Quick Takes: Affirmative Action Ban Upheld, Student Stress, Harvard Law Promotes Public Service, Debate on Prof's Pose on S/M Web Site, Black Hawk Cuts Jobs, NJ Probes Gossip Site, Student Avoids Expulsion in Facebook Case, NEH Honors Updike
A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit challenging Michigan's 2006 voter referendum that barred affirmative action at public colleges and other state agencies. A coalition of groups had challenged the measure as discriminatory against minority students. The Detroit News reported, however, that David Lawson, a federal district judge, ruled that the plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate discriminatory intent. The plaintiffs needed to show, Lawson said in his decision, that the measure was created "because of, not merely in spite of, its adverse effects upon an identifiable group." He added: "The court cannot say that the only purpose of Proposal 2 is to discriminate against minorities."
A new poll of four-year college students, conducted by the Associated Press and mtvU, has found that many experience stress but many are also happy. According to the poll, 4 in 10 students say that they feel stress often, and nearly 1 in 5 say that they feel it all of the time. About 1 in 6 said that they have friends who have discussed committing suicide. The survey generally found female students to experience more stress than male students, and white students to report more stress than black or Latino students. While the AP report emphasizes the statistics that suggest a major stress problem on campus, the poll also found that 6 in 10 said that they are usually hopeful and enjoy life, and half of students said that they felt understood by their families.
The Harvard University Law School announced Tuesday that it would waive tuition for third-year students who pledge to work for five years following graduation in public service. While Harvard and many other law schools have loan-forgiveness programs, the new effort is believed to be the first program of its kind.
A deputy provost at the University of New Mexico has determined that no ethics review is needed of a professor who posed with a graduate student on a sadomasochism Web site, the Albuquerque Journal reported. Some faculty members had demanded an investigation, saying that they were not objecting to the professor's decision to pose for the site, but her decision to do so with a graduate student. But the administrative inquiry, while finding "poor judgment" by the professor, found that no university funds or equipment were used, and that the graduate student participation was entirely voluntary, and so there were not grounds for further review.
Black Hawk College, in Illinois, is eliminating 38 jobs, representing about 10 percent of its employee positions, to deal with limits on state funds, the Quad City Times reported. Sixteen jobs are being eliminated through layoffs. The United Auto Workers, which represents clerical, custodial and day-care employees at the college, said it did not object to cuts, but believed that too many of the jobs being eliminated were hourly positions that are part of the UAW unit, as opposed to administrators' jobs.
JuicyCampus.com, the Web site where college students post anonymous gossip, much of it sexual, has been causing controversy on many campuses. New Jersey's attorney general is now investigating whether the site violates consumer fraud laws, The Star-Ledger reported. The state authorities have subpoenaed from the Web site records showing how it selects colleges to feature, how it verifies the age of participants and how it responds to complaints. The state also sent a subpoena to an advertising company that works with JuicyCampus.com and the company said it would pull advertising from the site.
Ryerson University, in Toronto, has decided not to expel a student who was the administrator for a Facebook group in which students helped one another on chemistry assignments (as they viewed it) or cheated by sharing answers (as others viewed it), The Globe and Mail reported. While the student avoided being kicked out, he will receive a zero for the assignment that prompted the dispute, and will have a disciplinary note placed in his file.
The National Endowment for the Humanities announced Tuesday that John Updike will deliver the 2008 Jefferson Lecture. Giving the lecture is considered the top honor of the federal government for intellectual achievement in the humanities.
Comments on
Quick Takes: Affirmative Action Ban Upheld, Student Stress, Harvard Law Promotes Public Service, Debate on Prof's Pose on S/M Web Site, Black Hawk Cuts Jobs, NJ Probes Gossip Site, Student Avoids Expulsion in Facebook Case, NEH Honors Updike
Cooler heads prevail, again
Posted
by Martin
on March 19, 2008 at 9:10am EDT
It is refreshing to see the Michigan higher courts ruling in favor of the people's voice in squashing Affirmative Action in the state. I have said and will continue to say that Affirmative Action in its current form is ineffective at best, discriminatory in its worst form. This is not a popular view I know, but I am finishing a book on my 30 years in higher education at an HBCU, where I will show clearly that Affirmative Action hurts minorities more than helps.
Affirmative Action
Posted
by Bernie
on March 19, 2008 at 10:25am EDT
Let me see now, working at an HBCU for 30 years and writing another book on the ills of Affirmative Action is just what we need....with all of the data about unequal treatment in the judicial system, the educational system, and society in general I am even more sure that we don't need Affirmative Actions....yeah right!
Posted
by With the voters
on March 19, 2008 at 11:10am EDT
"I have said and will continue to say that Affirmative Action in its current form is ineffective at best, discriminatory in its worst form. This is not a popular view I know..."
A perplexing statement indeed. When the issue of affirmative action is put to a vote the people choose to restore the 14th amendment and end legally-sanctioned discrimination. It is widely expected they will do the same this fall in multiple states thanks to the efforts of the civil-rights giant Ward Connerly. You are right about affirmative action Martin, but wrong about its popularity. With the Supreme Court purporting to find a constitutional right to discriminate for up to 25 years, the battle for equal treatment has had to be fought state by state; thankfully the voters are clearly ahead of the Supreme Court and much of academe on this.
Wow, such venom
Posted
by Martin
on March 19, 2008 at 12:20pm EDT
Well Bernie, did I mention that I am a white male who worked at an HBCU for all those years? Your comments are typical, but perhaps getting the Affirmative Action argument from another side will be interesting, yes? See you did not read my comment correctly, I never once said that there was justice or equality in the world, there never has been. What I did say was the Affirmative Action IN ITS CURRENT FORM, is not effective. With some overhaul and more oversight, with some understanding of what affirmative action really is and who it should be helping, we could reform affirmative action and make it better. I will be the first, with first hand experience from both sides of the argument, to say that prejudice and inequalities still exist in America, but the answers are NOT in our current affirmative action plans. Period.
Clarification
Posted
by Martin
on March 19, 2008 at 1:25pm EDT
To with the voters, I meant by my statement that to say Affirmative Action does not work is not popular, I did not mean to infer that people are not for some form of Affirmative Action that ensures legal rights for all. The simple basis of Affirmative Action should be equal access to all who qualify, thus meaning that a student should be given full access to education, services, etc, IF he is qualified for that access. We can no longer grant access to education and programs because of race, and exclude others who might be qualified, because of race; instead ensure access to all who have done what is needed to succeed. That is the American way, we have to make sure that the old saying about if you work hard, study hard, and do the right things, you will have the opportunity to succeed, but only on your merits not on the basis of your race.
Plain English Rules OK
Posted
by Chuck
on March 19, 2008 at 4:20pm EDT
The deal with the Michigan case reported here is pretty simple. In 2008, voters widely and strongly dislike double standards based on someone's gender, race or ethnicity in public spheres.
No matter what historical claims, modern threats, slick alibis or guilt-tripping justifications the defenders of affirmation action preferences try to make, the courts and voters reject them time after time after time.......
The howling and berating will continue throughout this election year, sad to say. But the result will be the same: voters and courts will continue to reject racial and gender double standards.
It is indeed, time to move on........
affirmative action
Posted
by Theron
on March 20, 2008 at 10:05am EDT
Of course, SOME affirmative action works: legacy admits, faculty/staff kids, corporate donor perks, sports "scholarships," veterans' preferences,and so forth. Kind of like bank bailouts concurrently with increased foreclosures. Corporate welfare vs. individual welfare.
ALL affirmative action examples are parts of social constructions...or reflect social values and perceptions. What is it about affirmative action for the poor and people of color that so rankles?
All actions
Posted
by Dr. F. Gump
on March 24, 2008 at 8:55pm EDT
Theron, For many of us, any action for admission, hiring, promotion, etc. is bad. Those of us in the middle don't benefit from legacy admits/hires nor do we benefit from faculty or large donors' kids getting special acceptance status.
For us post-moderns, "The Rules" may not be anywhere near completely objective, but having a consistent set of hiring, admissions, promotion, etc. rules at least gives everyone some stability.
Legacy brats or someone with 1/42nd ___?____ ancestry may still be able to argue their way into a special admit, but by and large, let's stop blocking hard-working, studious, honest, ambitious kids from every background just to fight an old political battle.