to those who take advance courses when, not all of the high schools (and especially those with large minority enrollment) provide advance classes?
The irony is that consideration of race, ethnicity or national origin in admissions is necessary counter existing preferences toward whites and some ethnic groups, and if we are to overcome this legacy of discrimination and provide equal opportunity for all.
© 2005 OCA-Greater Seattle
OCA - GREATER SEATTLE CHAPTER