Director of College Counseling

College Prep School

Oakland, Ca

                     References

Rizga, K (2019 September 19). How to keep teachers from leaving the profession. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/09/teachers-need-other-teachers-succeed/598330/

Hartocollis, A. (2020, February 18). The affirmative action battle at Harvard is not over. New York Times. Retrieved from https://wwwnytimes.com/2020/02/18/us/affirmative-action-harvard.htm. 

*Is race-conscious admissions in higher education a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

*Judge Burroughs of the District Circuit Court of Massachusetts ruled that although Harvard's admission practices are not perfect, they met the legal standard that it was not violating the Civil Rights Act. 

*Students for Fair Admission practices are appealing because they believe Judge Burroughs gave Harvard the "benefit of the doubt." 

*Too little weight was given to the statistical analysis and bias towards Asian American students. In turn, Judge Burroughs could not confidently say that the plaintiffs were treated fairly in the process. 

*Amici Curiae have been filed by other ivy league universities with similar admission practices in support of Harvard. 

Bower-Wolf, J. (2020, February 26). Justice Department backs appeal in Harvard affirmative action lawsuit. Education Dive. Retrieved from https://www.educationdive.com/news/justice-department-backs-appeal-in-harvard-affirmative-action-lawsuit/573027/

*Justice Department files brief to offer support of appeals case of Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) against Harvard. The Justice Department's support pushes the district court to rethink its decision.

*The Justice Department support pushes the appeals case towards Supreme Court decision and could unravel decades of affirmative action policies. 

*The Justice Department amicus attacks Judge Burrough's decision as a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and equal treatment under the Constitution. 

*In support of SFFA, several Asian American groups have filed briefs supporting the student group: The Pacific Legal Foundation, Chinese American Citizens Alliance of New York, and The Center for Equal Opportunity.

*SFFA stated that Asian American students are held to a higher standard, and records released by Harvard supported their case. Nevertheless, Judge Burrough sustained Harvard's admission practices. 

Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.

Source of Law: Federal Statute

https://www.justic.gov/crt/fcs/TitleVI

           Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin when programs receive federal funding. This statute establishes that everyone should have the same rights and privileges regardless of race, color, or national origin. Sadly, as admission officers place caps on Asian American students, the result is that certain subgroups are given a pass on admissions that do not have the merit scores for the rigors of highly selective universities (Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 2019). The cost is that the premise behind admitting under representing minority groups is that it diversifies the student body, and drives more discussion in classes. However, this practice assumes that ethnic groups are monolithic in beliefs and personalities. Low socioeconomic (SES) Asian American students suffer from the admission caps, and their views are not valued the same as other low SES groups. High-achieving low SES Asian American students should not be denied admission based on their culture. This act is the very definition of discrimination.  

Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 1:14-cv-14176-DJC of Massachusetts, (2019)

Source of Law: Federal Judicial Law (Federal District Court of Massachusetts). 

https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/ED-MA-0002-9000.pdf

           

Summary:  

 The case against Harvard University is that Asian American students face a higher admission standard than other ethnic groups. Thus, Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) believe that this violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, by not using a race-neutral scoring system, Asian American students are held to a higher standard. Their admissions to the university have stagnated the last decade while their merit-based scores are the highest in the pool of candidates. This stagnation goes against the increased application rates, and higher overall numeral based grades and testing. Also, SFFA believes that Harvard acted with negligence by not working towards a more equitable solution to increase diversity. Ultimately, if the American education system increases its overall rigor, it is the first step in the correct direction to level the playing field. However, students should not suffer for their increased effort and desire to succeed. Sadly, Asian American students are penalized for this increased effort. 

U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Uplift Academy. (2019, June 25). Uplift education board meeting June 25th, 2019. [Video file] Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkT97JI5xCs&list-PLZZ55TnSKw4vVOBxZmxvfdNeaPT.

Source of Law: Constitutional Law

https://constitutionus.com

            The XIV amendment to the constitution is the protection of equal treatment of all citizens of the United States. Furthermore, the amendment protects and grants all citizens equal protection and guarantees their rights under the law. Specifically, in the case of admission quotas, my position is that the cap on admission of certain ethnic groups' is a violation of the XIV amendment. The field of play is set, and the same set of parameters should judge everyone equally. This practice of scoring Asian American students lower in personality scores is baseless and not supported by facts. Also, imposing an arbitrary cap inflicts unnecessary harm to low SES groups by admitting students who do not have the educational background to compete at highly selective institutions. One of the premier charter schools in the Dallas Fort Worth area touts a 100% college acceptance rate for its graduating students. Uplift Schools push their graduating students to look first at private universities as their preference. However, when viewed under a microscope, the numbers tell a different story. Over five years, 50% of the students leave post-secondary education after two years with significant debt. Of the 50% of the students that graduate, half of those students are unable to find jobs earning more than $35,000 a year. Sadly, this places undue stress and riddles them with student loans and less than ideal job prospects (Uplift, 2019). Ultimately, is the mistreatment and discrimination of low SES Asian American students 

Marco DeFunis Jr. v. Odegaard, 416 U.S. 312, (1974). 

Source of Law: Federal Judicial Law 

This United States Supreme Court case was the first case dealing with affirmative action. In 1971, Marco Defunis sued the University of Washington because he was denied admission into the law school. Mr. DeFunis' premise was that the university's law school admission practice of admitting less qualified minority students discriminated against him and violated the XIV Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Initially, the trial court sided with Mr. DeFunis and ordered his admission to the law school in 1971. However, the university appealed the decision, and it made its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court did not rule on this case. The court ruled that because Mr. DeFunis was in his final year of law school at another university, certiorari would void the decision made and its implications. In other words, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that no choice needed to be made on Mr. DeFunis' behalf, because their decision would not change the fact that Mr. DeFunis was finishing law school that year. This case laid the foundation for proceeding affirmative action cases where the plaintiffs received standing and granted some legal precedent. In the end, a prima facie case was pseudo established for plaintiffs to sue for discrimination. 

American Association for School Counselors. (2016). Ethical standards for school counselors. Retrieved from https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/Ethics/Ethical

Standards2016.pdf.

Source of Law: Administrative Law  Ethical Standard: A12 b

Link: https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/Ethics/EthicalStandards2016.pdf.

Summary: 

           On the private school side of secondary education, schools track their students' performance during their first year of college. This information arms schools and counselors with the information needed to modify their high school curriculum to put their students in the best possible position to be successful (M. Bonilla, Personal Communication, July 1, 2020). However, this is a component that public education should borrow as a practice to use as a barometer for students' preparation. As counselors, this practice should be a driving force on the decisions made and the guidance given to students. Ultimately, counselors should not advocate for students to begin their academic careers in an environment where they can find the most success. 

American School Counselor Association (2016). ASCA ethical standards for school counselors. Retrieved from https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/Ethics/EthicalStandards2016.pdf

ASCA A.4 c - Academic, Career and Social/Emotional Plans 

The reality is that an unfair bias towards underrepresented, low socioeconomic status groups has come at the cost of another demographic. Does lowering the standards for one group, validate the expense of another group? In the name of diversifying college campuses with racial diversity supersede that of other ethnic groups with superior merit scores? In the 21st century, does affirmative action and a constant lowering of the bar for one group improve their long-term opportunities? In the end, a fair and open process for all should be the gold standard. Everyone should play by the same set of rules and work towards meeting those standards not to perpetuate stereotypes.  

Ho, P., Park, H., & Kao, G. (2019). Racial and ethnic differences in student participation in private supplementary education activities. Research in social stratification and mobility, 59, 46–59. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0276562418300416

School is the most important job an individual will ever have in their life. School should be a full-time job, and counselors are the gatekeepers towards preparing individuals for their future. Education gives individuals choices and opportunities in life, and outside post-secondary private supplementary education opportunities have to be the norm. Granted, on the public school side, many low socioeconomic status families cannot afford the cost, through proper planning and budgeting, public education could easily fill this void. After school and summer enrichment camps and tutoring should be the norm in areas that need to level the playing field. A culture of "If you want more, you have to do more" has to be the norm. In the end, those who do find success, more often than not, do more.

*Per Judge Burrough's decision that Harvard admission's practice of weighing Asian American student personality indexes lower (PKs in College Counseling terminology), more emphasis should be placed on merit-based scores and recommendation letters. 

*A closer investigation on educational "rigor" and the production of a national standard to set expectations for university admissions. In other words, a similar system used by nations throughout the world. 

*A longitudinal research on the practices, beliefs, and attitudes of high achieving low socioeconomic Asian American students be done. Ultimately, the production of a how-to guide to replicate similar success for other struggling demographics. 

*School guidance counselors play a much more significant role in lower school and work towards building a post-secondary educational attitude amongst students and parents. Family parent education has to be at the forefront of why school is important in achieving the American dream. At this point, school counselors do not play a role in cultivating a parent education philosophy at the lower school levels.

* Perform a longitudinal quantitative and qualitative research study on students exiting post-secondary education before graduation. A parallel research study on the success or lack of success of students who are graduating from post-secondary institutions and their job placement prospects has to coincide. 

*Increased recruitment of college admission officers to train and work with public school counselors. The goal is to give public school counselors a better insight into the best practices of admissions and educate students on how to prepare for post-secondary education (Nichols, 2020). 

Jaschik, S. (2017, August 7). The numbers and arguments on Asian admission. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2017/08/07/look-data-and-arguments-about-asian-americans-and-admissions-elite

Nichols, T. (2020, March 10). School counselors need better training in college admissions. Education Week. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/03/11/school-counselors-need-better-training-on-college.html