Number 19 - December 5, 2002
The size of the type may be changed by clicking on view at the top of
your browser and selecting "text size". The document will
print in the size you select.
do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: 'now, you are free
to go where you want, do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please.'
You do not take a man who for years has been hobbled by chains, liberate
him, bring him to the starting line of a race, saying, 'you are free
to compete with all the others,' and still justly believe you have been
completely fair . . . This is the next and more profound stage of the
battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity -
not just legal equity but human ability - not just equality as a right
and a theory, but equality as a fact and as a result."
- President Lyndon
B. Johnson, addressing the graduating class of Howard University, July
Sometime next summer,
affirmative action in higher education may finally come undone. President
Johnson's promise of a national commitment to equality of "results"
- that is, numerically provable Black representation at all levels of
society in something resembling their proportions of the population
- rang like victory's bell. The President of the U.S. had embraced not
only the moral underpinnings of the movement, but the absolute necessity
of the achievement of Black people's material goals.
Ask anyone Black
who remembers that day if they felt "shamed" or "insulted"
by Johnson's words. To be sure, many African Americans doubted the Texan's
sincerity, and few believed that he spoke for the bulk of white America.
But to hear Power acknowledge the Truth of the debt owed to all African
Americans for the very first time in U.S. history, was glorious.
Johnson's words might come to nothing, but at least we knew that our
hands had wrenched them from his lips. He had abandoned all claims to
the moral authority of white privilege, and accepted the government's
responsibility to redress historical crimes by adjusting the playing
field to our advantage.
There was at that
time little doubt about the meaning of affirmative action, although
the suddenness of Johnson's capitulation revealed that few actual plans
of implementation existed, even on paper. The promise was unambiguous:
the rules would be changed to effectuate the desired societal results.
There was also no confusion as to who was to benefit from affirmative
action: Black people. Period. Who else had been "hobbled in chains...?"
The morally flabby and legally vague term "diversity" had
not yet made its appearance.
Long march backwards
We will not recount
the details of the disintegration of the national commitment announced
by LBJ 37 years ago. It is enough to say that the same forces that opposed
every advance of Black people, before and after the 1954 school desegregation
decision have all but completed their long march backwards. They are
one U.S. Supreme Court swing vote away from administering the coup
de grace to even the flaccid concept of "diversity" in
student enrollment at the University of Michigan's law school. Two white
female high school "B" students will make the case that their
"right" to "equal protection under the law" trumps
centuries of historical wrongs - that they have educational "rights"
based largely on test scores.
The Michigan law
school admitted Blacks and Hispanics whose academic records were similar
to or lesser than the two white women's because the alternative would
have been an almost lily-white student body. The pool of applicants'
test scores said so. As reported by the New York Times, December 3:
Despite its outreach
and recruitment efforts, the university said, the law school received
only 35 applications from minority students at the top range of undergraduate
grades and law board scores that account for nearly all admissions.
In contrast, the school received 900 applications from white students
in that range.
Even with a "race-blind
lottery," the [university's] brief said, "the percentage
of African-American students enrolled would almost certainly fall
below 3 percent." At the law school today, 74 of 1,109 students
are black (6.7 percent) and 49 are Hispanic (4.4 percent)....
The law school
considers not only grades and scores but also "soft variables,"
including unusual achievements and experiences, non-academic performance,
personal background, and ability to make a "notable contribution"
to the class. The policy seeks "meaningful numbers" of students
from groups that have been historically discriminated against, in
the belief that learning to "work more effectively and more sensitively"
in a multiracial world is important for a lawyer's education.
The law school is
tepidly attempting to do what President Johnson called for in 1965,
yet it should now be obvious that such piddling around the edges of
privilege serves only to increase these programs' vulnerability to challenge
by the insatiable Right, which seeks to maintain white dominance in
every avenue of life.
In 1965, the disparity
between Black and white performance on standardized tests was greater
than today, and only small numbers of Blacks were encouraged to take
the SATs. Few people argued that anyone had a right to admission
to a prestigious school based on test scores. Yet, in practice, SAT
scores were becoming the equivalent of legal tender, the price of admission
to the upper strata of education and resulting economic mobility. Although
not mandated by law, the all but universal practice of giving great
weight to SATs has had the effect of freezing into place privileges
of race and class. The Hard Right's legal guns are on the verge of enshrining
SAT-based privilege into law, for all practical purposes. There appears
to be no way to stop them other than to take the SATs out of the college
admissions equation or, at the very least, render them a minor factor.
Whites can keep their high test scores; they just shouldn't count for
of democracy in education
U.S. higher education
enrollment more than doubled between 1955 and 1965, from 1.5 million
to 3.8 million students. By 2000, 10 million full-time students were
enrolled in colleges and universities, a population that is now overwhelmingly
defined by SAT scores. The explosion in numbers gave the illusion of
greater democracy and general mobility, but in fact the composition
of college classrooms is essentially determined by the rigid dictatorship
When Johnson spoke
to Howard University's students in 1965, he was acquiescing to Black
political demands. However, white universities were simultaneously institutionalizing
the rule of standardized testing. Four decades later, the chickens have
come home to roost. The autumn Journal
of Blacks in Higher Education reports that the gap between Black
and white SAT scores has increased over the past 14 years, and "there
is no compelling evidence that any improvement is in the offing."
The numbers spell disaster:
In 1988 the average
combined score for whites of 1036 was 189 points higher than the average
score for blacks. In 2002 the gap between the average white score
and the average black score had grown to 203 points. In the past year
alone the black-white scoring gap on the SAT increased by two points.
For whatever reasons
- and Black youth do not have the luxury of waiting for the reasons
to be discovered - economic status appears not to be a major
factor in the Black-white SAT gap. "Whites from families with incomes
below $10,000 had a mean SAT test score that was 46 points higher than
blacks whose families had incomes of between $80,000 and $100,000,"
according to the JBHE study. The logic of the numbers is inexorable:
Blacks must categorically reject SAT-type tests as criteria for college
admissions, or accept that they will disappear from the elite regions
of academia, and the less prestigious schools, as well.
In a race-neutral
competition for the approximately 50,000 places for first-year students
at the nation's 25 highest-ranked universities, high-scoring blacks
will be buried by a huge mountain of high-scoring non-black students.
Today, under prevailing affirmative action admissions policies, there
are about 3,000 black first-year students matriculating at these 25
high-ranking universities, about 6 percent of all first-year students
at these institutions. But if these schools operated under a strict
race-neutral admissions policy where SAT scores were the most important
qualifying yardstick, these universities could fill their freshman
classes almost exclusively with students who score at the very top
of the SAT scoring scale. ...black students make up at best between
1 and 2 percent of these high-scoring groups.
will survive the trap it set for itself, but Black student bodies are
destined to whither away unless the relative weight of standardized
testing is drastically reduced or eliminated. There is no other
programs, grafted onto a larger machinery of SAT-reinforced white privilege,
were never destined to achieve anything like Johnson's "equality
as a fact and as a result." Designed as pitiful substitutes for
racial justice, they are about to be flattened entirely. The immediate
antagonists are Hard Right lawyers, but the institutional culprit is
New white rights
The plaintiffs at
the University of Michigan law school are seeking to give test scores
something approximating the force of law. If the Supreme Court rules
in favor of the white women, persons who have achieved higher test scores
will be entitled to commensurate, enhanced "rights" under
the law as long as these tests carry weight. Black students will
have no rights other than those bestowed on them by the Princeton Educational
Testing Service. The assault against the Black presence in higher education
is fundamental, and can only be effectively countered by a battle to
expunge the SAT's from national life. It's us or them.
Black people's rights
to historical redress are about to be replaced by a new right to test-based
privileges. Unless the tyranny of standardized tests is abolished, root
and branch, there is no hope for generalized Black upward mobility through
Let no one tell
us what we can't do, that standardized testing to too entrenched to
overcome. Lyndon Johnson was compelled to announce with his own voice
that affirmative action marked "the next and more profound stage
of the battle for civil rights." Those who think the battle has
been won, that Blacks need to move on to some other arena, need to look
at the numbers - and finish the fight.
The autumn Journal
of Blacks in Higher Education http://www.jbhe.com/latest/37_b&w_sat.html