Kirsanow Assails Affirmative Action in Academia

For decades, higher education institutions have utilized racial preferences and quota programs, euphemistically called “affirmative action” in their admission policies. At least one member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights would like to see that practice come to an end.

Peter Kirsanow [pictured], a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights who was appointed by President Bush, spoke to students Tuesday at UNC-Chapel Hill where he focused on ending the victim grievance model of civil rights. He also argued that the focus on civil rights activism should be on looking towards the future rather than to the past. In an interview prior to his speech, Kirsanow explained that higher education is focused too much on racial policies that were effective in the 1960s, but are now unnecessary and even counterproductive.

“Academia is well behind the curve when it comes to this,” said Kirsanow, who is black and a conservative Republican. “They’re still pretty much investing in the 50s and 60s. So much of our public intellectual establishment are still invested in that.”

Focusing on race in admissions process does more harm than good, Kirsanow suggested.

“Many universities have this obsession with counting by race,” Kirsanow said. “In so doing, they highlight racial differences if any. I think they exacerbate the problem by – even when it’s not necessary – focusing on race and ethnicity. I also think that the whole matter of affirmative action, while its not a giant societal problem, has the tendency to cause people to count by race, especially in academia and also has the tendency to stigmatize the beneficiaries of affirmative action and hits their advancement.”

Kirsnow’s address came only a few days after the release of a new Cato Institute policy paper, “The Affirmative Action Myth,” by Marie Gryphon.

In the paper, Gryphon writes that “[a]ffirmative action produces no concrete benefits to minority groups, but it does produce several harms. First, a phenomenon called the ‘ratchet effect’ means that preferences at a handful of top schools, including state flagship institutions, can worsen racial disparities in academic preparation at all other American colleges and universities, including those that do not use racial preferences. This effect results in painfully large gaps in academic preparation between minority students and others on campuses around the country.”

Both Kirsanow and Gryphon challenge the idea that race-based policies, are necessary to ensure that blacks and other minority groups have a chance to attend college. Kirsanow mentioned the 1996 California initiative Proposition 209 that banned public institutions in the state from giving favorable treatment to any group based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin. The legislation received 54 percent of the vote in 1996.

Detractors claimed, Kirsanow said, that the bill would limit the number of blacks who went to college and would have a near “Holocaust effect” on blacks wanting to get a college education. What actually occurred after the passage of Proposition 209 was that black and minority college attendance rose to levels higher than before.

“There was a slight dip in the number of admission at the elite public schools,” Kirsanow said. “What happened is black students started going to what some people would consider second or third tier public universities. The overall admission level did not fall, but actually started to rise.”

The California initiative, while also increasing the number of blacks who attended college, also had the affect of increasing the number of blacks who graduate from college, Kirsanow said.

“The reason is these students might not have been ready to compete at Berkley, but could have competed at UC-Riverside and they did well,” Kirsanow said.

Of the two increases – the number of blacks attending college and the number of blacks graduating from college – Kirsanow said he the increase in the number of blacks who graduate from college is more important.

“Some people like to celebrate how many people actually get into school,” Kirsanow stated. “I think a better measure is how many people actually complete school, get a degree, and become an active member of the society. I don’t care if they graduate from Harvard or some other school that doesn’t have such an illustrious pedigree, if they get a degree and they’ve gotten an education what sense does it make to go to Harvard for a year and drop out as opposed to going to another school and getting a four-year degree and becoming a productive member of society?”

Shannon Blosser is a staff writer with the John W. Pope Center for Higher Education Policy in Chapel Hill, NC.