Description
In this assignment you will use data to explore the different educational experiences among racial groups in the U.S., particularly in the real-world example of race in college admissions. For context, the admission process is an open one at University of Arizona Global Campus in that there are few barriers to admission to a program of study. As such, University of Arizona Global Campus enjoys a high occurrence of diversity in its student demographic. This, however, may not always be the case in traditional college admissions practices in the US.
Read the document submitted by the American Sociological Association (ASA) to the United States Supreme Court regarding a Michigan Law School case. The goal is for you to engage the empirical data and summary arguments while drawing your own conclusions about the college admission process.
After reading the ASA’s position on this case, address the following:
Thoroughly summarize the key elements of the argument presented by ASA. This summary should include:
A general overview of ASA’s position.
A discussion of the fundamental justifications behind ASA’s position including residential segregation, school segregation, economic disadvantages, stigma, and the relevance of race-based life experiences to university admissions.
Please be mindful to summarize the ASA’s position on these issues in your own words.
Argue your own position as to whether or not college admission officers should consider race (as one of many factors), when deciding whom to accept to colleges. Be sure to use scholarly evidence and empirical data to support your position. Which position you take has NO bearing on your grade. However, you will be graded on how well you support your argument with scholarly evidence and empirical data, as well as the amount of thought put into your argument. Your argument must:
Be well-reasoned and based on scholarly evidence and empirical data – Not on personal ideologies and/or uninformed opinions.
Explain why you have chosen the position that you have (using facts and empirical data).
Depending on the position you take, propose either an alternative solution to addressing racial inequalities in college admissions or propose a solution for implementing racial consideration in the admissions of an actual college setting.
If you argue that race should not be taken into account along with other life experiences in college admissions, then you must also propose ways in which current racial inequalities of educational attainment can best be overcome.
If you argue that race should be taken into account along with other life experiences in college admissions, then you must also propose ways in which this could best be implemented in an actual applied setting.
The Race and College Admissions Assignment:
Must be 8 to 10 double-spaced pages in length
Unformatted Attachment Preview
No. 02-241
================================================================
In The
Supreme Court of the United States
———————————♦——————————–BARBARA GRUTTER,
Petitioner,
v.
LEE BOLLINGER, ET AL.,
Respondents.
———————————♦——————————–On Writ Of Certiorari Before Judgment
To The United States Court Of Appeals
For The Sixth Circuit
———————————♦——————————–BRIEF OF THE AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL
ASSOCIATION, ET AL., AS AMICI CURIAE
IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS
———————————♦——————————–BILL LANN LEE
DEBORAH J. MERRITT
John Deaver Drinko/
Counsel of Record
Baker & Hostetler
LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN
& BERNSTEIN, LLP
Chair in Law
275 Battery Street,
Moritz College of Law
30th Floor
THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
400 Stillman Hall
San Francisco, CA 94111
1947 College Road
Telephone: (415) 956-1000
Columbus, OH 43210
Telephone: (614) 247-7933
Attorneys for Amici Curiae
================================================================
COCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING CO. (800) 225-6964
OR CALL COLLECT (402) 342-2831
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I.
STATEMENT OF INTEREST …………………….
1
II.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ……………………..
2
III.
ARGUMENT …………………………………………….
5
A. Universities Have a Compelling Interest
in Considering the Life Experience of
Growing Up Black, Latino, or Native
American in Making Admissions Decisions ………………………………………………….
5
1. Residential Segregation ………………….
5
2. School Segregation …………………………
7
3. Economic Disadvantage ………………….
11
4. Stigma…………………………………………..
11
5. The Relevance of Race-Based Life Experiences to University Admissions ……..
14
a. Potential to Benefit from the
Educational Experience……………..
14
b. Contributions to the Educational
Experience ……………………………….
20
c.
Contributions to Society …………….
22
B. Considering Race in University Admissions
is Narrowly Tailored When Race is One of
Many Life Experiences Considered in Assessing Individual Applicants ………………….
25
CONCLUSION …………………………………………
30
IV.
ii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
CASES
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) …… 2, 19
Gratz v. Bollinger, 122 F. Supp. 811 (E.D. Mich.
2000)…………………………………………………………………….. 29
Grutter v. Bollinger, 288 F.3d 732 (6th Cir. 2002) ………… 29
Grutter v. Bollinger, 137 F. Supp. 2d 821 (E.D.
Mich. 2001) …………………………………………………………… 16
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438
U.S. 265 (1978) …………………………………………… 20, 25, 29
BOOKS & OTHER NONPERIODIC MATERIALS
WALTER ALLEN & DANIEL SOLORZANO, EXPERT
REPORT (2000), at http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/
issr/choices/reports_data.html (visited February
8, 2003)…………………………………………………………………. 19
MARIANNE BERTRAND & SENDHIL MULLAINATHAN,
ARE EMILY AND BRENDAN MORE EMPLOYABLE
THAN LAKISHA AND JAMAL? A FIELD EXPERIMENT
ON LABOR MARKET DISCRIMINATION (2002) (unpublished) …………………………………………………………….. 12
JULIAN R. BETTS, KIM S. RUEBEN & ANNE DANENBERG, PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA,
EQUAL RESOURCES, EQUAL OUTCOMES? THE DISTRIBUTION OF SCHOOL RESOURCES AND STUDENT
OUTCOMES IN CALIFORNIA (2000)……………………………….. 9
Lawrence D. Bobo & Susan A. Suh, Surveying
Racial Discrimination: An Analysis from a Multiethnic Labor Market, in PRISMATIC METROPOLIS:
INEQUALITY IN LOS ANGELES 523-560 (L. D. Bobo
et al. eds., 2000)…………………………………………………….. 13
iii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
WILLIAM G. BOWEN & DEREK BOK, THE SHAPE OF
THE RIVER (1998)………………………………………………. 23, 24
JOE R. FEAGIN, RACIST AMERICA (2000) ……………………….. 12
JOE R. FEAGIN & MELVIN P. SIKES, LIVING WITH
RACISM: THE BLACK MIDDLE CLASS EXPERIENCE
(1994) …………………………………………………………………… 12
DAVID L. FEATHERMAN & ROBERT M. HAUSER,
OPPORTUNITY AND CHANGE (1978)……………………………. 14
ANN A. FERGUSON, BAD BOYS: PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN
THE MAKING OF BLACK MASCULINITY (2000) ……………… 10
Ronald F. Ferguson, Teachers’ Perceptions and
Expectations and the Black-White Test Score Gap,
in THE BLACK-WHITE TEST SCORE GAP 318-74
(Christopher Jencks & Meredith Phillips eds.,
1998)…………………………………………………………………….. 10
CLAUDE FISCHER ET AL., INEQUALITY BY DESIGN:
CRACKING THE BELL CURVE MYTH (1996) …. 13, 17, 18, 20
Michael Fix et al., An Overview of Auditing for
Discrimination, in CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE: MEASUREMENT OF DISCRIMINATION IN
AMERICA 1, at 18-25 (Michael Fix & Raymond J.
Struyk eds., 1993)………………………………………………….. 12
LEO GREBLER ET AL., THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN
PEOPLE, THE NATION’S SECOND LARGEST MINORITY
(1970) …………………………………………………………………….. 6
JAY P. HEUBERT & ROBERT M. HAUSER, NATIONAL
RESEARCH COUNCIL, HIGH STAKES: TESTING FOR
TRACKING, PROMOTION, AND GRADUATION (1999)….. 10, 15
iv
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
CAMERON HOWELL & SARAH TURNER, LEGACIES IN
BLACK AND WHITE: THE RACIAL COMPOSITION OF
THE LEGACY POOL (2003) (Preliminary draft, University of Virginia)…………………………………………………. 28
JOHN ICELAND ET AL., U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS,
RACIAL AND ETHNIC RESIDENTIAL SEGREGATION IN
THE UNITED STATES: 1980-2000, CENSUS 2000
SPECIAL REPORT 3 (2002)………………………………………….. 6
COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF BLACK AMERICANS,
COMMISSION ON BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES AND EDUCATION, NATIONAL RESEARCH
COUNCIL, A COMMON DESTINY: BLACKS AND
AMERICAN SOCIETY (Gerald D. Jaynes & Robin M.
Williams, Jr. eds., 1989) …………………………………………… 5
Christopher Jencks & Meredith Phillips, An Introduction, in THE BLACK-WHITE TEST SCORE GAP 151 (Christopher Jencks & Meredith Phillips eds.,
1998)………………………………………………………………………. 9
Christopher Jencks, Racial Bias in Testing, in THE
BLACK-WHITE TEST SCORE GAP, 55-85 (Christopher Jencks & Meredith Phillips eds., 1998) ………. 15, 16
Thomas Kane, Racial and Ethnic Preferences in
College Admissions, in THE BLACK-WHITE TEST
SCORE GAP 431-56 (Christopher Jencks & Meredith Phillips eds., 1998) …………………………………………. 27
Jerome Karabel, No Alternative: The Effects of
Color-Blind Admissions in California, in CHILLING ADMISSIONS 33-50 (Gary Orfield & Edward
Miller eds., 1998) …………………………………………………… 27
JONATHAN KOZOL, SAVAGE INEQUALITIES (1991) ………… 9, 16
v
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
HELEN F. LADD ET AL., EQUITY AND ADEQUACY IN
EDUCATION FINANCE: ISSUES AND PERSPECTIVES
(1999) …………………………………………………………………….. 8
HELEN F. LADD & JANET S. HANSEN, COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION FINANCE-NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, MAKING MONEY MATTER: FINANCING AMERICA’S SCHOOLS (1999) ……………………………………………….. 9
AMANDA LEWIS, RACE IN THE SCHOOL YARD (Forthcoming 2003)…………………………………………………………. 12
STANLEY LIEBERSON, A PIECE OF THE PIE: BLACKS
AND WHITE IMMIGRANTS SINCE 1880 (1980)…………. 17, 18
GLENN LOURY, THE ANATOMY OF RACIAL INEQUALITY
(2002) ……………………………………………………………….. 5, 13
SAMUEL R. LUCAS, TRACKING INEQUALITY: STRATIFICATION AND MOBILITY IN AMERICAN HIGH SCHOOLS
(1999) …………………………………………………………………… 10
DOUGLAS S. MASSEY & NANCY A. DENTON, AMERICAN APARTHEID: SEGREGATION AND THE MAKING
OF THE UNDERCLASS (1993)……………………………………….. 7
CHARLES C. MOSKOS & John Sibley BUTLER, ALL WE
CAN BE (1996) ……………………………………………………….. 22
Michael T. Nettles et al., Race and Testing in
College Admissions, in CHILLING ADMISSIONS
(Gary Orfield & Edward Miller eds., 1998)…………..11, 16
FRANK NEWPORT, GALLUP POLL SOCIAL AUDIT:
BLACK-WHITE RELATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES,
2001 UPDATE (July 10, 2001 Poll Release) ……………….. 12
vi
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
JEANNIE OAKES ET AL., EDUCATIONAL MATCHMAKING:
ACADEMIC AND VOCATIONAL TRAINING IN COMPREHIGH SCHOOLS (1992), at http://
HENSIVE
www.rand.org/publications/R/R4189.pdf/…………………. 10
MELVIN L. OLIVER & THOMAS M. SHAPIRO, BLACK
WEALTH/WHITE WEALTH: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON
RACIAL INEQUALITY (1995) ………………………………………..11
GARY ORFIELD, SCHOOLS MORE SEPARATE: CONSEQUENCES OF A DECADE OF RESEGREGATION (2001) ……. 7, 8
ROBERT NASH PARKER, PRESLEY CENTER FOR CRIME
AND JUSTICE STUDIES, TRAFFIC TICKETS, ETHNICITY, AND POLICE PATROL IN RIVERSIDE, 1998: EVIDENCE FOR RACIAL PROFILING IN PATTERNS OF
TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT (2003)…………………………………. 12
MARY PATTILLO-MCCOY, BLACK PICKET FENCES:
PRIVILEGE AND PERIL AMONG THE BLACK MIDDLE
CLASS (1999) …………………………………………………………. 25
Thomas Pettigrew, Prejudice and Discrimination on
the College Campus, in CONFRONTING RACISM:
THE PROBLEM AND THE RESPONSE 263-79 (Jennifer L. Eberhardt & Susan T. Fiske eds., 1998) …………. 26
Thomas Pettigrew & Linda R. Tropp, Does Intergroup Contact Reduce Prejudice? Recent Metaanalytic Findings, in REDUCING PREJUDICE AND
DISCRIMINATION, 93-114 (Stuart Oskamp ed.,
2000)…………………………………………………………………….. 22
LEONARD RUBINOWITZ & JAMES ROSENBAUM, CROSSING THE CLASS AND COLOR LINES (2000) …………………….. 8
PATRICK SHIELDS & CAMILLE ESCH, CENTER FOR THE
FUTURE OF TEACHING AND LEARNING, WHO IS
TEACHING CALIFORNIA’S CHILDREN (2002) ………………….. 9
vii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
JAMES L. SHULMAN & WILLIAM G. BOWEN, THE
GAME OF LIFE (2001)…………………………………………. 28, 29
Russell Skiba, When is Disproportionality Discrimination? The Overrepresentation of Black
Students in School Suspension, in ZERO TOLERANCE: RESISTING THE DRIVE FOR PUNISHMENT IN
OUR SCHOOLS (William Ayres et al. eds., 2001)…………. 12
Claude M. Steele & Joshua Aronson, Stereotype
Threat and the Test Performance of Academically
Successful African Americans, in THE BLACKWHITE TEST SCORE GAP 401-27 (Christopher
Jencks & Meredith Phillips eds., 1998)…………. 16, 17, 18
MITCHELL L. STEVENS, MANAGING PRIVILEGE IN
COLLEGE ADMISSIONS (April 4, 2002) (paper presented at the Department of Sociology Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois)……………………. 19
MARTA TIENDA ET AL., CLOSING THE GAP? ADMISSIONS AND ENROLLMENTS AT THE TEXAS PUBLIC
FLAGSHIPS BEFORE AND AFTER AFFIRMATIVE ACTION (January 21, 2003) (unpublished paper)…………… 27
MARGERY AUSTIN TURNER ET AL., Discrimination in
Metropolitan Housing Markets (2002), at http://www.
huduser.org/publications/pdf/phase1_report.pdf
(visited February 13, 2003)…………………………………… 3, 7
U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 2002 MEDIAN INCOME
OF HOUSEHOLDS BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS,
at http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/income01/
inctab1.html (visited February 8, 2003)…………………….11
DEBRA VAN AUSDALE & JOE R. FEAGIN, THE FIRST R:
HOW CHILDREN LEARN RACE AND RACISM (2001) …..11, 12
MARY C. WATERS, BLACK IDENTITIES (1999) …………………… 9
viii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
SUSAN WIERZBICKI & CHARLES HIRSCHMAN, THE
END OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN WASHINGTON
STATE AND ITS IMPACT ON THE TRANSITION FROM
HIGH SCHOOL TO COLLEGE (May 9, 2002) (revised
version of paper presented at the annual meeting
of the Population Association of America, Atlanta, Georgia)………………………………………………………. 27
WILLIAM JULIUS WILSON, WHEN WORK DISAPPEARS:
THE NEW WORLD OF THE URBAN POOR 112-37
(1996) …………………………………………………………………… 13
JOHN YINGER, CLOSED DOORS, OPPORTUNITIES LOST:
THE CONTINUING COSTS OF HOUSING SEGREGATION (1995) ………………………………………………………….. 7, 8
PERIODICAL MATERIALS
Elijah Anderson, The Ideologically Driven Critique,
107 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY 1533
(2002) …………………………………………………………………… 13
Joshua Aronson et al., When White Men Can’t do
Math: Necessary and Sufficient Factors in Stereotype Threat, 35 JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL
PSYCHOLOGY 29 (1999)……………………………………………. 17
William G. Bowen & Neil Rudenstine, RaceSensitive Admissions: Back to Basics, CHRONICLE
OF HIGHER EDUCATION 49 (Feb. 7, 2003), at
http://chronicle.com/weekly/v49/i22/22b00701.htm ……..25
Marilynn B. Brewer & Layton N. Lui, The Primacy
of Age and Sex in the Structure of Person Categories, 7 SOCIAL COGNITION 262 (1989) …………………………. 5
ix
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
David Card & Alan B. Krueger, School Resources
and Student Outcomes: An Overview of the Literature and New Evidence from North and South
Carolina, 10 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES 31 (1996)………………………………………………………… 8
David Card & Alan B. Krueger, School Resources
and Student Outcomes, 559 ANNALS OF THE
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL
SCIENCE 39 (1998)……………………………………………………. 8
Clifton A. Casteel, Teacher-Student Interactions
and Race in Integrated Classrooms, 92 JOURNAL
OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 115 (1998)…………………….. 10
Camille Z. Charles, The Dynamics of Racial Residential Segregation, ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY (2003) (in press)………………………………………………… 6
Susan Chira, Teen-Agers, in a Poll, Report Worry
and Distrust of Adults, NEW YORK TIMES, July
10, 1994, at 16 ………………………………………………………… 9
A.J. Christopher, Segregation Levels in South
African Cities, 1911-1985, 25 INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL OF AFRICAN HISTORICAL STUDIES 561
(1992) …………………………………………………………………….. 6
Robert Davidson & Ernest Lewis, Affirmative
Action and Other Special Consideration in Admissions at the University of California, Davis,
School of Medicine, 278 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION 1153 (1997) ……………………. 23
Nancy Denton & Douglas S. Massey, Racial Identity among Caribbean Hispanics: The Effect of
Double Minority Status on Residential Segregation, 54 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW 790
(1989) …………………………………………………………………….. 6
x
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
Nancy DiTomaso, Why Anti-Discrimination Policies
Are Not Enough: The Legacies and Consequences
of Affirmative Inclusion – for Whites (August 16,
2000, Anaheim, CA) (Presented at The 95th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association) …………………………………………………………………. 13
Jennifer L. Eberhardt & Susan T. Fiske, Affirmative Action in Theory and Practice: Issues of
Power, Ambiguity, and Gender Versus Race, 15
BASIC AND APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 201
(1994) …………………………………………………………………… 12
Ronald G. Ehrenberg et al., Does Class Size Matter?, 285 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN 79 (2001) …………………… 9
Joe R. Feagin, The Continuing Significance of Race:
Antiblack Discrimination in Public Places, 56
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW 101 (1991) ……………. 12
Gallup Organization, Black/White Relations in the
United States, 1997 (Special report) (June 10,
1997)…………………………………………………………………….. 13
Anthony G. Greenwald & Mahzarin R. Banaji,
Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes, Self-Esteem,
and Stereotypes, 102 PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW 1
(1995) …………………………………………………………………… 13
Maureen T. Hallinan, Race Effects on Students’
Track Mobility in High School, 1 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY OF EDUCATION 1 (1996)………………………… 10, 19
Maureen T. Hallinan, Diversity Effects on Student
Outcomes: Social Science Evidence, 59 OHIO
STATE LAW JOURNAL 733 (1998) …………………………… 8, 22
xi
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
Albert R. Hunt, Service Academies: Affirmative
Action at Work, WALL STREET JOURNAL, January
23, 2003, at A14 …………………………………………………….. 22
Rosabeth M. Kanter, Some Effects of Proportions on
Group Life: Skewed Sex Ratios and Responses to
Token Women, 82 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY 965 (1977) ………………………………………………………. 19
Ivy Kennelly, You’ve Got That Single Mother Element: Employers’ Images of African American
Women, 13 GENDER & SOCIETY 168 (1999) ……………….. 13
G. Kenney & D. A. Wissoker, An Analysis of the
Correlates of Discrimination Facing Young Hispanic Job Seekers, 84 AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW 674 (1994)……………………………………………………… 12
Alan Krueger & Diane Whitmore, The Effect of
Attending a Small Class in the Early Grades on
College-Test Taking and Middle School Test Results: Evidence from Project STAR, NATIONAL
BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH WORKING PAPER
7656 (2000), at http://netec.mcc.ac.uk/WoPEc/
data/Papers/nbrnberwo7656.html (visited February 9, 2003) …………………………………………………………….. 9
Maria Krysan & Reynolds Farley, The Residential
Preferences of Blacks: Do They Explain Persistent
Segregation? 80 SOCIAL FORCES 937 (2002)………………… 6
Richard O. Lempert et al., Michigan’s Minority
Graduates in Practice: The River Runs Through
Law Schools, 25 LAW AND SOCIAL INQUIRY 468
(2000) ………………………………………………………… 21, 23, 24
Michael J. Lovaglia et al., Status Processes and
Mental Ability Test Scores, 104 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY 195 (1998) …………………………………. 18
xii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
Samuel R. Lucas, Hope, Anguish, and the Problem
of Our Time: Comments on Publication of The
Black-White Test Score Gap, 102 TEACHERS COLLEGE RECORD 461 (2001) ………………………………………… 16
Brenda Major et al., Attributional Ambiguity of
Affirmative Action, 15 BASIC AND APPLIED SOCIAL
PSYCHOLOGY 113 (1994) ………………………………………….. 26
Douglas S. Massey & Nancy A. Denton, Suburbanization and Segregation in U.S. Metropolitan Areas, 94 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY 592
(1988) …………………………………………………………………….. 6
Douglas S. Massey & Nancy A. Denton, The Effect
of Residential Segregation on Black Social and
Economic Well-Being, 66 SOCIAL FORCES 29
(1987) …………………………………………………………………. 4, 8
Douglas S. Massey & Mary J. Fischer, Does Rising
Income Bring Integration? New Results for
Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians in 1990, 28 SOCIAL
SCIENCE RESEARCH 316 (1999) ………………………………….. 6
Rachel Moran, Diversity and Its Discontents: The
End of Affirmative Action at Boalt Hall, 88 CALIFORNIA LAW REVIEW 2241 (2000)……………………………… 21
Phillip Moss & Chris Tilly, Soft Skills and Race: An
Investigation of Black Men’s Employment Problems, 23 WORK & OCCUPATIONS 252 (1996) ………………. 13
Evelyn Nieves, Civil Rights Groups Suing Berkeley
over Admissions Policy, NEW YORK TIMES, Section
A, p. 9 (1999)……………………………………………………. 10, 19
C. Matthew Snipp, Sociological Perspectives on
American Indians, 18 ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY 351 (1992) …………………………………………………….. 6
xiii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
Aage B. Sorenson & Maureen T. Hallinan, A Reconceptualization of School Effects, 50 SOCIOLOGY OF
EDUCATION 273 (1977) ……………………………………………. 15
S.J. Spencer et al., Stereotype Threat and Women’s
Math Performance, 35 JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 4 (1999) …………………………….. 16, 17
Claude M. Steele, A Threat in the Air: How Stereotypes Shape Intellectual Identity and Test Performance, 52(6) AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST 613
(1997) …………………………………………………………………… 16
Claude M. Steele & Joshua Aronson, Stereotype
Threat and the Intellectual Test Performance of
African Americans, 69 JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY
AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 797 (1995) ………………………… 16
J. Stone et al., Stereotype Threat on Black and
White Athletic Performance, 77 JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 1214 (1999) ………… 17
Marylee C. Taylor, Impact of Affirmative Action on
Beneficiary Groups: Evidence from the 1990 General Social Survey, 15 BASIC AND APPLIED SOCIAL
PSYCHOLOGY 143 (1994)………………………………………….. 26
Marylee C. Taylor, White Backlash to Workplace
Affirmative Action: Peril or Myth?, 73 SOCIAL
FORCES 1385 (1995) ……………………………………………….. 26
Beth E. Vanfossen et al., Curriculum Tracking and
Status Maintenance, 60(2) SOCIOLOGY OF EDUCATION 104 (1987) ……………………………………………………… 10
Rachel Deyette Werkema, A Calculated Risk, 12
REGIONAL REVIEW 11 (2002) ……………………………………. 10
1
I.
STATEMENT OF INTEREST
1
Over the past fifty years, sociologists and other social
scientists have produced an extensive body of scholarship
demonstrating that race and ethnicity profoundly affect
both the life experiences of individuals and the way
individuals are treated within society. Amici offer their
expertise to aid the Court in determining whether the
admissions systems challenged in these cases are narrowly
2
tailored to serve a compelling state interest.
The American Sociological Association (ASA) is the
major professional association of sociologists in the United
States. ASA has more than 13,000 members, including
most sociologists holding doctoral degrees from accredited
3
universities.
The Law and Society Association is a professional
association of over 1,500 scholars in the social sciences,
1
Written consent to the filing of this brief has been obtained from
the parties in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 37.3(a). Copies of
the consent letters have been filed with the Clerk. Pursuant to Supreme
Court Rule 37.6, the amici state that this brief was not authored in
whole or part by counsel for any party and that no party or entity, other
than the amici and their counsel, made any monetary contribution to
its preparation or submission.
2
To avoid burdening the Court, amici have submitted this brief
solely in Grutter v. Bollinger. The social science evidence discussed here,
however, is equally relevant to the admissions systems challenged in
Gratz v. Bollinger, No. 02-516.
3
Amici thank Barbara Reskin, S. Frank Miyamoto Professor of
Sociology at the University of Washington and immediate past President of the American Sociological Association, for serving as the
principal compiler of the social science data presented in this brief and
for her substantial assistance in authoring the brief.
2
humanities, and law who study the place of law in social,
political, economic, and cultural life.
The Society for the Study of Social Problems is an
interdisciplinary organization of about 1,500 scholars,
practitioners, and students interested in the study of
social problems.
The Association of Black Sociologists is a national,
professional organization of sociologists and social scientists, founded by people of African descent.
Sociologists for Women in Society is an international
organization of almost 1,000 social scientists and researchers who study the position of women within society.
II.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
In 1954, a unanimous Supreme Court recognized that
racial segregation “affects the hearts and minds” of children “in a way unlikely ever to be undone.” Brown v.
Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, 494 (1954). Fifty years
later, the promise of Brown remains unfulfilled: race still
shapes the lives of our children, and our cities and schools
continue to be segregated to an extraordinary degree.
Blacks living in Detroit, New York, and Chicago today are
almost as segregated from whites as were blacks living in
South Africa under apartheid. More than seventy percent
of black children in the United States attend schools that
are majority nonwhite. For Latino children, segregation is
also pronounced: seventy-six percent attend schools that
are majority nonwhite. These segregated schools are
generally inferior in staffing, resources, and programs to
predominantly white schools in similar neighborhoods.
3
School segregation is firmly rooted in residential
segregation emanating from racial prejudice. Despite four
decades of civil rights legislation, studies by the Department of Housing and Urban Development show that black
and Latino renters and buyers face race discrimination
about half the time they visit real estate or rental offices
to inquire about advertised housing (Turner et al. 2002:81). In social surveys, employers openly acknowledge their
reluctance to hire people of color and recount the tactics
they use to discourage minority applicants. Well-designed
experiments demonstrate that almost all Americans
automatically respond negatively toward people of color.
Race shapes every experience of minority children,
from where they live and the schools they attend to the
attitudes they encounter in classrooms, on the streets, at
work, and in stores. Their everyday experiences are
affected not only by their economic circumstances and
other concomitants of race, but by race itself. The life
experience of growing up nonwhite in America renders
other fundamental life experiences, such as living in
poverty, qualitatively different for minorities and whites.
Moreover, minority children learn that they are treated
differently because of their race.
Because growing up black, Latino, or Native American
in the United States is a defining life experience, universities have a compelling interest in considering race when
4
selecting students. Universities seek students who will
4
The University of Michigan considered only students from these
three racial/ethnic groups in its affirmative action plan, so we focus on
these groups as well. Other racial minorities, such as Asian Americans,
do not currently suffer from the degree of segregation and social
(Continued on following page)
4
benefit most from the educational experience, who will add
to that experience through their individual talents and
diverse perspectives, and who will build upon their education to contribute significantly to society after graduation.
Given the pervasive effects of growing up nonwhite,
universities cannot accurately assess a candidate’s potential to contribute to these goals without considering race.
Research has established that considering race among
many other factors produces graduates of all races who
become leaders in law, medicine, science, and public life.
Declaring students’ race out of bounds in admissions
decisions would deny admissions officers crucial information to contextualize other life experiences and accurately
measure academic performance.
When universities consider race in concert with other
life experiences and weigh those experiences individually
for each applicant, attention to race is narrowly tailored.
Unlike approaches that would automatically admit students from impoverished backgrounds or from the top
percentage of every high school class, an individualized
examination of files considers race exactly where it matters, as an individual’s life experience that transcends
most other experiences.
disadvantage in education that blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans
experience (Massey and Denton 1987). As we argue below, however,
race must always be considered in the context of other life experiences.
In some parts of the country, universities may find the experiences of
some Asian American students, particularly recent immigrants,
relevant to their admissions process. The approach we outline here,
focusing on an individualized consideration of race within the context of
an applicant’s other life experiences, would not preclude that consideration.
5
III.
ARGUMENT
A. Universities Have a Compelling Interest in
Considering the Life Experience of Growing
Up Black, Latino, or Native American in Making Admissions Decisions
Social scientists agree that race and gender are
overriding aspects of social identity because of the profound way in which they cut across every other identity,
shaping our life experiences and how others view us
(Brewer and Liu 1989; Committee on the Status of Black
Americans 1989; Loury 2002). The long history of racial
discrimination in the United States, amplified by contemporary forms of discrimination, still molds the lives of
nonwhite children. The life experience of growing up
black, Latino, or Native American today alters the impact
of all factors that universities consider in admissions. To
evaluate applicants fully and fairly and achieve their
institutional goals, universities have a compelling interest
in taking this experience into account.
We summarize below careful, comprehensive research
demonstrating the fundamental ways in which race
shapes life experience. We then explain how this experience is crucial to a university’s assessment of individual
candidates for admission.
1. Residential Segregation
The landscape of America remains indisputably
segregated by race. Social scientists use the “segregation
index” to assess the degree of segregation, ranging from 0
for full integration to 100 for complete segregation. Values
above 60 reflect high levels of segregation. In 2000, the
6
average black-white segregation index in U.S. metropolitan areas was 65; in the Northeast and Midwest it was 74
(Iceland et al. 2002:64). Detroit, the most segregated city
in the United States, had a black-white segregation index
of 85, followed by Milwaukee (82), New York (81), and
5
Chicago (80). Id. These levels approach the degree of
black-white segregation in South Africa under apartheid
(Christopher 1992:573). No other group in U.S. history has
experienced such persistently high levels of segregation.
Latinos also have a long history of segregation from
whites (Grebler et al. 1970:271-90). Hispanics who identify
themselves on the Census as black or racially mixed have
segregation indices well above 60, while the index for
Hispanics who identify as white is in the low to moderate
range (Denton and Massey 1989:803). The same is true of
Native Americans, although the 35 to 45 percent who live
on or near reservations are extremely segregated from
whites (Snipp 1992).
Racism is the driving force in residential segregation.
Almost all blacks would prefer to live in integrated
neighborhoods; those blacks who express a preference for
all-black neighborhoods do so because they believe they
would be unwelcome in integrated neighborhoods (Krysan
and Farley 2002:953). In general, they are right. Although
many whites would accept a few blacks in their neighborhood, all nonblack groups view blacks as the least desirable potential neighbors (Charles 2003:18). Audit studies
5
Affluent blacks are as segregated from whites as poor blacks are
(Massey and Denton 1988:613). Indeed, as racial segregation extends
into the suburbs, affluent blacks typically are more segregated from
whites than are the poorest Latinos (Massey and Fischer 1999:319).
7
demonstrate that blacks consistently encounter discrimination in real estate rentals, sales, and mortgage approvals (Turner et al. 2002:8-1 to 8-3). Levels of housing
discrimination against Latinos increase with the darkness
of their skin, underscoring the racial nature of this bias
(Yinger 1995:179). Residential segregation has been
further aggravated by deliberate acts of racial avoidance,
occasional violence against minorities, local zoning decisions, and the isolation of public housing (
