In defense of affirmative action

WHEN THE DEBATE over affirmative action in higher education exploded, my open support surprised many. My personal view about using race, ethnicity, and sex among the factors in student admissions has put me at odds with many, including the majority of the Regents of the University of California who govern my campus.

With California voters having decided in November, 1996, to end all state-sponsored affirmative action programs, silence would seem to be a far more prudent course for me to take. Educators already have enough battles to fight--declining public funding, controversy over the national research agenda. and eroding public support for America's academic mission.

Why did I take on the explosive issue of affirmative action? My participation in the debate is inspired both by any role in higher education and my experience as an immigrant of Chinese descent. As chancellor of the University of California. Berkeley. I had seen the promise of affirmative action come true. Today, no ethnic or racial group constitutes a majority among the university's 21,000 undergraduates. Berkeley students enter better prepared and graduate at the highest rate in our history. Through daily interaction in classrooms, laboratories, and residence halls, they develop a deep understanding of different cultures and outlooks.

As an immigrant, I know the U.S. is the land of opportunity. Unlike any other nation in history, America has taken pride in being built by immigrants and allows foreign-born people like me to participate in the world's greatest democracy.

In 1956, I came here for graduate studies. a virtually penniless immigrant from China with a limited grasp of the language and customs of the U.S. A teaching fellowship was my income. To stretch my frugal budget, I walked across town to eat at the least expensive restaurants and scouted out the lowest-cost washing machines and dryers.

As a result of the wonderful educational opportunities I have enjoyed, I have contributed to American. My research in heat transfer has enhanced our engineering expertise in many critical technologies, including nuclear reactor safety, space shuttle thermal design, and electronic systems cooling. My former students teach and conduct research in American's top universities and industries. I was privileged to head the university with the largest number and highest percentage of top-ranked doctoral programs in the nation.

Yet, along with opportunity. I have encountered the harsh realities of racial discrimination that are part of' America's legacy. Like it or not, this history of racial division is linked with the debate over affirmative action. Although the U.S. has made great strides, race still divides our society. It is part of the debate over how we afford equal opportunities to everyone.

My first months in the U.S. reflect how opportunity and racial intolerance can be linked. I served as a teaching fellow for a professor who refused to pronounce my name and only referred top me as "Chinaman." One day, the professor directed me to adjust some valves in a large laboratory apparatus. When I climbed a ladder, I lost my balance and instinctively grabbed a nearby steam pipe. It was so hot, it produced a jolt of pain that nearly caused me to faint, but I did not scream out. I stuffed my throbbing hand into my coat pocket and waited until the class ended. Then I ran to the hospital emergency room, where I was treated for a burn that completely had singed the skin off my palm.

My response seems to fit the Asian model minority myth: Say nothing and go about your business. My silence had nothing to do with stoicism, though. I simply did not want to endure the humiliation of having the professor scold me in front of the class.

Today, after four decades of major civil rights advances, members of racial and ethnic minorities like me no longer are intimidated into silence. Still, serious racial divisions remain. Those of us who are of Asian. Latino, or Middle Eastern heritage have become accustomed to having passersby tell us, "Go back to your own country." More typical is the politic query: "What country do you come from?" It makes no difference if you are first-generation or fifth-generation. If you have Asian. Latino, or Middle Eastern features or surname, many Americans assume you were born in another country. The ancestors of a professor in the university's School of Optometry left China to work in California during the 1850s. Even though his roots run tar deeper than those of the vast majority of Californians, people invariably ask him where he was born.

Our nation can not afford to ignore the racial strife that continues to divide America. Nor should we forget that the U.S. is a great democracy built by diverse peoples. It is critical to attack the problem of racial division and build on national strengths. The finest hope for meeting this challenge will be America's colleges and universities.

These institutions launched affirmative admissions programs to open their doors to promising minority students who lacked educational and social opportunities. Over time, the composition of America's college students has changed. Campuses are more diverse than at any time in history.

Critics of continuing race or ethnicity as a consideration in student admissions argue that affirmative action unfairly discriminates against white and Asian-American applicants who worked hard in high school and received top grades. They further maintain that it no longer is needed to provide opportunities. Although I agree that affirmative action is a temporary measure, the time has not yet come to eliminate it. Educational opportunities vary dramatically in U.S. public schools.

The inner-city student can find illegal drugs more readily than computer labs and after-school enrichment courses. In contrast, the more affluent suburban student is hooked into the Internet, enrolled in honor classes, and looking forward to summer instruction.

Given this reality, it is fair and equitable to consider race and ethnicity as one factor among many--including test scores and grade-point averages--in admitting qualified youths to highly competitive universities. Such an approach remains the most effective way to make sure America does not turn into a two-tiered society of permanent haves and have-nots.

Assisting promising students is not the only reason for preserving affirmative action. The diversity of students, faculty, and staff that it inspired is one of the most exciting and challenging phenomena in American higher education today. All students stand to gain, whether they are whites, Asian-Americans, or traditionally underrepresented minorities.

I believe students on campuses that lack diversity can gain just a limited, theoretical understanding of the challenges and opportunities in a highly diverse nation. A lecture on Toni Morrison's novels or the theater of Luis Valdez is not enough.

No career or profession will be untouched by the rapid socio-demographic change. For instance, consider how America's diversity will affect those in U.S. colleges and universities. Education students will teach many youngsters born in different countries. Medical students will treat many patients with beliefs and attitudes about medicine that differ from the Western outlook. Students of engineering and business will work for major corporations, where they will be expected to design, develop, and market products that sell not just in the U.S., but in markets around the world. Law students will represent clients whose experience with the judicial system in their neighborhoods and barrios is distinctive from the way middle America regards the law.

A matter of diversity

Diversity in colleges and universities benefits all students, not just the underrepresented minorities. Our experience at Berkeley shows the promise of affirmative action. Every time I walk across campus, I am impressed by the vibrant spirit of our diverse community. Nowhere do you see this better than teeming Sproul Plaza, where dozens of student groups set up tables representing a wide range of social, political, ethnic, and religious interests.

At Berkeley, undergraduates are about 40% Asian-American; 31% non-Hispanic Caucasian; 14% Hispanic; six percent African-American; and one percent Native American, with the rest undeclared. About one-quarter of freshmen come from families earning $28,600 a year or less; another quarter from families that earn more than $90,000. The median family income reported for 1994 freshmen was $58,000.

Young people from barrios, comfortable suburbs, farm towns, and the inner city come together at Berkeley to live and study side by side. Not surprisingly, they find first-time interactions with students from different backgrounds occasionally fraught with misunderstanding and tension.

As chancellor, I made it a point to listen and talk with students. Casual conversations as I walked the campus to meetings, dropped in at the library after work, and sat in on classes gave me greater insight into the day-to-day lives of Berkeley students. They told me about the practical challenges of moving beyond the stereotypes and learning to respect differences.

Some African-Americans and Latinos confided they sometimes believed their professors and white classmates considered them to be inferior academically. This made them feel isolated from the general campus community. Some whites told me they felt like they had been pushed out by less-deserving blacks and Latinos. They also believed that overachieving Asians were depriving them of educational opportunities.

The views of Asian-Americans differed. Some were disturbed by the "model minority" stereotype. They complained that it pits them against other minorities and masks the problem of discrimination they still face. Others were concerned about issues such as affirmative action. They believed it is fair to base admissions on academic qualifications alone--which would open the door to more Asian-Americans.

These differing outlooks are not cause for alarm. Instead, they reflect the views held in society at large. It is important that students of all racial and ethnic groups told me they valued the opportunities on our campus to come together with people of diverse backgrounds. I believe it is this attitude our campus must reinforce as we help them to address differences.

The residence halls are the first place students come together. Because we understand the challenges associated with living together with those who have different values and outlooks, we run programs that encourage students to discuss racial and cultural differences openly.

Our campus tradition of academic freedom is critical. When issues arise where students are divided by race, they don't ignore the matter. We encourage all members of the campus community to air differences freely in forums, seminars, and rallies. Whether the topic is affirmative action, enforcement of the successful California ballot measure that would ban illegal immigrants from public schools, or the organization of ethnic studies, students and faculty passionately debate the pros and cons.

Let me cite an example. In 1995, the longstanding conflict between Israelis and Palestinians led to fiery exchanges between Jewish and Muslim students on our campus. During rallies and counter-protests, an Israeli flag was ripped apart, while Muslim students alleged they were being demonized.

We addressed the issues directly. The campus held meetings to denounce "hate speech," while open debate was encouraged. My top objective was to make sure that discussions on this charged issue did not degenerate into racial epithets. I decided to forego an invitation from Pres. Clinton to attend a White House meeting so I could meet with students who were central to the debate and help them hammer out their differences.

It is this tradition of study and debate that makes American higher education so valuable. Colleges and universities are a haven for open discussion. Only by addressing differences directly can students reach a deeper understanding of the real meaning of diversity.

Today, our campus faces a major new challenge. The University of California Regents have voted to end the use of race, ethnicity, and sex as a factor among many others in student admissions at its nine campuses in 1998. At first, the Regents' decision stunned me. I questioned whether we could preserve the diversity which is so important to our campus after losing an important tool for achieving student enrollments that reflect California's wide-ranging population.

Yet, I quickly realized the importance of the Regents' reaffirmation of their commitment to diversity even though they discarded affirmative action. So, I decided to take the Chinese approach to challenge. In Chinese, the character for crisis actually is two characters: One stands for danger and the other for opportunity. For me, times of crisis present both challenges and opportunities.

The end of affirmative action at the University of California gave us the impetus for trying new approaches to improving the eligibility rates of high school students traditionally underrepresented in higher education. At Berkeley, we set to work right away to turn challenge into opportunity. We realized our efforts would be doomed unless we worked even more closely with the public schools. Within weeks of the affirmative action decision, I joined the superintendents of the San Francisco Bay Area's major urban school districts to announce our new campaign to diversity: The Berkeley Pledge.

The announcement made it clear that our campus would not shirk its commitment to diversity. Instead, we pledged to step up the drive to support the efforts of disadvantaged youth to qualify for admission and preserve access to higher education. I committed $1,000,000 from private gifts, and we are seeking additional private support to fund this innovative approach.

America has come a long way since the days of Jim Crow segregation. It would be a tragedy if our nation's colleges and universities slipped backward, denying access to talented, but disadvantaged, youth and eroding the diversity that helps to prepare the leaders of the 21st century.

I find one aspect of the debate over affirmative action to be especially disturbing. There seems to be an underlying assumption that if it is eliminated, the nation will have solved the problems associated with racial division. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is critical for America to address the issue of how people from diverse backgrounds are going to study, work, and live in the same neighborhoods together in harmony, not strife.

This is the challenge in higher education. It demands the collaboration of students, faculty, staff, and alumni at universities and colleges across America. All must work together to maintain the diversity that is essential to excellence.

Dr Tien, professor of mechanical engineering. University of California, Berkeley, was chancellor of the university from 1990 to 1997

COPYRIGHT 1997 Society for the Advancement of Education
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group