Counter Argument:
The argument in my research paper on topic " The iceberg of racial diversity policies/environment at college campus and the challenges/consequences that come along with it", is that universities and colleges these days are just focusing on increasing the diversity of their colleges instead of finding ways to meet challenges that come along with diversity policies such as, affirmative action. This has discoursed the real goal of diversity and affirmative action from academic point of view to racial-balancing. There are two sides to this topic, one side thinks that racial diverse policies have no consequences and that they are greatly just and beneficial to all; whereas , the other side thinks that although the real goal or motto of diversity at college campuses is not wrong, but it's benefits can be achieved by monitored and regulated environment, which come along with it's consequences/ challenges, for which something should be done.I totally disagree with the view that racial diverse policies/environment have no challenges or consequences, because if it had been true than we wouldn't have had cases like "Fischer Vs. University of Texas". Elizabeth Aries in her book " Race and Class Matters at an Elite College", has talked about several solutions to the challenges met by students studying in a racial/class diverse college. In my interview with Professor Tillery, he said that " who ever talks about the challenges and consequences of racism or thinks Fischer deserved admission at University of Texas, is just looking for their own benefit", so all the sources that I have read so far, do talk about the impact of racial and class diversity at colleges. Another counter argument is that why do we even emphasize on race?, and by these racial diverse policies prove to them that they are different from others deteriorating the feeling of oneness/unity.
You need to work on the clarity of your writing. Try using shorter sentences with a clear subject-verb-object construction. I don't follow the way you have framed the debate as being between those who "thinks that racial diverse [sic] policies have no consequences" [why have a policy if there is no point to it?] and the other side that ... well, I'm having trouble seeing how you understand the other side. I think you might be better off looking for places in your sources where they explicitly or implicitly indicate *why* they are in favor of increasing diversity on campus or opposed to it. I also agree with Tillery that this issue comes to the fore now because of the competition over college admission and there are those, like Fisher, who feel disadvantaged.
ReplyDeleteI want to see specific evidence of where the two sides stand. What does Aries say? Quote her where she indicates *why* she has her view.