...K P F T news

Related Articles Texas' employs new tactics to increase graduation rates Peer-mediation helps solve student problems Drug convictions hinder financial aid for college Students get extra 90 minutes to speak loudly New INS rules to affect students Fourth Ward shrinks, HISD helps ROTC in local high schools World Education Forum Related Links

LEAD-IN BY HOST KATA MESTER: Affirmative action policies at American colleges have always been a hot topic. In 1996, a federal appeals court ruled against the affirmative action policy at the law school at the University of Texas in Austin. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear a case from Michigan that could re-write many of the nation's admission requirements. However, at a local predominantly black public University, affirmative action is done a little differently. Just across the street, at one of the most diverse schools in the country, a social scientist contends that admissions based on race are the only way to ensure diversity in the classroom. Brandon Moeller has the story: STORY: In 1996, a federal appeals court struck down the UT law school's affirmative action admissions policy which weighed applicants on many factors, but gave preference to minority applicants over considerably equal white applicants. But at UT, white students and minority applicants were placed into separate pools with separate admission criteria. James Douglas, the former head of the Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University explains the reaction to the UT ruling: "Most people, especially most people in legal education, were just amazed. Because I don't know of another law school in the country that had affirmative action programs similar to UT." The idea of affirmative action policies is to increase minority involvement in higher education, which some education researchers claim to help the overall learning experience of all students and to help right the wrongs of institutionalized racism. "I think it was implemented basically because both the primary and secondary education level of minorities were discriminated against and were not provided adequate opportunities for education during segregation." Now, the federal appeals court's regional restriction of affirmative action could be affirmed by the U.S. Supreme court, which is expected to hear cases dealing with a similar policy at a Michigan law school. The federal appeals court's decision only affects Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. If the U.S. Supreme Court makes a ruling, as it is expected to, it would be the first U.S. Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action in a quarter of a century. In its 1978 ruling on the Regents of the University of California vs. Bakke case, the high court ruled against using percentage quotas in the admissions process. Such a percentage quota entitled a certain number of minorities to be admitted whether they met admission requirements or not. Two of the five judges, William Rehnquist and John Paul Stevens, who agreed to strike down affirmative action quotas are still serving on the bench. One of the five judges, the late Lewis Powell Jr., wrote that while quotas were not constitutional, the use of ethnicity as a "plus factor" in the process could be allowed. Many universities, including the Michigan law schools, decided to follow Powell's suggestion. However, the Supreme Court could rule against "plus factors" thus ending [some] affirmative action in higher education in America. Last night just before the midnight deadline, President Bush filed a friend of the court brief with the Supreme Court that called the Michigan affirmative action policy a quota system, something that the University staunchly denies. The policy at the University of Michigan law school is to automatically assign 20 points to minority candidates who then compete with whites on a 150-point scale that measures other typical law school qualifications. Both the Texas and Michigan cases were argued by lawyers from the Center for Individual Rights, a non-profit conservative litigation organization that claims four areas as its major focus: civil rights, free expression, religious liberty and federalism. Shortly after the Texas decision, then-governor George W. Bush promoted and later signed legislation that entitled high school students in the top 10 percent of their class to guaranteed admission into a public state University. It is a trend that has been implemented elsewhere: In Florida, Bush's brother Jeb Bush implemented the "One Florida" plan that guarantees admission to the top 20 percent of high school graduating classes and in California, the top 4 percent enjoy similar treatment. Supporters of such percentage plans argue that admission should be granted by achievement, and that even high achievers in low-income areas and lower-quality schools will have a chance to compete in academia. University of Houston sociology professor Anthony Gary Dworkin, who sat on a panel and extensively studied the Hopwood decision, debunks that myth: "Absolutely nothing is as good as using race to get diversity, so Bush is dead wrong." Douglas, the former director of the TSU law school from 1981 to 1995, told KPFT News that their school, where he is now a distinguished professor, also has affirmative action. However, affirmative action at TSU is used to incorporate non-black students, such as latinos or whites. "Fortunately we don't even have to go to the plus factors because we have such a nice mix in our applicant pool. I think most of the people who go to the plus factors are those people who don't have the kind of mix in their applicant pool that we have." However since the anti-affirmative action decision, minority enrollment into the prestigious UT law school has declined. In his more formative years, Bush himself applied to the UT law school but was not accepted. Dworkin states again what the panel came to as their conclusion for the best model of inclusiveness at public universities: "We looked at 16 different indicators, and none of them gave us anything like the racial composition that you get in higher education if you do consider race." The Supreme Court will hear arguments about the Michigan case in March and a decision is expected by July. Brandon Moeller, KPFT News, Houston. E-mail Brandon Moeller at Brandonmoeller@hotmail.com . This story was broadcast on January 17, 2003.