Thursday, February 9, 2023 | 11
OPINION
In defense of affirmative action Affirmative action is as relevant and necessary today as it was in the 1960s The current U.S. Supreme Court seems intent on sending the United States back to the 20th century. First it was overturning Roe v. Wade and challenging tribal sovereignty, now the Supreme Court has the potential to overturn another 1960s precedent — affirmative action. It is extremely concerning to see a handful of old, white men — who are both unelected and who hold life-long appointments — make decisions that will primarily affect low-income people of color. This Court is set to make a decision by June on two cases which challenge the constitutionality of considering race as a factor in college admissions. Affirmative action arose from the civil rights movement and was intended to expand the opportunities for women and underrepresented minorities in employment, which eventually expanded to colleges and universities. The original executive orders which eliminated racial discrimination in employment were created and supported by several U.S. presidents, including John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon. The phrase affirmative action derives from the exact words that Johnson used in Executive Order 11246 to describe the manner in which employers should act to ensure racial equity. Over six dec-
ades of affirmative action have paved the way for more women and people of color to pursue opportunities that would have otherwise been impossible under the previous legal racial discrimination that occurred in employment and education. Despite all the good that has arisen from affirmative action, it has also been a source of controversy. The most recent challenge began when Students
These cases are a blatant example of the zero-sum mentality that prevents the alliance of racial minorities and instead creates a kind of oppression Olympics pitting minorities against one another. This zero-sum mentality manifests itself as the belief that admission of more Black or Latinx students means that a spot is being taken away from an Asian or a white student that has a higher test score or
icies — like exclusionary housing practices, medical racism and more — have resulted in less opportunity for many people of color, and therefore less expendable income and security. Lost opportunities as a result of this intergenerational racism can negatively impact academic performance. Instead of targeting affirmative action, SFFA should turn its attention to the selectivity of elite universities
Lost opportunities as a result of this intergenerational racism can negatively impact academic performance” for Fair Admissions filed lawsuits against The University of Texas, The University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill and Harvard on the basis of race-based discrimination in college admissions. They claim that white and Asian students are being discriminated against in the admissions process. Much like the plaintiffs of another case the Supreme Court is hearing regarding the Indian Child Welfare Act, SFFA is essentially claiming reverse racism against a policy that is intended to protect minorities from historically racist policies.
a higher GPA. SFFA claims that colorblind admissions is best for everyone and that affirmative action tells Black and Latinx students that they are less intelligent and less capable of scoring highly on tests and were only accepted based on their race. Is SFFA claiming that students of color accepted into elite universities have not earned their spots, especially since many selective universities claim to use a holistic approach? What SFFA does not consider is the extensive research on the racist and eugenicist origins of standardized testing and how historically racist pol-
and fight to make higher education more accessible for all those wishing to pursue it — especially considering that for women and people of color, admittance to an elite university positively correlates with increased job prospects and earning potential. If affirmative action is ruled unconstitutional, though, it is not a matter of if these colleges will become less diverse — it is when. Unfortunately, college admissions are not the only thing that is threatened by the overturning of affirmative action — scholarships on the basis of race are also in jeopardy.
Despite the historical progress made under affirmative action, racial discrimination persists in employment, and college remains out of reach for many people of color due to systemic racism. While affirmative action does not replace the need for monetary reparations for descendants of enslaved individuals or Indigenous communities, it is a type of reparation for the historical barring of people of color and women from higher education. We do not live in a race blind society. Nor should we, lest we ignore the many barriers people of color face in an intrinsically unequal society. Affirmative action is a topic that is very important to me as I consider myself a beneficiary of the policy. While I do not claim that affirmative action is a perfect policy, it is clear that we are still fighting for liberties fought for by the original 1960s civil rights movement — until those visions are achieved, affirmative action must be vehemently defended. YSSIS CANO-SANTIAGO is an Opinion Columnist for The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at opinion@cavalierdaily.com.
Learn to teach with ChatGPT Efforts to limit student use of chatbots are misguided and will prove futile Just as quickly as it came, the warm embrace of syllabus week has passed. While students are typically bombarded with the same class policies about lying, cheating and stealing, this semester there was one notable addition to many syllabi — ChatGPT. Although ChatGPT was launched only in December, its arrival has dominated discourse in education. Teachers and parents have rushed to declare the English class and even the college essay dead. In response to growing concerns, the school districts of New York and Seattle banned the so-called “cheating device,” with Fairfax County following suit in January. Although uncertainty within academia is understandable, the alarmist rhetoric and outright bans are shortsighted. We must begin to realize ChatGPT’s capability as a teaching tool both at the University level and beyond. ChatGPT is the latest release from the artificial intelligence company Open AI. A conversational chatbot, ChatGPT uses machine learning techniques to produce thoughtful responses to requests. OpenAI gives several examples of potential uses for the program on the site’s homepage — from asking ChatGPT to explain quantum
computing in simple terms to requesting a list of ideas for a ten-year-old’s birthday party. While it may be easy to dismiss the program as just hype, it is hard to deny its successes, as it managed to both pass an MBA exam and
safeguards put in place by administrators. There have been developments to solve the threat of cheating, including GPTZero, an app created by a current Princeton student which claims to be able to detect whether a text was AI
students who have trouble processing information at high speeds in a lecture setting. ChatGPT can supplement learning by providing the user with a conversational partner to talk through difficult concepts. If embraced,
Instead of running from it, why not use it? When used correctly, ChatGPT can be a revolutionary tool in the classroom.”
even help write legislation. Just spend a couple minutes playing around with the user-friendly software and you will be astounded by its capabilities. Its capability has fueled fears that cheating will be an inevitable consequence of widespread access to this AI. While it makes sense that many districts’ first instinct would be to block ChatGPT, this simply is not feasible. Schools can ban the AI on schoolowned electronics and even the wifi system, but students have their own phones and computers. Even if they do not, it does not take a person with a tech background to access a VPN — allowing students to circumvent any
produced. However, just changing a few words of an AI-generated text easily fools the software. Instead of running from it, why not use it? When used correctly, ChatGPT can be a revolutionary tool in the classroom. For starters, it could help level the playing field by aiding students who struggle to translate their ideas into prose, especially those with learning disorders like dyslexia. One of ChatGPT’s most valuable features is its ability to digest difficult concepts into easily understood terms, effectively turning the program into a personal teaching assistant. This would prove particularly beneficial to
ChatGPT would quickly become a go to tool for students with SDAC accommodations, helping to promote access and inclusion at the University. It is not just students with learning accommodations — this technology has the potential to benefit everyone. ChatGPT is a chatbot, meaning that its primary function is to engage the user in conversation. In practice, this means English second language learners would always have a practice partner. Need someone to debate? ChatGPT’s ability to give all sides to an argument makes it the perfect partner. The Generative Pre-Trained Transformer software lends itself to
developing points and counterpoints, which teachers could use to help strengthen students’ arguments. The biggest concern among University faculty is what the advent of ChatGPT would mean for the Honor system. It is fair to wonder how a program that can write its own essays could coexist with the University’s rich history of academic honesty. But innovation and Honor coexist in every corner of the University. Calculators enabled greater advancement in math. The da Vinci surgical robot is used in our medical school. The reality is that these tools can be used to help students achieve more and reach greater heights. Universities have been drivers of innovation for centuries. Both the Internet and GPS originated at MIT. Modern seat belts were envisioned in a lab at Cornell. And the notion of an Academic Village — well, you know where that started. We must embrace innovative concepts, not fear them. And ChatGPT is no exception. DAN FREED is an Opinion Columnist for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at opinion@cavalierdaily.com.