New version page

CSUF READ 290 - 290 Exam #1 practice (Aff. Action)

Upgrade to remove ads

This preview shows page 1 out of 3 pages.

View Full Document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 3 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Upgrade to remove ads
Unformatted text preview:

Exam #1 Practice AnalysisDirections: Read carefully the article below and the analysis provided in Titanium. Highlight the claim/conclusion in yellow. Highlight reasons in green. Highlight ambiguous terms in purple. Please type your answers to the questions below in a different colored font. Save and submit in Titanium. This is worth 20 points.1. What are the issue and conclusion?The issue is, “Are affirmative action admissions policies for professional schools desirable?” The conclusion is, “It is not desirable to have affirmative action admission policies for professional schools.” 2. What are the reasons?- Discrimination of white people should be considered illegal, if racial discrimination against people of color is illegal- Affirmative action policies create bigger conflicts between people of color and whites by calling attention to racial characteristics- Should set up more professional schools if their focus is to create more nonwhite professional schools- It is ridiculous to attempt to convince that people of color and each occupation is proportionally equal to people of color in the workforce. It can be seen if one will admit that in particular occupations it is not distributed the same as the distribution of racial characteristics in the population- Race is just as significant as class and sex are in deciding social inequity. Havinga focus on race immortalizes inequity while trying to limit it- Nonwhites who are admitted to professional schools by affirmative action admissions, most of the times they are somewhat unqualified. Quality of professional services will be reduced if they admit unqualified applicants. 3. What words or phrases are ambiguous?- Affirmative action admissions policies4. What are the value conflicts and assumptions?The worth clashes are the discussion between uniformity of condition where minorities are getting a relative sum if confirmation spaces in proficient schools and independence where individuals who are against governmental policy regarding minorities in society affirmation arrangements tend to, "lean toward independence to fairness of condition." a supposition that is being made is that it is dependent upon the distinct individual to procure the option to have a spot in the expert school with noassistance from the legislature.5. What are the descriptive assumptions?1One descriptive assumption that is candidate quality and how minorities who are conceded under the governmental policy regarding minorities in society strategies are regularly not qualified. another supposition that will be that the previous history on how minorities were dealt with ought not be a thought in deciding the decency of procuring. Ultimately, they accept that white people groups response to these affirmations’ approaches will shape the potentially pessimistic perspectives of white individuals who are dismissed.6. What is a euphemism?It can be used discreetly to refer to taboo topics such as sex, disabilities, bodily excretions, death or to mask profanity in a polite way. Often times an inoffensive word of phrase is substituted for an offensive one. Generally innocuous or inoffensive words or expressions used in place of ones that may be found offensive. 7. What is an inference?An inference is the conclusion that is made by the reader that is based on evidence or details shared by the author. Someone who infers concludes something from reasoning and makes guesses based on evidence. Admission to Professional SchoolsMost professional schools have many more applicants for admission than the schools can admit. Since access to education that will result in graduates becoming doctors, dentists, or lawyers is so valuable an opportunity, this access should not be decided by reference tothe racial characteristics of applicants. Yet many nonwhites argue for admissions policiesthat reflect “affirmative action.” Affirmative action is a euphemism for making admissions decisions on the basis of race. Those for whom racial equality has been requested are now trying to be more equal than white applicants to professional schools. If admissions and hiring decisions are illegal when they exclude nonwhites from fair consideration, then they should be illegal when they favor these same nonwhites.Affirmative action admissions policies for professional schools are disruptive, unnecessary, and even dangerous. If one desires racial harmony, as I do, then affirmative action policies that unfairly aid nonwhites will be disruptive of our hopes. Whites who are denied access, as well as their sympathizers, will probably be quite negative in their future attitudes toward nonwhites. Affirmative action reminds us of our race and the fact that other racial groups are advancing at our expense. If the objective that affirmative action is attempting to achieve is more nonwhite doctors, lawyers, and dentists, then a more acceptable option would be the creation of more professional schools.2Those who support admissions policies based on affirmative action should be very careful. If the goal of these policies is to bring representation in professions up to a level consistent with the minority’s representation in the general population, then shouldn’t the same reasoning be applied to other occupations? Because there are a disproportionate number of nonwhites on professional sports teams, wouldn’t it be a natural extension of affirmative action admissions policies to require coaches to reserve a certain number of team positions for white players?Affirmative action admissions policies are highly discriminatory. How do admissions committees decide which minorities to discriminate in favor of? Surely, many other groups besides nonwhites are treated unfairly in our society. In all seriousness, why shouldn’t women and poor, fat, ugly, or dirty people be given preference for admissions, since no one can deny that they have been victims of prior discrimination? In fairness, we should either grant special admission privileges to all past victims of injustice or we should continue the current admissions policies based on merit. Nonwhites who are not qualified simply should not be granted scarce training slots in professional schools. The United States Post-Secondary Testing Center has conclusively demonstrated that the average nonwhite applicant is less qualified than is his white counterpart. Yet we all know that under the guise of affirmative action, this inequality is

View Full Document
Download 290 Exam #1 practice (Aff. Action)
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...

Join to view 290 Exam #1 practice (Aff. Action) and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view 290 Exam #1 practice (Aff. Action) 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.


By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?