University of California Berkeley - Blue and Gold Yearbook (Berkeley, CA)

Page 25 text:

« v Stationed at the r a I 1 v are stu- dents %itfi American llags draped over them [aho e| Part ot the protest included an Our univcr- sit sign that represented the students ' desire lor control o cr the decisions aflectin their school (left]. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION 23

Page 24 text:

Who Belones Where? BY TRAGI BROWN AND VINCE MA The issue of political correctness merged with the debate on affirmative action and students formed unvoiced stereotypes that affected the way they viewed their classmates. arni-s obscrvinsJ the crowd. The intensity of the day is seen ni their tares. In the fall of 1990, the Vlmi York Tiwl-s published an article cxaniinina a rising campus phenomenon called political correctness. American society adopted the term as their phrase for the 90s, and the media, who utilized the PC explosion to its maximum capacity, began to manipulate the public into silencing their own free speech. The new McCarthyism, as the phenomenon was named by NfHSH-eek, described a disseminating tendency within collegiate institutions to quel! free speech through their feverish attempts to fioht sexism, racism, homophobia, and ethnocentrism. A controversy soon detonated in a countrv now in fear of its own words. Opinions that were once accepted were now offensive, and stereotypes that had been upheld for so long became politically incorrect. The debate, in hich the politically correct determined the right of others to voice or make certain judgements, took center stage. The university setting, a former convergence of intellectual and philosophical freedom, would emerge as a political correctness catalyst for the nation. The manner in which opinions were expressed and the way that fellow students were iewcd was changed forever, as unexpressed beliefs were hidden away behind a wall of PC caution. In the midst of the political correctness debate advanced the controversy over affirmative action. Issues of race, ethnicity, privilege, and morality enveloped the University setting and students were forced to face subjects once silenced by the PC explosion. Off limits arguements were opened for discussion and students began to dispute over the notion that, by ardently pursuing a diverse student body, the University would lower its standards and sacrifice its academic excellence. Matters of equality, reverse discrimination, and a right to the best possible education placed students, feeling victimized and cheated, onto the offensive. The heated debate over affirmative action became a battle for justice and justification. Students, now jaded with feelings of aggression and bitterness, began to view their peers with closed minds. The following characterizations are a compila- tion of admission situations and do not reflect any particular students at this or any other university. Athletes ' Advantage He had a high school GPA of 2.3 and a score of 950 on the SAT. Atter leading his high school football team to the state championships, this highly recruited senior chose to attend Berkeley over Arizona State, Cal State Long Beach, and Georgia Tech. Once at Cal, he led the team to a Pac-10 Conference championship. His talents wooed many alumni and football fans who would ultimately donate millions of dollars to the school. While at Cal he maintained a 2.0 GPA, and, with extra help from the personal tutoring services and counselors offered by the athletic program, graduated in six years with a degree in history. Should he have been admitted to Cal? Deferred to Spring Semester She was president of her student body, editor of the 2 2 I UK.

Page 26 text:

continticJ from piigc 22] Should minorities, who wouldn ' t be admitted on merit alone, receive special privleges, regardless of socioeconomic status? school newspaper, a member of both the soccer and tennis teams, head of the debate club, and first cello in the orchestra. A 3.8 unweighted GPA and 1250 SAT allowed this Caucasian student to graduate from high school first in a class of 600. After turning down offers from UCLA, Northwestern, and Boston University, she accepted Berkeley ' s offer to defer her enrollment to second semester. She would spend the first part of her freshmen year in the UC Extension program, a smaller and more specialized form of the University setting that would provide extra attention and help integrate high school students into university life. The program would have a high Caucasian and Asian enrollment of students who would enter Berkeley in the spring and take the place of others who had dropped out after the first semester. Because University Extension students are not guaranteed freshmen housing she would have to live at home and commute from San Francisco each day until she could move into the dorms second semester. Would she have been accepted through merit-based admissions? Did she suffer, while someone else benefited from affirmative action? Didn ' t Need Affirmative Action Before graduating from high school as the first African-American valedictorian in her mostly Caucasian community, this high school senior accepted an offer from Berkeley. After turning down Columbia and Brown University due to the financial burdens, she enrolled in the College of Chemistry as a chemical engineering major. She earned a 4.0 GPA her first semester and made her way onto the Dean ' s list during the following three years. She had secured her admission to the University through academic merit alone, but, in her four years at Cal, sensed that her classmates believed she was the product of affirmative action. She felt as though she had to make a great effort to counteract the stereotype that all minorities must have had some type of help from special admission policies. Would her views on Affirmative Action be influenced by her experiences as an African-American woman admitted through merit? Si ns lultl liiali throut liout tlic dav were a sliow ol soluLinlv -is .1 nceii lor eanipus (li ers]ty was expressed [below].