Affirmative action programs in the U.S. have existed since the late 1960s — shortly after the Jim Crow laws were repealed. At that time, many colleges and universities were still all white, based on separate-but-equal policies.
The academic achievement gap between blacks and whites in the 1960s is staggering compared to today. Despite being no less able and motivated than the general population, minorities were not offered the same opportunities to succeed due to direct racial discrimination by universities.
Affirmative action was brought about as a way to correct this difference in opportunity. And for decades, it attempted to undo centuries of injustice.
But has it worked?
To a degree, yes. The all- white university is long gone, and institutions now strive to include ethnicities in an effort to boost diversity.
But it isn’t working as well as it could be. There is still a black-white achievement gap despite 50 years of action.
This is because affirmative action is not currently focusing on those who need it, like students who grow up in inner-city poverty. Instead, it is focusing on all minority families, including the wealthier families who are already more likely to succeed due to their socioeconomic status. The efforts of affirmative action are essentially wasted on those who do not need it anymore.
When looking into the statistics of family income, ethnicity and academic achievement, the source of this persistent achievement gap — despite affirmative action efforts — becomes clear: Minorities make less money than whites, and poorer families do worse in school.
First, minorities make less money than the average worker. The average income for a black family is $33,460, compared to a U.S. average of $50,502, according to blackdemographics.com.
Second, socioeconomic status has a huge effect on academic achievement — far greater than ethnic background. The Huffington Post reports the “achievement gap between children from high and low income families is far higher than the achievement gap between black and white students.”
To summarize, the average black student does not do worse in school because he or she is black, but because the average black student is poorer than the average white student.
A CNN blog post last week by John Blake reinforces this idea that socioeconomic status has more of an effect on academic achievement than ethnic background. In his article, he relates his story as a black man from a poor inner-city neighborhood while attempting to fit in at a majority black college.
His struggle to succeed had little to do with his race. Instead, growing up in poverty had all but erased the idea of academic success from his mind.
He envied the ease at which the wealthier black students succeeded in college. He realized that his upbringing, not his race, made him feel like an “imposter” amid his more affluent peers.
Blake’s experience is not a rare scenario, either. Of the black students in selective colleges, only 14 percent are from lower-class backgrounds, the other 86 percent come from middle- or upper-class black families, according to CNN.
From these percentages, the ineffectiveness of ethnicity-based affirmative action is clear. Middle- and upper-class minorities are no longer having trouble getting into schools, and yet, they are still being helped by affirmative action. Lower-class families, however, are having a harder time than ever.
Affirmative action is therefore in desperate need of being reworked to focus on this modern inequality in socioeconomic status instead of the outdated inequality of the 1960s. Poor students like Blake would still be helped, but other students from equally bad backgrounds would get the help they deserve as well.
Efforts at providing an equal opportunity for all students would not be wasted on those from middle- and upper-class families, creating a more efficient and effective system.
Unsurprisingly, universities are hesitant to change. After all, having a large minority population helps them appear diverse. Minority students stand out; an ethnically diverse population is easy to notice and therefore marketable by an institution.
On the other hand, lower-class students are almost indistinguishable from their wealthier peers. Diversity in socioeconomic status is not nearly as apparent on the surface as diversity in ethnic backgrounds and is therefore less appealing in the eyes of a university.
Because of this difference in the appearance, people from lower-class backgrounds are not as likely to get help, despite being the ones who really need it.
The situation could have been changed if the U.S. Supreme Court had chosen to strike down ethnicity-based affirmative action in Fisher v. University of Texas in June.
But they didn’t. Instead, in a move described by many papers as a “punt,” the Supreme Court chose to put off making a lasting decision on the subject.
There is some hope that this Supreme Court sidestepping could be indicative of a more permanent decision in another case in the future.
Until that time, lower-class college applicants will be stuck where they are without the help they need.
Robert Klare is a 22-year-old engineering senior from New Orleans.