Category: Higher Education

In one paragraph, Columbia professor Samuel G. Freedman congratulates Gates for bringing

“intellectual honesty” to the admissions debate. In another paragraph, Freedman says that although

Gates asks the right questions, he gives the wrong answers. See the paragraphs below. Is Gates

honestly confused? [Quote:] Gates of Texas A&M asked the right questions, even if he gave the wrong

answers. He recognized that the college admissions system is profoundly flawed. He erred in continuing

to trust standardized tests and thinking that, without racial or legacy considerations, the playing

field would be level.

It never can be perfectly level, and we should operate on that

assumption. If we give up the notion that merit can be measured by a test, and if we acknowledge that

many variables contribute to an applicant’s prospects and to his or her ultimate value to a college,

we can bring integrity and sanity back to the admissions process.

Diversity should be a

plus; so should legacy, high grades and many other factors. Once we unshackle ourselves from this

belief in statistical objectivity – once we plainly say that admissions decisions are an art, not a

science – we can lay to rest the merit-vs.-race argument and save millions of high school kids and

their parents from the collective nervous breakdown that applying to college has

become.

I know this new way can work, because I have experienced it. As a faculty member

at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, I have operated in just such an

unapologetically subjective system for a dozen years. Our program consciously has refused to require

standardized tests because of our conviction that they largely tell us who had enough money to pay for

Princeton Review or Kaplan courses.[end quote, USA Tdoay, Jan.

22]

Email: “Hola, Greg”
from Professor Marco Portales,
Texas A&M

University
Thu, 29 Jan 2004

Dear Greg,

Glad I have your e-mail

address from your
Texas Civil Rights Review website. Good to
see some outside help. I read your

letter to
the Eagle and the one to the Battalion and
meant to write to you . . . but I

have
been busy finishing the books listed below.
I have been writing on the race issue

for
awhile, as you may have gathered. FYI: When the minority faculty and staff met

with
President Gates on campus on December 18th,
2003 (a meeting that was not reported by any

of
the media), four Latino faculty members
stood up, as well as several other faculty

and
staff TAMU members, to urge him to follow
the Grutter decision, to leave legacy behind,

and
to do several other things that we believe would
improve our chances of recruiting more

minority
students and faculty. But he was already committed
to the position of admitting

applicants only on
“merit” considerations, excluding race anew (as
Hopwood, which has now been

superseded)
required between 1996 and 2003.

Below I am sending you my recent

and
forthcoming publications, two of which
address the issue of why we should embrace
race, in

keeping with the Constitution. As
you can see, I don’t buy the way conservative
groups have

interpreted the 14th Amendment
for their convenience, just as they had it their
way before the

Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Part of the problem is that they always want it
their way, and only

their way, without working to
bring in the perspectives of minorities.
Fortunately, Justice

O’Connor saw the
constitutionality of Bakke. So we are
constitutionally correct; the problem is

that
they have the power and the support of the
general public,

unfortunately….

Best

regards,
Marco

_____________________________

BOOK MANUSCRIPTS

under Contract for Publication

“Quality Education for Latinos: Print and Oral Skills

for All Students, K-College”; this book manuscript, written with my wife, Rita Portales, is designed

to produce more academically-competitive minority students. The 272-page manuscript received an

advanced contract from the University of Texas
Press in the summer of 2003 and will be published

late in 2004 or early 2005

“Latino Sun, Rising: Our Spanish-speaking U.S. World” is a

collection of 44 essays divided into three parts: Youth (8), Parenthood (12), and Public Policy Issues

(24).

The Texas A&M Press will published this 310-page
manuscript in Fall 2004

BOOK

CrowdingOut Latinos: Mexican Americans in the Public

Consciousness Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2000; 209 pages

FORTHCOMING

ARTICLE

“A History of Latino Segregation Lawsuits” in The Unfinished Agenda of Brown

v. Board of Education, edited by James Anderson; Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, (March or

April, 2004, 20 pp.

REFEREED PUBLICATIONS

“Can the Supreme Court

Constitutionally Uphold the
Hopwood Opinion? Race, ‘Color-blindness’ and Public Opinion before

Bakke,” Callaloo: A Journal of African Diaspora Arts & Letters , Volume 26, Number 1, Winter 2003,

26-46. Article traces the history of the concept of “color- blindness” from the Reconstruction Period

following the Civil War to Bakke and Hopwood.

“Examining the Recruitment and

Enrollment of Eligible Hispanic and African American Students at Selective Public Texas

Universities,” New York: AMS Press, Inc., 1999, Volume 16, Readings on Equal Education, an education

series. One of eleven articles in Education of Hispanics in the United States: Politics, Policies and

Outcomes, pp. 201-222.

“Hopwood, Race, Bakke and the Constitution,” Texas Hispanic

Journal of Law and Policy, University of Texas School of Law publication, Volume 4, Number 1, Spring

1998, pp. 29-44.

“Anti-Hopwood: Why Race Ought to be Legally Recognized,” The

Hopwood Effect: Problems, Prospects, and Impacts on Minorities in Higher Education; conference

proceedings, edited by Mitchell Rice, Race and Ethnic Studies Institute, Texas A&M University, Fall

1998; pp. 172-176.

“Affirmative Action: Best Idea, So Far,” Hispanonoticias: The

Hispanic Caucus of the American Association for Higher Education, featured one-page article; June

1995.

“K-12 Education and the Responsibilities of the University,” one-page excerpt

published by HACU, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities; Seventh Annual Meeting

presentation; Washington, D.C., October 1993.

At an October 2003 meeting of Texas admissions officers, General Counsel

of the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Jan Greenberg explained the legalities of Affirmative

Action. See the slide show yourself at our Download

section.

AUSTIN — Minority lawmakers demanded Monday that Texas A&M University set concrete

goals for increasing minority enrollment in the wake of its controversial policy not to consider race

in

admissions.

Source:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2281130

I would like to post a contrary view that is likely to be unpopular on this site. My

intent is not to be a troll, but to generate a serious discussion and exchange some different points of

view, even at the risk of getting flamed.

[This message was originally posted as a

“comment” to one of the items below. It deserves to be lifted out for fuller consideration. I am

replying to jblanton at the “Forums” section. See “reply to legacy” under “Texas A&M Today” and

“reply to affirmative action under “Philosophy of Affirmative Action”–gm] First of all, as an

alum of Texas A&M, I have two different perspectives on the legacy issue. As a father, I certainly like

the idea of my daughters getting an extra 4 points on a 100 point admissions scale. A&M is a great

school and is much more competitive now than it was when I attended, and it wasn’t that easy to get in

back then. And as a parent, you always want what is best for your kids. However, in the context of the

recent admissions changes which are supposed to make admissions based soley on merit, I understand the

need to eliminate the legacy benefit. President Gates has as well, and I support his decision to remove

it. My point is that people who like the idea of legacies getting a little extra help aren’t

necessarily doing it because they hope to keep a minority student from being admitted, just as a

supporter of affirmative action in admissions isn’t doing it with the main purpose of depriving a

white guy of getting admitted. From the soundbites I’ve seen on the news, some protesters seem to

think that the legacy policy was designed with a secret racist agenda to screw over minorities, and I

really don’t think that’s the case.

With regard to affirmative action, I think we need

to step back and look at the bigger picture. It is a fact that the student population of Texas A&M is

weighted towards whites relative to the ethnic makeup of the population of the state it serves. It is

also true that historically, minorities were not admitted, so there is a history of discrimination.

Finally, regardless of your point of view, I think most reasonable people would agree that diversity is

a good thing, especially at an institution of higher learning. In fact, it is a necessity IMHO for A&M

to continue to be a top-notch, world-class university, and Gates has acknowledged as

much.

I see two questions from this. The first is: when have you reached the goal? The

second is: what is the best way to achieve it?

Gates didn’t come right out and state

what the racial breakdown should be for the student population, he just said that it’s not what it

should be and that A&M needs to increase the minority enrollment. I agree with that position. Take

Prarie View A&M for example. Prarie View A&M has traditionally been a mostly black college. I think it

would probably benefit them as well to diversify their student populace for the same reasons as I think

the College Station campus should. Diversity is a good thing. Does that mean Prarie View A&M needs to

establish an affirmative action program for non-blacks? I don’t think so. Should the student body

relect the overall state population’s ethnic makeup exactly? Again, I don’t think so. I still think

A&M (College Station) needs to continue to strive to increase minority enrollment, but like everything

else, it should be put in perspective.

So, let me address the second question: what is

the best way to increase minority enrollment? Affirmative action is one way of doing it, but is it the

best way? Although the U.S. Supreme Court decided that it is constitutional, race cannot be the primary

factor in admissions, nor are any kind of quotas allowed. Secondly, if you do use it, it is a very

controversial method, even if the intent is good. If you’re a white guy that doesn’t get admitted

while someone else with a slightly lower score does because they happened to get extra points due to

their race, it’s hard to view it as anything but reverse discrimination. It makes some people

resentful and others get unfairly labeled. I’m not a minority, but I imagine it would make me angry if

someone accused me of obtaining something not because of my hard work but the color of my

skin.

Gates has suggested special minority recruitment programs, which certainly is

certainly a good idea. But why do A&M (and other universities) have to recruit top minority students?

i.e., why aren’t there enough “good” minority students to go around so that you don’t have to make

such a special effort to recruit them?

I think the biggest civil rights issue isn’t

with A&M’s office of admissions, but rather the secondary education system. Secondary eduction in

Texas has traditionally been funded with local property taxes, and local property taxes vary widely

depending on the socioeconomic condition of the local populace. Minorities that were historically

discriminated against tend to be concentrated in poorer property districts, which in a lot of cases

means their kids go to crappy schools and get a crappy education, and then have trouble competing to

get in to A&M or UT or get a decent job. Seems like a vicious cycle to me. By ensuring that every Texas

kid gets an opportunity for a decent secondary education, we don’t have to fix the problem with a

controversial affirmative action program when that kid gets older and wants to compete for a slot at a

prestigious university or a decent job. The state legislature is supposedly supposed to take this issue

up in the near future. Maybe they can get it right this time.

Well, that’s it. I don’t

mean to be insensitive or rude, so if I’ve come across that way, I apologize. I am just trying to

start an open and honest discussion, and I’m open to listening to other points of view. Flame on. And

Gig’em Aggies.