The Observer, December 8, 2006
Volume XXXIX, Issue 13
Filling racial quotas not solving root of problem
Recently it was revealed how two urban public schools in Seattle maintain racial quotas in order to keep a proper "balance." Apparently, a white woman who desired admission for her child to a kindergarten in Kentucky was denied entry because the school needed black children to maintain the district's required minimum of "15 percent."
The interesting nature of these cases is the implication that perhaps racial quotas and other measures desired to bring along integration are acceptable since they are in fact for a good cause. The Supreme Court seemed to be divided upon this issue with more conservative justices stating that forced integration in the light of racial quotas is unconstitutional. There also was the suggestion that these integration plans should be subject to close examination like the schools under Brown v. Board of Education.
In the American psyche, there seems to be a particular sensitivity about race, especially in the school system. However, I would argue that it is not only unconstitutional but ultimately defeating to hold racial quotas of any sort, even those deemed "beneficial" towards more ideal racial integration. Although there is an argument that racial diversity is a compelling enough interest to merit a sort of extra-societal measure such as quotas and affirmative action, racial quotas of any sort are rather self–defeating to their cause.
In many instances where these forced integration plans occur, many minority students are rather unprepared educationally and emotionally to deal with the nature of a particular public school. Many minority students who end up failing in public schools are often not given the help that they are needed both academically and emotionally.
On a more personal level, I once tutored an after–school program at an urban middle school in New York City with a large number of poor minority students. One of the major issues that I had was that these children had grown up in rough neighborhoods and did not know how to manage their anger well or understand rules of social behavior. It was often a long battle of trying to settle down the class before actually managing to teach anything at all.
In essence, the traditional school structure would have been better served not by districting these students to other schools with a wealthier white majority but actually having an infrastructure tailored to help these students succeed with more counselors and other resources. I believe instances such as these are indicative of the fact that racial quotas and forced integration have not sweepingly changed the socioeconomic face of poor minorities in the United States.
The experiment is dead and for good reason. It's an imposed artificiality that is further justified in the minds of the men and women who propagate such a system when they see it as an appropriate gesture of social empowerment. However, it would seem as if this gesture, this forced racial integration serves more to alleviate the guilt and ego of school administrators and the like who seek to impose these measures more than to actually help impoverished minorities.
I am not advocating a separate–but equal–type mentality, but rather pointing out that integration is a useless gesture by itself and that there must be better measures to help minorities. While integration is a noble gesture, it is secondary to actually really helping out impoverished minorities. When one enforces racial quotas, there is a strong perception of entitlement to minorities which is a ridiculous idea yet commonly held amongst far too many people in the United States. This is a tragedy because it detracts from the real issues and the real needs that minorities need to actually sustain an equal footing in this country.
Hon is a first–year student whose major is currently undecided. He is a member of the Cycling Club and the Philosophy Society.
