ago this summer the Supreme Court of the United States ruled on a pivotal case in which I was named as a defendant. Inthe court confirmed by a 5-4 majority the view previously expressed by Justice Lewis Powell inin 1978: that affirmative action in higher education is constitutional under the 14th Amendment, which guarantees “equal protection of the laws” to all.
It will take time to understand the full implications of the court’s ruling. It is important to note, however, that whereas it is the court’s role to declare what the law is, educational institutions must remain committed to the well-supported judgment that students benefit from a diverse learning environment that prepares them to function and lead in a diverse world. We have the expertise, and the right under the First Amendment to provide that to our students.
University leaders should use this moment as an opportunity to rethink admissions and focus even more attention on understanding who their applicants are, and the extent to which these prospective students can be good teachers to each other, so that universities can graduate people who will be engaged, sensitive citizens.
Over the past two decades, higher-income applicants have quite literally been trained to do well on admissions tests. For the most ambitious and well-resourced applicants, gaming the admissions process via test-prep courses, enrichment camps and so on has become a project that, in some cases, can run the entire course of adolescence.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: SkyNews - 🏆 35. / 67 Read more »
Source: TIME - 🏆 93. / 53 Read more »
Source: Channel4News - 🏆 27. / 68 Read more »
Source: Channel4News - 🏆 27. / 68 Read more »
Source: TIME - 🏆 93. / 53 Read more »
Source: SkyNews - 🏆 35. / 67 Read more »