Popular in Professional

Architecture

Connecting Cities and Nature

University of Virginia Timothy Beatley

Human Rights Law

Human Rights and Corruption: Problems and Potential of Individualising a Systemic Problem

Max Planck Institute Anne Peters

Finance

Chinese Exchange Rate Policy: Lessons for Global Investors

University of California San Diego Michael Melvin

Law

A statistical approach to law school citation rankings

University of Virginia Joshua Fischman

Education

Firm Performance Pay as Insurance against Promotion Risk

Stockholm School of Economics Alvin Chen

Constitutional Law

What is constitutional ideology?

University of Oxford Nick Barber

Asian Americans and affirmative action: Addressing the color of privilege

View more insights in Professional - Education - Rights, Equality & Justice in Education

View more figures from University of California Los Angeles

View the page of Mitchell Chang

Read the Study

Next in Education

Still going… sometimes in the dark”: Reflections of a woman of color educator

Yolanda Abel | Johns Hopkins University

High school change

Andrew Hargreaves | Boston College

What role has Asian Americans played historically in challenges to affirmative action? Mitchell Chang discusses unresolved issues for Asian Americans concerning Civil Rights.

Image courtesy of interviewee. May 14, 2024

Log-in or Sign-up to Faculti
Currently viewing this subject insight as a guest. You have insight(s) remaining for this month. Login to view 8000+ figures on the platform.

Generating Workspace...

Export as PDF

This video video discusses a lawsuit brought by the Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) against Harvard University, aimed at prohibiting the consideration of race in college admissions. The SFFA argued that Harvard's practices were unfair and unconstitutional, particularly regarding the treatment of Asian American applicants, who reportedly needed significantly higher SAT scores than White applicants to gain admission. The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which sided with the SFFA, effectively eliminating affirmative action in higher education.

Historically, Asian Americans in elite institutions experienced rapid enrollment growth from 1976 to 1985, yet their admission rates began to decline, leading to complaints filed with the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) in the late 1980s. These complaints highlighted that Asian American applicants were admitted at lower rates than equally qualified White applicants.

In 2016, another complaint accused Ivy League colleges of unlawful discrimination against Asian American applicants, asserting that race-conscious admissions were at fault. However, the OCR found insufficient evidence for civil rights violations.

This video video also reflects on the diverse experiences of Asian Americans, emphasizing differing perspectives on admissions practices and the belief in elite education as a pathway to upward mobility. It argues that the elimination of race-conscious admissions may not be in the best interest of many Asian Americans, especially given the low overall admission rates to elite institutions.

The author emphasizes the need for a collective civil rights movement that benefits all rather than a selective approach that primarily aids a few. They discuss the importance of building cross-racial coalitions and centering Asian American voices in advocacy efforts, particularly to address educational inequities and the broader social structure limiting opportunities for many in the community. The author expresses hope for a future where younger Asian Americans can redefine their narratives and collaborate more broadly on civil rights issues.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.115 --> 00:04.205
This was a really interesting lawsuit filed by students

00:04.345 --> 00:09.125
for fair admissions or what I will refer to as F-S-F-F-A

00:09.705 --> 00:11.325
and is sought to more broadly

00:11.845 --> 00:14.365
prohibit Harvard from considering race as one

00:14.365 --> 00:16.885
of many factors they typically use in admitting students.

00:17.025 --> 00:19.885
Now, SFFA argued

00:19.955 --> 00:23.805
that this practice is unfair, unnecessary,

00:24.145 --> 00:28.285
and unconstitutional, especially when it came to

00:28.465 --> 00:30.965
how Asian American applicants were treated.

00:31.625 --> 00:32.725
For example, according

00:32.745 --> 00:36.125
to SFFA Asian American applicants needed

00:36.965 --> 00:38.085
SAT scores

00:39.155 --> 00:44.005
that were about 140 points higher than white applicants

00:44.025 --> 00:48.605
to be admitted and SATs in in the US they're,

00:48.745 --> 00:51.085
achievement entrance exam scores.

00:52.235 --> 00:57.205
Curiously, this case did not focus on this wide advantage,

00:57.465 --> 01:01.475
but instead focus on what SFFA refer to

01:01.735 --> 01:04.755
as the racial preference associated

01:04.905 --> 01:07.395
with race conscious emissions practices.

01:08.215 --> 01:11.035
And as, many folks know, these

01:12.315 --> 01:14.675
practices do not include white applicants,

01:14.695 --> 01:18.155
but instead attempted to even the playing field

01:18.255 --> 01:21.235
for underrepresented racial minority populations.

01:21.975 --> 01:24.955
So when this case finally reached the US Supreme Court,

01:25.715 --> 01:29.835
a majority of the court last year ended up siding with SFFA

01:30.015 --> 01:31.795
and that decision pretty much

01:32.805 --> 01:36.355
eliminated affirmative action in higher education

01:36.415 --> 01:37.475
in the United States.

01:38.135 --> 01:41.155
By contrast, previous Supreme Court decisions,

01:41.565 --> 01:44.915
which included the landmark regents of the University

01:44.915 --> 01:47.675
of California versus Bakke in 1978,

01:48.015 --> 01:52.515
and then cases against the University of Michigan in 2003

01:52.695 --> 01:56.275
and then the University of Texas in 2013,

01:56.925 --> 02:00.915
those decisions only incrementally scaled back

02:01.665 --> 02:03.715
race conscious emissions practices,

02:04.095 --> 02:06.235
but still held them to be constitutional.

02:06.375 --> 02:09.835
So the decision last summer with respect

02:09.835 --> 02:12.515
to Harvard was quite, consequential

02:13.145 --> 02:15.315
that Harvard case was not the first rodeo

02:15.535 --> 02:17.315
for Asian Americans when it came

02:17.315 --> 02:19.715
to challenging college admissions practices.

02:20.655 --> 02:23.595
Uh, there's a very interesting, backdrop

02:23.985 --> 02:25.875
between 1976

02:26.295 --> 02:27.595
and 1985,

02:28.405 --> 02:32.995
Asian American enrollment in elite institutions in the US

02:33.225 --> 02:36.075
grew at an extraordinary pace,

02:36.695 --> 02:38.915
nearly tripling their proportion

02:38.915 --> 02:43.035
of the undergraduate enrollment by the mid 1980s,

02:43.035 --> 02:45.755
however, their missions rate at those

02:46.315 --> 02:47.755
campuses started dropping.

02:48.655 --> 02:52.435
So Asian American Civil Rights organizations filed

02:52.445 --> 02:56.795
complaints to the Office of Civil Rights of the Department

02:56.795 --> 03:00.765
of Education or OCR beginning in

03:01.365 --> 03:02.405
1988.

03:03.315 --> 03:06.085
Importantly, however that complaints filed

03:06.105 --> 03:09.805
during this period did not attribute this drop

03:09.905 --> 03:12.165
to race conscious emissions practices,

03:12.545 --> 03:16.565
but instead charged that Asian-American applicants

03:17.145 --> 03:19.925
had been admitted at a significantly

03:20.935 --> 03:25.565
lower rate than comparably qualified white applicants.

03:26.305 --> 03:30.525
The subsequent OCR investigation did indeed confirm this

03:30.675 --> 03:33.205
disparity, but here's the odd twist.

03:34.035 --> 03:37.125
They also concluded that the lower rate

03:37.225 --> 03:40.805
for Asian applicants was not due to discrimination,

03:41.785 --> 03:46.365
but instead due to plus factors using the admissions process

03:47.155 --> 03:51.965
such as preferences for children of alumni or legacies

03:52.545 --> 03:56.365
and athletes, which tipped the missions in favor

03:56.745 --> 04:01.225
of white applicants, those preferences were considered

04:01.325 --> 04:04.145
by OCR to be,

04:04.925 --> 04:06.665
to not be discriminatory

04:07.055 --> 04:09.905
because they serve what they refer to

04:10.045 --> 04:13.265
as legitimate institutional goals.

04:14.165 --> 04:15.345
So as you might imagine,

04:15.575 --> 04:17.745
this conclusion did not settle the matter.

04:18.095 --> 04:21.705
Fast forward now a couple of decades In 2016,

04:22.495 --> 04:25.745
another complaint was filed charging that a handful

04:26.045 --> 04:29.945
of Ivy League colleges continued to engage

04:30.725 --> 04:35.185
in unlawful discrimination against Asian American applicants

04:35.185 --> 04:36.185
in the emissions process.

04:37.045 --> 04:39.745
Now, unlike the ones filed in the eighties,

04:40.455 --> 04:44.865
this one called out race conscious emissions practices

04:45.325 --> 04:48.145
as the main source for this discrimination.

04:49.565 --> 04:51.945
For decades leading up to this complaint,

04:52.475 --> 04:56.105
Asian Americans had been repeatedly portrayed

04:56.485 --> 05:00.265
as the new victims of affirmative action recasting

05:01.005 --> 05:04.945
the long narrative of reverse discrimination against whites.

05:05.935 --> 05:09.685
Still similar to those complaints filed in the eighties,

05:10.445 --> 05:14.165
OCR determined that there was insufficient evidence

05:14.385 --> 05:16.405
to charge Ivy League colleges

05:16.755 --> 05:18.605
with any civil rights violations.

05:19.265 --> 05:23.285
So it was not at all surprising that by 2019,

05:23.755 --> 05:27.885
well-funded neoconservative groups like SFFA,

05:28.015 --> 05:30.485
which downplayed wide selection advantages

05:30.505 --> 05:32.885
to roll back civil rights legislation

05:33.785 --> 05:38.605
was successful in recruiting Asian American families into

05:38.605 --> 05:40.605
the service of their political agenda.

05:40.855 --> 05:45.285
Folks who are considered to be Asian Americans in the US

05:45.905 --> 05:48.725
are a very diverse category of peoples.

05:49.575 --> 05:50.595
The Immigration

05:50.895 --> 05:52.595
and Nationality Act

05:52.615 --> 05:56.835
of 1965 played a significant role

05:57.665 --> 06:02.525
in what this population looks like today, positioning some

06:02.625 --> 06:05.365
but not all groups to compete economically.

06:06.475 --> 06:10.045
This act favored educated immigrants

06:10.385 --> 06:13.525
and their family members, which would eventually lead

06:13.525 --> 06:15.565
to a significant growth

06:16.105 --> 06:18.285
in Asian American high school students

06:18.505 --> 06:22.205
who would be better positioned than those in the previous

06:22.355 --> 06:25.885
generations to pursue admissions into elite

06:26.045 --> 06:27.565
colleges and universities.

06:28.345 --> 06:30.085
My father, for example, took advantage

06:30.085 --> 06:33.805
of this immigration act to lead Taiwan and come to the US

06:34.425 --> 06:37.965
and with his engineering degree was able to come, come

06:38.025 --> 06:41.325
and then eventually bring our family along.

06:41.625 --> 06:45.925
Now our family would eventually, sponsor multiple uncles

06:45.985 --> 06:48.805
and aunts who themselves were well educated

06:49.065 --> 06:52.645
and can enter a skilled workforce in the us.

06:53.505 --> 06:56.445
My siblings and I were expected to go to college

06:56.445 --> 06:58.205
because it was made clear to us

06:58.235 --> 07:02.565
that our future would depend on our level of education.

07:03.505 --> 07:07.325
We also learned, you know, as we were trying to,

07:08.135 --> 07:11.855
adapt to us culture,

07:12.085 --> 07:15.215
that not all college degrees were equal,

07:15.635 --> 07:19.935
and that attending an elite educational institution

07:20.505 --> 07:24.695
would improve our future opportunities even more.

07:25.455 --> 07:29.235
And it turned out that we were not the only immigrant family

07:29.345 --> 07:30.355
that believed this.

07:30.425 --> 07:32.275
Instead, these expectations

07:32.455 --> 07:35.715
and goals were quite common among families

07:35.715 --> 07:39.355
who benefited from the 1965 Immigration Act.

07:40.015 --> 07:43.515
For us, an elite education would be a pass

07:44.375 --> 07:45.955
to enjoy the privileges

07:45.955 --> 07:48.315
that in our eyes growing up in the seventies

07:48.945 --> 07:51.515
were reserved exclusively for whites.

07:52.265 --> 07:54.595
This belief has not so far fetched,

07:54.655 --> 07:58.235
as many studies have shown that elite education

07:58.755 --> 08:02.275
provides students with credentials, relationships,

08:03.015 --> 08:06.995
and carefully cultivated lives on campus, all

08:06.995 --> 08:10.955
of which increase the chances of future success.

08:12.355 --> 08:13.595
I think more recent waves

08:13.595 --> 08:17.595
of Asian immigrants still view education as the best path

08:17.655 --> 08:21.555
for their children to access those privileges

08:22.025 --> 08:25.075
that are close to them due to language, cultural

08:25.695 --> 08:27.475
or socioeconomic barriers.

08:28.185 --> 08:30.835
There's still a durable shared understanding

08:31.505 --> 08:36.275
that elite schooling is central to becoming an elite.

08:37.015 --> 08:40.275
Now, given the limited op options for social mobility,

08:40.815 --> 08:44.355
it seems quite sensible for many Asian American families

08:44.355 --> 08:48.275
to make great sacrifices and invest their effort

08:48.375 --> 08:51.755
and resources toward obtaining privilege

08:51.755 --> 08:53.075
through elite education.

08:53.075 --> 08:54.875
Certainly that was the case for my family.

08:55.665 --> 08:59.205
So when their chances to access this pathway

09:00.225 --> 09:04.695
is perceived to be reduced in favor of groups

09:04.875 --> 09:09.675
who they perceive to be less qualified, it it right

09:11.005 --> 09:15.475
fires them up and lead them to side with those

09:15.655 --> 09:19.675
who can help them eventually realize their American dream.

09:20.365 --> 09:21.915
One's vulnerability to

09:22.455 --> 09:25.995
discrimination cannot be eradicated merely

09:26.095 --> 09:29.235
by earning credentials from elite institution.

09:31.185 --> 09:34.605
In the American corporate world, for example, there are lots

09:34.605 --> 09:38.965
of Asian Americans at junior levels and quite a few

09:38.985 --> 09:40.365
and in the middle management

09:40.625 --> 09:45.445
and virtually none in the higher reaches of leadership.

09:46.945 --> 09:51.085
Wisley Yang once wrote in the New York Times magazine,

09:51.185 --> 09:54.285
and I think it was about 2011,

09:55.555 --> 10:00.525
that a bitter undercurrent of Asian American life is that

10:00.865 --> 10:05.165
so many Asian graduates of elite universities

10:05.835 --> 10:10.365
find that meritocracy as they have understood it comes

10:10.665 --> 10:14.285
to an abrupt end after graduation.

10:15.705 --> 10:18.845
Now, although access is important, the story

10:19.025 --> 10:22.805
of discrimination does not end at the moment of access.

10:22.805 --> 10:27.405
According to my colleague, Devin Cardo at UCLA,

10:28.555 --> 10:33.075
inclusion in does not mean the absence

10:33.175 --> 10:37.595
of discrimination from, in other words, that pass obtained

10:37.595 --> 10:40.235
through credentials is limited.

10:41.175 --> 10:44.035
It doesn't provide full access to all privileges

10:44.035 --> 10:45.075
that one would expect.

10:46.445 --> 10:50.715
Still, it's better than having no pass at all, which gets us

10:50.715 --> 10:55.195
to another, perhaps even more unsettling problem, which is

10:55.195 --> 10:58.835
that individual benefits obtained from having a pass

10:59.775 --> 11:03.595
do not necessarily trickle down to other Asian Americans.

11:04.375 --> 11:07.075
So in other words, having more Asian Americans

11:07.275 --> 11:12.195
with elite credentials does not necessarily improve

11:12.255 --> 11:14.955
the conditions for those without one,

11:15.085 --> 11:16.595
especially those at the bottom.

11:16.855 --> 11:20.115
So some studies have shown that most of those

11:20.255 --> 11:24.115
who possess a skillset to race to the top

11:24.175 --> 11:28.435
of the hierarchy are also incentivized

11:29.055 --> 11:33.395
to pull up the ladder, behind them

11:33.945 --> 11:35.275
when they get to the top.

11:36.145 --> 11:38.745
Likewise, there is little reason to believe

11:38.745 --> 11:42.105
that Asian Americans who over attribute hard work

11:42.205 --> 11:46.105
and individual merit gaining emissions

11:46.165 --> 11:49.345
to elite colleges will necessarily

11:50.175 --> 11:51.345
lift as they climb.

11:52.325 --> 11:55.645
So my points here raise important questions about whether

11:55.665 --> 11:58.525
or not eliminating race conscious emissions

11:59.065 --> 12:02.445
is really in the best interest of Asian Americans,

12:02.445 --> 12:06.525
especially given that so few are actually admitted to

12:07.065 --> 12:08.365
in elite college.

12:08.555 --> 12:09.925
Harvard, for example,

12:10.065 --> 12:14.205
and mets roughly I think around 2000 applicants per year

12:14.785 --> 12:19.405
and reject nearly 95% of those

12:19.465 --> 12:23.765
who apply eliminating race conscious emissions will not

12:23.765 --> 12:27.185
change those numbers, so will not significantly

12:27.945 --> 12:30.225
increase one's chances of o of emissions

12:30.685 --> 12:34.585
and at best may increase only slightly the number

12:34.845 --> 12:37.865
of Asian Americans admitted per class.

12:39.045 --> 12:42.995
By comparison, nearly 50%

12:43.775 --> 12:48.475
of all Asian Americans enrolled in US H Education

12:49.175 --> 12:52.315
attend a community college or a two year college.

12:54.245 --> 12:58.835
The civil rights of these students have little, if nothing

12:59.455 --> 13:03.595
to do with Harvard, yet by actively seeking

13:03.855 --> 13:07.875
to dismantle hard fought civil rights practices like

13:07.875 --> 13:11.435
affirmative action that serve to even a playing field,

13:12.295 --> 13:15.555
it suggests that Asian American either

13:16.335 --> 13:19.155
do not need such protection, which is wrong

13:19.695 --> 13:23.155
or are only interested in those protections

13:23.585 --> 13:24.995
that best serve them.

13:26.195 --> 13:30.485
However, you can't just selectively choose when you want law

13:30.505 --> 13:31.685
to be colorblind

13:32.025 --> 13:34.725
and when you want it to recognize racial discrim

13:35.385 --> 13:37.405
discrimination, that is just not

13:37.465 --> 13:39.885
how civil rights advocacy works.

13:41.115 --> 13:45.605
Instead, it requires cross racial coalition building

13:46.275 --> 13:49.365
that prioritizes lifting up the bottom

13:50.325 --> 13:52.055
more than protecting the top.

13:53.445 --> 13:56.185
For me, it seems disingenuous to cry

13:56.205 --> 14:00.945
for civil rights protection to get access into the boardroom

14:01.695 --> 14:06.625
when you don't support other groups access to the kind

14:06.645 --> 14:10.985
of elite education that puts you in a position to be

14:11.565 --> 14:14.265
con even considered for the board.

14:14.735 --> 14:17.985
Clearly, Asian Americans that are, are at

14:18.025 --> 14:20.225
A crucial Junction when it comes

14:20.225 --> 14:21.625
to civil rights advocacy,

14:21.805 --> 14:25.865
and no doubt our interests here are as diverse

14:26.085 --> 14:27.705
as the population itself.

14:28.325 --> 14:32.105
On one hand, more Asian Americans than in previous

14:32.215 --> 14:35.985
generations have access some of the privileges

14:35.985 --> 14:39.745
that were once reserved only for whites.

14:40.125 --> 14:43.105
On the other hand, Asian Americans are still quite

14:43.115 --> 14:45.905
vulnerable to acts of racial violence

14:46.325 --> 14:47.465
and discrimination

14:48.165 --> 14:50.785
as was made more public over the past couple

14:50.805 --> 14:54.485
of years in the US under the banner of Asian hate.

14:55.505 --> 14:58.565
So where do we go from here when it comes

14:58.565 --> 15:00.045
to civil rights advocacy?

15:00.995 --> 15:03.325
Well, I see both challenges and opportunities,

15:03.985 --> 15:06.645
and I'll offer just three of them given the time limitation.

15:08.165 --> 15:12.395
First, I think we must recognize that there are limits

15:13.435 --> 15:17.215
to an unfettered pursuit of the American dream.

15:17.955 --> 15:20.695
Our society is still structured in a way

15:21.045 --> 15:25.855
that the well-worn path of obtaining a pass by way

15:25.855 --> 15:30.415
of elite education provides at best

15:31.445 --> 15:33.765
a day pass and not a season pass.

15:34.865 --> 15:38.215
Entry through some doors is still guided

15:38.835 --> 15:42.175
by racial order and not by credentials alone.

15:42.995 --> 15:47.895
Second, those who have earned a pass must be honest

15:48.425 --> 15:52.535
about how they are leveraging their newly acquired

15:53.015 --> 15:55.015
privileges to advance civil rights.

15:55.755 --> 16:00.685
Are they doing it to amass even more privileges or to repro

16:00.905 --> 16:04.805
or to reproduce existing privileges

16:05.345 --> 16:06.485
for their own children?

16:07.525 --> 16:12.365
Or are they leveraging their privileges in ways

16:12.435 --> 16:16.395
that disrupt the hoarding of opportunities

16:16.935 --> 16:21.515
and subsequently expanding status acquisition?

16:22.295 --> 16:23.875
Now, I'm not judging here

16:23.875 --> 16:25.835
because I don't see anything wrong

16:26.465 --> 16:28.355
with pursuing one's own self-interest.

16:29.755 --> 16:32.575
My problem is that if those interests

16:33.275 --> 16:37.335
do not really serve a majority of Asian Americans,

16:38.415 --> 16:41.365
let's not call what's happening here,

16:41.925 --> 16:44.525
a collective civil rights project.

16:45.775 --> 16:49.035
So lastly, I would suggest that we have

16:49.035 --> 16:52.515
to lean away from narratives that are filtered through a

16:53.245 --> 16:54.475
mainstream lens

16:55.215 --> 16:57.315
and lean into narratives

16:57.585 --> 17:00.035
that center on Asian American voices.

17:00.905 --> 17:04.475
Take for example how academic achievement is

17:04.475 --> 17:05.955
characterized in the us.

17:06.865 --> 17:11.155
Such caricatures through a mainstream, let's call it a gaze,

17:11.845 --> 17:15.195
would lead us to believe that Asian Americans are

17:15.785 --> 17:19.035
overachievers, have unique cultural values,

17:19.215 --> 17:23.475
and up upbringing illustrated through tiger parenting

17:24.225 --> 17:28.515
have good grades, but we character are one dimensional

17:29.335 --> 17:33.515
and unoriginal are models for other racial

17:34.035 --> 17:37.075
minority groups to emulate, et cetera, et cetera,

17:37.655 --> 17:38.845
by contrast.

17:40.035 --> 17:45.015
And American Center gaze would characterize their academic

17:45.015 --> 17:48.655
achievement as shaped by limited options

17:48.675 --> 17:52.125
for social mobility as stressful

17:52.125 --> 17:54.445
because there are no safety nets.

17:54.985 --> 17:59.725
So failure isn't a viable option as isolating

18:00.505 --> 18:01.525
due to language

18:01.525 --> 18:05.565
and cultural barriers as disempowering

18:06.305 --> 18:08.445
due to avoidance of conflict.

18:08.445 --> 18:12.285
Because such conflict can derail one's future opportunities

18:13.385 --> 18:18.285
as dehumanizing because they feel invisible as ignored

18:18.355 --> 18:21.565
because they are never similar enough to be accepted

18:22.505 --> 18:26.645
and not different enough to be seen or heard

18:27.575 --> 18:30.995
and as lost because they are always code switching

18:31.735 --> 18:33.835
and never their authentic selves.

18:34.005 --> 18:37.755
These are things that we learned, from the research.

18:39.765 --> 18:42.855
This gaze is a very different way of seeing

18:42.995 --> 18:47.015
and explaining the circumstances of

18:47.235 --> 18:50.095
and conditions for Asian Americans.

18:51.525 --> 18:53.965
I think if we take more seriously

18:54.625 --> 18:56.645
and more authentic gaze,

18:57.385 --> 19:00.165
we will develop a better foundation

19:00.385 --> 19:03.245
and roadmap for civil rights advocacy.

19:04.865 --> 19:07.885
Now, I'm not necessarily an optimistic person,

19:08.665 --> 19:12.885
but I'm very hopeful that we can move in this direction

19:12.885 --> 19:17.125
because I now see more younger Asian Americans

19:18.285 --> 19:19.685
throwing out the playbook

19:19.985 --> 19:22.725
and taking ownership of their own stories

19:23.655 --> 19:27.275
and broadening their spheres of association

19:27.455 --> 19:31.755
and sense of achievement by creating new pathways.

19:32.815 --> 19:34.715
If more of us take part in this,

19:35.295 --> 19:39.635
or at least support it, Asian Americans will be less tempted

19:40.255 --> 19:44.355
to blindly support false promises

19:44.455 --> 19:45.915
to access privilege

19:46.615 --> 19:50.355
and become more willing to imagine

19:51.015 --> 19:52.635
an alternative future.

Asian American Admissions: A Legal Battle

00:00:00 - This was a really interesting lawsuit filed by students for fair admissions or what I will refer to as F-S-F-F-A and is sought to more broadly prohibit Harvard from considering race as one of many factors they typically use in admitting students. Now, SFFA argued that this practice is unfair, unnecessary, and unconstitutional, especially when it came to how Asian American applicants were treated.
00:00:32 - to SFFA Asian American applicants needed SAT scores that were about 140 points higher than white applicants to be admitted and SATs in in the US they're, achievement entrance exam scores. Curiously, this case did not focus on this wide advantage, but instead focus on what SFFA refer to
00:01:04 - with race conscious emissions practices. And as, many folks know, these practices do not include white applicants, but instead attempted to even the playing field for underrepresented racial minority populations. So when this case finally reached the US Supreme Court, a majority of the court last year ended up siding with SFFA and that decision pretty much
00:01:36 - in the United States. By contrast, previous Supreme Court decisions, which included the landmark regents of the University of California versus Bakke in 1978, and then cases against the University of Michigan in 2003 and then the University of Texas in 2013, those decisions only incrementally scaled back race conscious emissions practices,
00:02:06 - So the decision last summer with respect to Harvard was quite, consequential that Harvard case was not the first rodeo for Asian Americans when it came to challenging college admissions practices. there's a very interesting, backdrop between 1976 and 1985, Asian American enrollment in elite institutions in the US grew at an extraordinary pace,
00:02:38 - of the undergraduate enrollment by the mid 1980s, however, their missions rate at those campuses started dropping. So Asian American Civil Rights organizations filed complaints to the Office of Civil Rights of the Department of Education or OCR beginning in 1988. Importantly, however that complaints filed during this period did not attribute this drop

Disparities in Asian American College Admissions

00:03:12 - but instead charged that Asian-American applicants had been admitted at a significantly lower rate than comparably qualified white applicants. The subsequent OCR investigation did indeed confirm this disparity, but here's the odd twist. They also concluded that the lower rate for Asian applicants was not due to discrimination,
00:03:47 - such as preferences for children of alumni or legacies and athletes, which tipped the missions in favor of white applicants, those preferences were considered by OCR to be, to not be discriminatory because they serve what they refer to as legitimate institutional goals.
00:04:15 - this conclusion did not settle the matter. Fast forward now a couple of decades In 2016, another complaint was filed charging that a handful of Ivy League colleges continued to engage in unlawful discrimination against Asian American applicants in the emissions process. Now, unlike the ones filed in the eighties, this one called out race conscious emissions practices
00:04:49 - For decades leading up to this complaint, Asian Americans had been repeatedly portrayed as the new victims of affirmative action recasting the long narrative of reverse discrimination against whites. Still similar to those complaints filed in the eighties, OCR determined that there was insufficient evidence to charge Ivy League colleges
00:05:19 - So it was not at all surprising that by 2019, well-funded neoconservative groups like SFFA, which downplayed wide selection advantages to roll back civil rights legislation was successful in recruiting Asian American families into the service of their political agenda. Folks who are considered to be Asian Americans in the US are a very diverse category of peoples.
00:05:50 - and Nationality Act of 1965 played a significant role in what this population looks like today, positioning some but not all groups to compete economically. This act favored educated immigrants and their family members, which would eventually lead to a significant growth in Asian American high school students who would be better positioned than those in the previous

Education as a Pathway to Opportunity

00:06:26 - colleges and universities. My father, for example, took advantage of this immigration act to lead Taiwan and come to the US and with his engineering degree was able to come, come and then eventually bring our family along. Now our family would eventually, sponsor multiple uncles and aunts who themselves were well educated and can enter a skilled workforce in the us.
00:06:56 - because it was made clear to us that our future would depend on our level of education. We also learned, you know, as we were trying to, adapt to us culture, that not all college degrees were equal, and that attending an elite educational institution would improve our future opportunities even more.
00:07:29 - that believed this. Instead, these expectations and goals were quite common among families who benefited from the 1965 Immigration Act. For us, an elite education would be a pass to enjoy the privileges that in our eyes growing up in the seventies were reserved exclusively for whites. This belief has not so far fetched, as many studies have shown that elite education
00:08:03 - and carefully cultivated lives on campus, all of which increase the chances of future success. I think more recent waves of Asian immigrants still view education as the best path for their children to access those privileges that are close to them due to language, cultural or socioeconomic barriers. There's still a durable shared understanding
00:08:37 - Now, given the limited op options for social mobility, it seems quite sensible for many Asian American families to make great sacrifices and invest their effort and resources toward obtaining privilege through elite education. Certainly that was the case for my family. So when their chances to access this pathway is perceived to be reduced in favor of groups
00:09:11 - fires them up and lead them to side with those who can help them eventually realize their American dream. One's vulnerability to discrimination cannot be eradicated merely by earning credentials from elite institution. In the American corporate world, for example, there are lots of Asian Americans at junior levels and quite a few

Meritocracy and Asian American Leadership Gaps

00:09:40 - and virtually none in the higher reaches of leadership. Wisley Yang once wrote in the New York Times magazine, and I think it was about 2011, that a bitter undercurrent of Asian American life is that so many Asian graduates of elite universities find that meritocracy as they have understood it comes
00:10:15 - Now, although access is important, the story of discrimination does not end at the moment of access. According to my colleague, Devin Cardo at UCLA, inclusion in does not mean the absence of discrimination from, in other words, that pass obtained through credentials is limited.
00:10:44 - that one would expect. Still, it's better than having no pass at all, which gets us to another, perhaps even more unsettling problem, which is that individual benefits obtained from having a pass do not necessarily trickle down to other Asian Americans. So in other words, having more Asian Americans with elite credentials does not necessarily improve
00:11:15 - especially those at the bottom. So some studies have shown that most of those who possess a skillset to race to the top of the hierarchy are also incentivized to pull up the ladder, behind them when they get to the top. Likewise, there is little reason to believe that Asian Americans who over attribute hard work and individual merit gaining emissions
00:11:50 - lift as they climb. So my points here raise important questions about whether or not eliminating race conscious emissions is really in the best interest of Asian Americans, especially given that so few are actually admitted to in elite college. Harvard, for example, and mets roughly I think around 2000 applicants per year and reject nearly 95% of those
00:12:23 - change those numbers, so will not significantly increase one's chances of o of emissions and at best may increase only slightly the number of Asian Americans admitted per class. By comparison, nearly 50% of all Asian Americans enrolled in US H Education attend a community college or a two year college.

Asian American Perspectives on Civil Rights Advocacy

00:12:59 - to do with Harvard, yet by actively seeking to dismantle hard fought civil rights practices like affirmative action that serve to even a playing field, it suggests that Asian American either do not need such protection, which is wrong or are only interested in those protections that best serve them.
00:13:30 - to be colorblind and when you want it to recognize racial discrim discrimination, that is just not how civil rights advocacy works. Instead, it requires cross racial coalition building that prioritizes lifting up the bottom more than protecting the top. For me, it seems disingenuous to cry
00:14:01 - when you don't support other groups access to the kind of elite education that puts you in a position to be con even considered for the board. Clearly, Asian Americans that are, are at A crucial Junction when it comes to civil rights advocacy, and no doubt our interests here are as diverse as the population itself.
00:14:32 - generations have access some of the privileges that were once reserved only for whites. On the other hand, Asian Americans are still quite vulnerable to acts of racial violence and discrimination as was made more public over the past couple of years in the US under the banner of Asian hate. So where do we go from here when it comes
00:15:00 - Well, I see both challenges and opportunities, and I'll offer just three of them given the time limitation. First, I think we must recognize that there are limits to an unfettered pursuit of the American dream. Our society is still structured in a way that the well-worn path of obtaining a pass by way of elite education provides at best
00:15:34 - Entry through some doors is still guided by racial order and not by credentials alone. Second, those who have earned a pass must be honest about how they are leveraging their newly acquired privileges to advance civil rights. Are they doing it to amass even more privileges or to repro or to reproduce existing privileges

Redefining Asian American Civil Rights Narratives

00:16:07 - Or are they leveraging their privileges in ways that disrupt the hoarding of opportunities and subsequently expanding status acquisition? Now, I'm not judging here because I don't see anything wrong with pursuing one's own self-interest. My problem is that if those interests do not really serve a majority of Asian Americans,
00:16:41 - a collective civil rights project. So lastly, I would suggest that we have to lean away from narratives that are filtered through a mainstream lens and lean into narratives that center on Asian American voices. Take for example how academic achievement is characterized in the us. Such caricatures through a mainstream, let's call it a gaze,
00:17:15 - overachievers, have unique cultural values, and up upbringing illustrated through tiger parenting have good grades, but we character are one dimensional and unoriginal are models for other racial minority groups to emulate, et cetera, et cetera, by contrast. And American Center gaze would characterize their academic
00:17:48 - for social mobility as stressful because there are no safety nets. So failure isn't a viable option as isolating due to language and cultural barriers as disempowering due to avoidance of conflict. Because such conflict can derail one's future opportunities as dehumanizing because they feel invisible as ignored
00:18:22 - and not different enough to be seen or heard and as lost because they are always code switching and never their authentic selves. These are things that we learned, from the research. This gaze is a very different way of seeing and explaining the circumstances of and conditions for Asian Americans.
00:18:54 - and more authentic gaze, we will develop a better foundation and roadmap for civil rights advocacy. Now, I'm not necessarily an optimistic person, but I'm very hopeful that we can move in this direction because I now see more younger Asian Americans throwing out the playbook and taking ownership of their own stories

Empowering Asian Americans: Creating New Pathways

00:19:51 - and sense of achievement by creating new pathways. If more of us take part in this, or at least support it, Asian Americans will be less tempted to blindly support false promises to access privilege and become more willing to imagine an alternative future.

Faculti AI can make mistakes

Research

Policy

Analysis