Asian-American Quotas Are Imaginary; Need for Diversity Isreal

Asian-American Quotas Are Imaginary; Need for Diversity IsReal

Khin Mai Aung is the director of the educational equity program at theAsian American Legal Defense and Education Fund.

UPDATEDDECEMBER 19, 2012, 8:02 PM

Asian-Americans have long been used as a wedge group by opponents of affirmative action. But the latest frenzy about "discrimination" against Asians — often by parties that have rarely shown their concern for Asian-Americans in other contexts — is not based on facts.

These opponents have alleged that even limited legal consideration of diversity in educational admissions constitutes discrimination. Some allege specifically that affirmative action harms Asian applicants, capping the Asian population at elite universities. In reality, there is no evidence that this is the case. Furthermore, if discrimination against Asian applicants were proven to exist at elite universities, getting rid of affirmative action would do nothing to stop it.

It has long been illegal for universities to impose quotas or ceilings on enrollment of any racial group. Affirmative action, as it currently exists in the United States, simply allows admissions officers to consider an applicant’s racial background in a limited way as one of a myriad of factors that make up who he or she is. It neither condones nor facilitates racial discrimination and quotas.

Far from harming Asian-Americans, the consideration of diversity in admissions advances equal opportunity for many Asian-American applicants who continue to face educational barriers. Southeast Asians like Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotians, most of whom came to the U.S. as refugees, have significantly lower educational attainment and higher poverty rates than many other Asian and non-Asian ethnic groups. Without the consideration of diversity, many of these students would be denied an equal opportunity for higher education.

Moreover, the benefits of diversity extend beyond any particular racial groups or subgroups. Diversity consideration in admissions enables universities to select the very best candidates for their campuses by taking into account all of an applicant’s characteristics. It allows universities to create the most effective learning environment for giving each student the tools to succeed in our global and multicultural economy. As the Supreme Court considers the future of affirmative action in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, all Americans, including Asian-Americans, cannot lose sight of how much we gain from diversity.

JoinRoom for Debate on Facebookand follow updates ontwitter.com/roomfordebate.

Topics:Asian-Americans,affirmative action,college,standardized tests

Statistics Indicate an Ivy League Asian Quota

RON UNZNEXT

Scores Aren't the Only Qualification

ROD M. BUGARIN JR.

79 COMMENTS

Share your thoughts

Top of Form

Share your thoughts

Bottom of Form

All79

Readers’ Picks57

NYT Picks1

Newest

anasiancollegeapplicant

San Francisco7 February 2013

I don't see how people can claim that certain groups should be classified as minorities and others not. My family came from a rural region of China with a very unique culture and yet I am classified as Asian or Chinese. Let me tell you something Ms. Aung, from my experience China is very diverse. It's so diverse that we can't even understand other Chinese people in their cultural dialects. There is no so called "Chinese Culture" it doesn't exist. Chinese people are all very unique and different. We all have very unique cultures. The idea that some people can decide that a certain group of people are considered minorities and that others belong to a "majority group" is WRONG. To say that I am part of the "Chinese majority" and that you think other groups of people deserve special consideration is racism.

Recommend

fivealive

Brooklyn, NY27 December 2012

These are very tired tropes. Affirmative action is defined by what it is not -- caps and minimums by race. So how can Ms. Aung say something categorical about what it is: "diversity consideration... to select the very best candidates." How do we know all this when all we know about affirmative action is it must stop short of actual hard numbers?
I find the basic situation to be rather simple: educational institutions will not tolerate Asian American populations in excess of 30% or so. Beyond this point, the institution gets a reputation for being too Asian, and some method must be found to limit their numbers (otherwise, you risk reputational damage and white-flight). The same goes for whites, but the number seems to be something like 85%, beyond which the institution is too white to be modern.
We can't prove this with science, unfortunately, and so the Ms. Aung's of the world can continue to lay down generalizations about the noble intentions of race-based admissions without fear of being contradicted.

3Recommend

Bmk

Washington,dc27 December 2012

Assuming that a culture of achievement is a minimum bar then a diverse student body should have nothing to do with ethnic differences. Etnic differences give us physical differences but in America do not define other aspects of diversity. The problem with so many discussions about Asian - American college admissions is that Asian stereotypes continue to govern the conversation. Because AsiaAmericans as a group score higher than other groups that does not mean there is no diversity within Asian Americans and that only their high achieving scores define them. In fact it seems to me if you took only Asian Americans who scored well enough to be admitted and then imposed diversity considerations you could get a class of all Asian Americans that was diverse across income, geography, family history, and life style. This might be more easily accomplished then if the same scrutiny were applied to all white applicants or all black applicants. So conversations about diversity without looking more deeply at Asian diversity is mostly sham.

1Recommend

mark miller

berkeley25 December 2012

@DarthVader:
Exactly. Show me the numbers or put a sock in it. The famous adage about "damn lies" aside, if you don't provide me with evidence-based reasoning, I will resent you and your position for wasting my time.

Recommend

asf

asdf25 December 2012

One thing that doesn't come up much is the _price_ of diversity. Everything around you depends on technology, which in turn depends on symbolic manipulation, logic, and general intelligence.
If the US makes it a matter of routine to pay for the diversity ideology at all costs, innovation will move elsewhere.

Recommend

Darth Vader

Fairfax, VA24 December 2012

Notice how an article denying quotas doesn't quote any statistics? If quotas really were imaginary, I'm sure you'd have data to back that up. And if you really did have data to back that up, you'd have gone all Nate Silver on us by now.

3Recommend

Roberto

New York, NY21 December 2012

Ron Unz writes
"...nearly 20 percent of the Harvard College student body is Asian-American, and 25 percent to 33 percent is Jewish, though Asian-Americans make up only 3 percent of the U.S. population and Jewish-Americans even less than 3 percent. Thus, 50 percent of Harvard’s student body is drawn from about 5 percent of the U.S. population!"
That sounds like discrimination. Not diversity.

3Recommend

NY21 December 2012

If it is discrimination then that would imply that the system somehow favors Asians and Jews. This correlation is flawed. Would you take the same point of view if one were to replace "Asian-American" and "Jewish-American" with "Black" and "Latino"? This would suddenly become politically incorrect.
How do you feel about the dominance of black athletes in the NBA or NFL? Is there discrimination there? Shall we institute affirmative action quotas for Asians in sports or are they all too busy cramming and playing the violin to care?

1Recommend

Not Just Wall St

NYC24 December 2012

Sounds more like self-interest, which I believe is generally acceptable for a private institution. For better or worse, over the past 375 years, Harvard has been able to navigate to the pinnacle of elite international universities.
Their approach (measured over time) seems to be working. And surprise, self-interest of a historically male-WASP institution involves change and...horror...intentionally excluding male-WASPs to make room for others. But that also means then excluding non-male WASPs to make room for the next group.
Life is unfair.

Recommend

SEE ALL REPLIES

Jerry

NY21 December 2012

Khin Mai Aung - We'll see how imaginary your quotas are when your Asian daughter gets her first rejection after earning a 4.0 GP and 2390 SAT scrore. Don't feel bad though. She'll be fine at the local state school. She has to understand. This is for the greater good. Afterall, it's all in the name of "diversity."

10Recommend

marct

portland21 December 2012

ms.aung,
I hate to weigh in at this late date, but you seem to have few supporters
I feel
1) that if American universities are allowed to discriminate in favor of the children of rich and famous alumni (witness George W. Bush)
2)that if American universities are allowed to discriminate in favor of those who participate in high revenue sports
I think American universities should be allowed to discriminate in favor of diversity. Is it fair? Honestly, I do not know ...But it is certainly more fair. than 1 or 2.
Academic America mirrors the rest of America...nothing is fair...If university education was fair tuition would be free and there would be no economic discrimination.
Be real...stop going on about "fairness"

1Recommend

Jeff

WA21 December 2012

She writes:
"Affirmative action, as it currently exists in the United States, simply allows admissions officers to consider an applicant’s racial background in a limited way as one of a myriad of factors that make up who he or she is."
Yes, limited to 15~18%.

1Recommend

NYT Pick

NY21 December 2012

Even though the words "diversity", "underprivileged" and "minority" can be attributed to Asians, these terms are almost always used in reference to Blacks and Latinos only. Asians are the "Other", singled out as "overachievers", as if that is something to be controlled and limited, rather than encouraged and rewarded.
Asians are not prone to making a stink about discrimination. We are told by our parents, work hard, you will overcome and achieve. We don't demand special treatment or make excuses because our ancestors were railroad coolies or ruled by the British or whatever. Yet we are sorely punished for our earnest efforts.
But what difference does race really make? Diversity initiatives simply call attention to superficial differences. Shouldn't schools admit the most qualified...humans? Should schools admit only a certain percentage of blondes? How about short people? Some of you will say, "oh well that's not the same thing!"....but how isn't it? Perhaps we should do away with race data collection and assign ID #'s in lieu of surnames on college applications. It would fascinating to see what the student body would look like then.

7Recommend

John Zotto

Cape Canaveral, Florida20 December 2012

What and where you live defines diversity. My daughter went to a university in Miami and she was one of the few students identified as non white Hispanic. What are universities in south Florida doing to have a diverse student body that reflects America, well frankly nothing and why should they ? What they are doing is reflecting the population of south Florida and South America. According to those who argue for more minorities, the south Florida universities have wildly exceeded the diversity advocates' expectations. My daughter was not admitted to her school because she was white, she was admitted because she is talented and worked hard to get good grades. The fact that the Ivy League schools do not disclose whom they admit makes me suspect they have a quota system.

1Recommend

Andrew S.

Tacoma WA20 December 2012

If there is a real "need for diversity" why aren't we concerned about all those countries with little or no ethnic or religious diveristy? There are countless countries that are almost 100% black, Arab or Asian. Some of them, like Japan do very well. There are 3 dozen countries that are 99-100% Muslim. Why no concern about this? No one seems to fret about a lack of cultural, religious or ethnic diversity except in Judeo-Christian countries where the majority are of European decent.

5Recommend

Anne184

Cambridge, MA20 December 2012

Diversity of background is one of the best aspects of the U.S. The public schools of our suburbs and cities are more and more homogenous as time goes by. For some, the only place to bump up against difference is in college.
I like that colleges have economic, racial, geographic, religious, and gender differences. I like that they take all those different kids and throw them together in a freshman dorm. It may be the only time in their lives where they live with—possibly struggle with—and learn to respect difference. Diversity isn't nonsense, and acknowledging it rather than ignoring it makes life interesting.

3Recommend

Realist

Long Island20 December 2012

There is now a whole industry around re-inventing your background.
Whether it means...
finding that great-great-great grandmother from Spain (are Spanish people actually under-represented? let me pull out the 100-volume book of statistics and wade through it).
Learning to play an obscure musical instrument.
Hiding income.
Inventing some learning disability
Moving to Wyoming
Doing some contrived charity work.
Inventing some hardship. I dunno pretend one leg is 9 inches shorter than the other.
I am not trying to belittle any of these, but these are ACADEMIC institutions. None of this has anything to do with academics. It is a waste of time and effort, weakens the universities and is unfair to those who worked so hard and sacrificed so much... parents and kids.
How about those low income black/hispanic people who worked hard to give their kids the best, pushed them and helped them. Whose kids showed outstanding potential got into the school on their own merits and sweat and then graduated? And then everyone has in the back of their heads (Oh yeah... an affirmative-action-MIT-graduate). Is that fair to them??

3Recommend

Andrew

New York, NY21 December 2012

Most kids, regardless of whether or not they have questions about whether they were beneficiaries of AA, would rather get into a top school than not. This is not a burden and your phony concern here is condescending.
Many of the things you talked about ARE academic. They involve conveying what you have learned, what your point of view is, and most importantly, where you are going. Hardship often measures grit, which is much often more important at producing business leaders/ground breakers. Charity work indicates the school won't waste resources educating an entire class of people who in no way give back to their communities. We need business millionaires AND talented governors and doctors.
Your point of view assumes that academics have nothing to do with life. You can be good at math and still lack any of the skills necessary to make you great or even successful in the world. And you need to be able to critically analyze new and different ideas in order to study any kind of liberal art or even perform in a professional environment. Exposure to some of those ideas in a safe, consequence-free learning environment helps.
But you'll be the one to condescendingly call these soft factors and then you wonder why none of your "brilliant, SAT-tested" friends can make CEO, navigate office politics, get along with people who aren't like them, or start their own companies.
Test scores only measure aptitude. These other factors you're making fun of indicate direction.

1Recommend

jck

nj20 December 2012

When a goal for racial,ethnic,or religious diversity is sought,a quota is set and not imaginary.

4Recommend

Realist

Long Island20 December 2012

"often by parties that have rarely shown their concern for Asian-Americans" A nasty broad brush irrelevant characterization
"Some allege specifically that affirmative action harms Asian applicants, capping the Asian population at elite universities... there is no evidence that this is the case" It's not capping, it is denying someone admission because they are of the wrong ethnic group. Being black does not mean you have more to offer or are more accomplished. Being Asian doesn't mean the opposite. So it should not be considered as a criteria for admission
"Affirmative action .. simply allows admissions officers to consider an applicant’s racial background .. as one of a myriad of factors ... It neither condones nor facilitates racial discrimination" Considering race as a criteria for admission is the very definition of discrimination
"Southeast Asians ..have significantly lower educational attainment .. than many other Asian and non-Asian ethnic groups. Without the consideration of diversity, many of these students would be denied an equal opportunity for higher education" Top universities have a disproportionate number of first gen Asians. Why? Many came here because of the dream that you can achieve through hard work and sacrifice. They invest in their kids
"Diversity consideration in admissions enables universities to select the very best candidates for their campuses" Any consideration outside of academic record, discriminates against the very best candidates

5Recommend

Elaine

New York, NY20 December 2012

Wow, i got an inkling of how out of touch with reality the AALDEF was when I saw that they were supporting the NAACP in their lawsuit against.the specialized high school exam, but this is an astounding alternative reality.
And I completely agree with what other commenters said about the AALDEF not representing the views and interests of the Asian-American community *as a whole*.
I would argue that they focus their efforts on those within the Asian-American community who are not achieving as well (e.g. Southeast Asian refugees from Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos). While that support is admirable and necessary, it is *illogical* to use that group as an argument that discrimination and quotas against other Asian-Americans do not exist.