OPINION: University Must Not Consider Race In Decision-Making About Students, Employees

("No" by Felipe Skroski via Flickr)

On March 29, UT-Tyler President Kirk Calhoun and Provost Amir Mirmiran answered questions from the student government in which they seemed to indicate that they would consider race in their decision-making about university policy. 

Calhoun said he wanted UT-Tyler to intentionally reach out “to students of color” and Mirmiran said that the university would reach diversity by purposefully hiring “a diverse faculty.”  Both of these university officials said—or at least appeared to say (if “diversity” is a reference word to race and racial composition, which it appeared to be in the conversation)—that they would factor considerations of race into the decision-making. 

As a state school, UT-Tyler should in no way consider either student applicants or prospective employees on the basis of their race. This language from UT-Tyler’s president and provost is troubling and gives the startling concern that the university will adopt an oppressive managerial philosophy by giving considerations to race, in effect, deciding between favored and unfavored groups. 

UT-Tyler’s managerial philosophy must be just. It must not consider the immutable characteristic of race in its students, faculty or staff.

Why Racial Considerations Are Bad

Now, racial considerations in a university’s managerial philosophy are bad for at least three reasons: they create resentment through segregation by race, they lower education quality for all and their presence inevitably undermines participants’ trust in the administration’s neutrality. 

First, considerations of race are bad because the led to segregation of university participants into separate, unequal groups by race. Many people can respect when another person wins awards because they deserved it, such as when one team wins the NBA championships over another, or when on actor wins an Oscar over another because people recognize that rewards follow merit.

However, people generally resent advantages drawn from entitlement, especially when the observers are working for their gains in life. Formal recognition of race by the university acknowledges type of status that comes, not from merit, but from entitlement—from immutable characteristics—and they resent it. Whether it is the student who receives special treatment and resents the university for putting him in a position where he is unequal with his peers, or the student who does not receive any special treatment from the university and has to compete with those who do, racial considerations separate the student body and create resentment in its participants. The university subjects all parties—both favored and disfavored racial groups—to unequal, unjust treatment and injures their common, equal humanity. It is wrong to treat people in a way that disparages their ability to achieve and it is unproductive to create an environment of resentment towards each other by making immutable characteristics a consideration in the university’s managerial considerations.

Second, racial considerations about the student body’s makeup are bad because once the university shows consideration for race and starts applying different standards around race, then students admitted with a lower GPA (although UT-Tyler does not do this right now) inevitably lower the quality of education all students receive.

This is because the instructor must teach curriculum that is on the level that all of the class can handle. So if the classroom’s average GPA is a 3.25 and new entrants through, say through affirmative action, with a lower GPA bring down the average from 3.25 to 2.75 (so, from “B-“ to “C+”) then inevitably the instructor will have to lower the class difficulty so that all of the students can have a reasonable shot at passing the class.

Otherwise, if the GPA gap is sufficiently large (say with two-thirds of the class at 3.25 and the one-third at 2.25) then it is possible that a larger portion of the class will fail than before the new student entered when the classroom’s overall average GPA was higher.

In short, the instructor will have to bring the content down to the weakest link’s level to accommodate a new composition of academic performance in his classroom. Introducing lower GPA students because of racial balancing lowers the quality of education for students overall. Not only can this lower the quality of education, but can be another unnecessary reason for resentment. 

Finally, race-consciousness in the administration’s managerial philosophy rightfully undermines confidence in the administration’s neutrality. When university officials show special considerations for particular racial groups (say, African-Americans over Asians), then people start to think that the administration is biased and will mistreat them if they encounter them. Double standards by racial groups create favorites and cast reasonable doubt that management will treat those students and employees who fall outside of favored group status equally.  

Conclusion

Overall, as a state school it is inappropriate for UT-Tyler to considering race in its decision-making in any way. Racial considerations introduce double standards which breed resentment in the university community, they lower the quality of education for all students by admitting applicants on racial rather than academic qualifications and they undermine confidence in administration’s neutrality. This destructive and distorted priority upon race should in no way shape the decision-making or equal treatment of university participants by the leadership. UT-Tyler should focus on developing academic excellence, rather than trying to manipulate social outcomes.

Twitter: @Jhescock12

Sign-up for my newsletter!

Feature Image: "No" by Felipe Skroski via Flickr