Introduction Evolution itself is simply the process of change over time.
Tweet Illustration by Michael Hogue Just before the Labor Day weekend, Reverse discrimination essays front page New York Times story broke the news of the largest cheating scandal in Harvard University history, in which nearly half the students taking a Government course on the role of Congress had plagiarized or otherwise illegally collaborated on their final exam.
In the last generation or two, the funnel of opportunity in American society has drastically narrowed, with a greater and greater proportion of our financial, media, business, and political elites being drawn from a relatively small number of our leading universities, together with their professional schools.
Indeed, the early success of Facebook was largely due to the powerful imprimatur it enjoyed from its exclusive availability first only at Harvard and later restricted to just the Ivy League.
During this period, we have witnessed a huge national decline in well-paid middle class jobs in the manufacturing sector and other sources of employment for those lacking college degrees, with median American wages having been stagnant or declining for the last forty years.
And the best single means of becoming such an economic winner is to gain admission to a top university, which provides an easy ticket to the wealth of Wall Street or similar venues, whose leading firms increasingly restrict their hiring to graduates of the Ivy League or a tiny handful of other top colleges.
The absurd parental efforts of an Amy Chua, as recounted in her bestseller Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, were simply a much more extreme version of widespread behavior among her peer-group, which is why her story resonated so deeply among our educated elites. Even billionaires, media barons, and U.
Senators may weigh their words and actions more carefully as their children approach college age. And if such power is used to select our future elites in a corrupt manner, perhaps the inevitable result is the selection of corrupt elites, with terrible consequences for America.
Thus, the huge Harvard cheating scandal, and perhaps also the endless series of financial, business, and political scandals which have rocked our country over the last decade or more, even while our national economy has stagnated. Just a few years ago Pulitzer Prize-winning former Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Golden published The Price of Admission, a devastating account of the corrupt admissions practices at so many of our leading universities, in which every sort of non-academic or financial factor plays a role in privileging the privileged and thereby squeezing out those high-ability, hard-working students who lack any special hook.
An admissions system based on non-academic factors often amounting to institutionalized venality would seem strange or even unthinkable among the top universities of most other advanced nations in Europe or Asia, though such practices are widespread in much of the corrupt Third World.
Or consider the case of China. There, legions of angry microbloggers endlessly denounce the official corruption and abuse which permeate so much of the economic system.
But we almost never hear accusations of favoritism in university admissions, and this impression of strict meritocracy determined by the results of the national Gaokao college entrance examination has been confirmed to me by individuals familiar with that country.
This perhaps explains why so many sons and daughters of top Chinese leaders attend college in the West: During the s, the established Northeastern Anglo-Saxon elites who then dominated the Ivy League wished to sharply curtail the rapidly growing numbers of Jewish students, but their initial attempts to impose simple numerical quotas provoked enormous controversy and faculty opposition.
Lawrence Lowell and his peers was to transform the admissions process from a simple objective test of academic merit into a complex and holistic consideration of all aspects of each individual applicant; the resulting opacity permitted the admission or rejection of any given applicant, allowing the ethnicity of the student body to be shaped as desired.
As a consequence, university leaders could honestly deny the existence of any racial or religious quotas, while still managing to reduce Jewish enrollment to a much lower level, and thereafter hold it almost constant during the decades which followed.
For example, in the aftermath of World War II, Jewish organizations and their allies mobilized their political and media resources to pressure the universities into increasing their ethnic enrollment by modifying the weight assigned to various academic and non-academic factors, raising the importance of the former over the latter.
Indeed, Karabel notes that the most sudden and extreme increase in minority enrollment took place at Yale in the years —69, and was largely due to fears of race riots in heavily black New Haven, which surrounded the campus.
Different political blocs waged long battles for control of particular universities, and sudden large shifts in admissions rates occurred as these groups gained or lost influence within the university apparatus: Yale replaced its admissions staff in and the following year Jewish numbers nearly doubled.
Despite these plain facts, Harvard and the other top Ivy League schools today publicly deny any hint of discrimination along racial or ethnic lines, except insofar as they acknowledge providing an admissions boost to under-represented racial minorities, such as blacks or Hispanics.
But given the enormous control these institutions exert on our larger society, we should test these claims against the evidence of the actual enrollment statistics. Jews were a high-performing group, whose numbers could only be restricted by major deviations from an objective meritocratic standard.
Since their strong academic performance is coupled with relatively little political power, they would be obvious candidates for discrimination in the harsh realpolitik of university admissions as documented by Karabel, and indeed he briefly raises the possibility of an anti-Asian admissions bias, before concluding that the elite universities are apparently correct in denying that it exists.
Princeton sociologist Thomas J. Espenshade and his colleagues have demonstrated that among undergraduates at highly selective schools such as the Ivy League, white students have mean scores points higher on the SAT scale than their black classmates, but Asian students average points above whites.
Fortunately, we can investigate the plausibility of these claims by examining the decades of officially reported enrollment data available from the website of the National Center for Educational Statistics NCES.
The ethnic composition of Harvard undergraduates certainly follows a highly intriguing pattern. Harvard had always had a significant Asian-American enrollment, generally running around 5 percent when I had attended in the early s.
However, from that year forward, the Asian numbers went into reverse, generally stagnating or declining during the two decades which followed, with the official figure being By contrast, prior to Asian enrollment had often changed quite substantially from year to year.
It is interesting to note that this exactly replicates the historical pattern observed by Karabel, in which Jewish enrollment rose very rapidly, leading to imposition of an informal quota system, after which the number of Jews fell substantially, and thereafter remained roughly constant for decades.
On the face of it, ethnic enrollment levels which widely diverge from academic performance data or application rates and which remain remarkably static over time provide obvious circumstantial evidence for at least a de facto ethnic quota system.
In another strong historical parallel, all the other Ivy League universities seem to have gone through similar shifts in Asian enrollment at similar times and reached a similar plateau over the last couple of decades.
As mentioned, the share of Asians at Harvard peaked at over 20 percent inthen immediately declined and thereafter remained roughly constant at a level 3—5 points lower.
Asians at Yale reached a Affirmative Action is Reverse Discrimination Essay - Affirmative Action is Reverse Discrimination Is it possible to fill out a job application, apply for college, or even fill out a simple survey without being asked to provide one’s ethnicity.
Although the federal budget has increased by trillions of dollars over the past half-century, one line item has been shrinking: the percentage of federal spending . "Reverse Discrimination" My topic for my paper is going to be "reverse discrimination." As far as for the topics and issues I am going to touch on, that is still kind of in the air.
I know that the main topic is going to be reverse discrimination in the workplace. I am going to list both sides of the argument. Essay on Reverse Discrimination Uploaded by ihatesuchin on Jul 05, In a thirty-three year-old Caucasian male named Allan Bakke applied to and was denied admission to the University of California Medical School at Davis.
Digital Impact LLC produces large format, high-resolution, semi-permanent corrugated/mixed material POP & POS displays, product packaging and specialized permanent displays for companies of all backgrounds. Our clients know us for our reliability, speed to market, and long-standing razor sharp focus on customer service.
Utilizing state of the art digital printing, we produce product packaging. Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on a person's sex or schwenkreis.com can affect anyone, but it primarily affects women and girls.
It has been linked to stereotypes and gender roles, and may include the belief that one sex or gender is intrinsically superior to another. Extreme sexism may foster sexual harassment, rape, and other forms of sexual violence.