Skip to content

UCLA Civil Rights Project Policy Briefs Provide Information on Proposition 16

One of the key decisions confronting California voters as they head to the polls next week is how to vote on Proposition 16, an initiative that would restore affirmative action in higher education in the state. 

The UCLA Civil Rights Project has produced three new research briefs that summarize key findings relating to the issue of affirmative action and Proposition 16.  

The documents by William Kidder, David Mickey-Pabello, Gary Orfield and Danielle Jarvie examine research showing the consequences of the present affirmative action ban on the ability of California’s public colleges to admit strong students from all groups in our population, and the losses to California, compared to the 41 states and all private universities that retain the right to implement affirmative action when they believe it will strengthen their educational program. 

These papers consider data both from California and nationwide research. They show that college access has declined in California; there are well-documented educational benefits from affirmative action for all groups of students; and affirmative action can help resolve shortages of key scientific, technical and medical personnel the state needs. In addition to these findings, the research summaries present new data showing unequal preparation for college in the state’s highly segregated schools. Very few Black, Latino and American Indian students have an opportunity to attend the high performing schools that most Asian and white students attend and that greatly help in preparation for the state’s demanding universities. 

The first policy brief, Proposition 16 and a Brighter Future for All Californians, by CRP Research Associate William Kidder, synthesizes research from over 100 studies. The brief focuses on enrollment, graduation and career success for traditionally underrepresented students, the benefits of diverse learning environments including campus racial climate, and the need to increase diversity in UC professional and graduate schools to better serve the health and well-being of all Californians.
 
A second resource, Scholarly Findings on Affirmative Action Bans, by David Mickey-Pabello, provides an overview of what is known about the impact of these bans nationally and complements research specific to California that Kidder summarizes. The research findings describe the impacts of affirmative action bans.  Mickey-Pabello also documents research showing that alternative pathways to affirmative action that aim to maintain racial diversity in higher education are insufficient.

Often debates over affirmative action assume all students have an equal chance to prepare for college entrance exams. The third brief, Unequal Public Schools Makes Affirmative Action Essential for Equal Opportunity, by CRP Co-director Gary Orfield and Senior Policy Research Analyst Danielle Jarvie, shows that college preparation and access is systematically unequal by race, and provides new statistics on the extent of segregation by race and poverty for California’s non-white students. It uses state testing and enrollment data to show that Black, Latino and America Indian students are concentrated in the most low-achieving schools, while Whites and Asians attend the most high-achieving schools. This produces a very unequal path to college, making affirmative action necessary to level the playing field.

All materials can be found on the CRP website here.
 

Tags: