Justin

Virgl
11343920
English 402
Instructor: Kate Watts
Research Recommendation Memo



Date: March 6, 2016
To: Potential Future Applicants of Washington State University
The Institute for Justice
Whom it May Concern
From: Justin Virgl
Subject: Affirmative Action and the Admissions Process at WSU

Purpose


The purpose of this recommendation memo is to show my steps of
researching affirmative action and the degree that it is factored into the admissions
process at Washington State University. Through an in depth look at the background
of the problem and my own personal methods of research, I have formed sufficient
results and conclusions pertaining to the matter that ultimately result in a formal
recommendation on how to address this issue.

Summary



Affirmative action policies have been implemented at universities to help
narrow the gap of inequalities among applying students. Consequently, it has
created an environment where opportunities for college participation is not just a
matter of qualification and merit but rather to achieve a certain level of diversity
among its community. In this memo, you will find an in depth look at this issue as
well as my personal research methods, results, conclusions, and recommendations
on how to address this problem at Washington State University. My methods of
research consisted of a sit down interview with the dean of admissions, researching
and constructing my own survey to distribute to the student body, and lastly
acquiring personal statements from students about their own admissions process
and how affirmative action might have played a role. The results yielded from this
research showed that affirmative action has negatively effected a high percentage of
the universitys student body. Through these results, I have concluded that
affirmative action is a relevant and negative practice at Washington State University
and have formed a recommendation on how to address the issue. My
recommendation consists of forming a committee at the university with the
objective of eliminating all affirmative action policies within the admissions office.
By doing so, I believe that noticeable changes can be made that will ultimately make
the admissions process more honest and fair to its applicants.

Introduction



Ever since having my own personal experiences of applying to colleges
around the west coast of the United States, I have become more aware and
concerned about the admissions process and the level that affirmative action is
taken into consideration. Not to my surprise, I noticed the same concerns from my
fellow classmates and peers of all ages who have gone through this process at
multiple institutions around the country. Throughout the history of the United
States there has been a great amount of unfairness and inequality in collegiate
opportunities and in other areas of society. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy
began using the term Affirmative Action as a plan to start help improving the
overall life and opportunities for African Americans and women. While there have
been numerous controversial hearings and decisions made in the past pertaining to
laws on college admissions, new laws have been put in place to bridge the gap of
inequality in this field even further. Even though these laws have been enacted in
order to keep these inequalities from happening, there have been questionable and
what appears to be negligent decisions being made by universities when it comes to
admitting future students. For over the last five decades, universities admissions
offices around the country have been making decisions based not merely off
qualifications and merit, but to achieve a certain level of diversity within their
community. This process of thinking might prevent individuals who might be just as
suited for admission from a life changing and ever-beneficial opportunity. In a
society that is predicated on equality and freedom of opportunities for all, doesnt it
make sense that it should apply to the college admissions process?

A case in our states history dealing with this issue was DeFunis v. Odegaard,
which occurred at the University of Washington. This case involved DeFunis who
was a graduate student applying to law school, and he argued that the schools
affirmative action policy favored minority applicants over better qualified Caucasian
ones. He believed that other applicants with much lower LSAT scores and GPAs
than his were getting admitted into the law school only because they were
minorities. Ultimately, the case was determined to be a moot, meaning that further
legal proceedings can have no effect on or is beyond the reach of the law. Basically
meaning that this case was brought up based on hypothetical questioning.
Universities admitting students solely according to their race, gender, sexuality, etc.
is immoral. A recent source that discussed this issue stated that the Affirmative
Action program Was designed by the efforts of John F. Kennedy to form a society
where every person has an equal opportunity to formulate an excellent living.
Overall, if another university in the state of Washington would allow these unfair
practices to go unpunished it was necessary to investigate these issues at
Washington State University accordingly.

Through the voice of the students, admissions authorities, and faculty I have
explored whether affirmative action policies are key components of the admissions
process. Having inequalities of this nature go uninvestigated and ultimately resolved
is inexcusable and I have made it my mission to investigate the affirmative action
policies here at Washington State University and have presented my methods of

research, results, conclusions, and recommendations pertaining to the matter

below.

Research Methods

Task 1: Discussing with the Admissions Office at WSU
I was able to set up and construct a brief sit down interview with the dean of
admissions at WSU to get insider information on the universitys affirmative
action policies.
First, I emailed the admissions office requesting a meeting and was granted
one just a couple days later with the dean of admissions.
Before going to the interview, I planned out my questions so that they would
be quick and effective because I know that the dean is busy and would most
likely not give me very much time.
The whole interview lasted about 20 minutes and the answers were very
brief.

Task 2: Researching similar surveys conducted on this issue
I explored numerous secondary sources mainly on the Internet about
surveys pertaining to affirmative action at universities. It was difficult to find
ones specifically targeted for colleges, but I found a vast amount of examples
that provided me with great insight on how similar surveys have been
constructed.
After researching for a couple days, I focused on two sources that I believe
contain the best types of questions to put on this kind of survey.
Ultimately, this provided me with an excellent guide on how to construct and
word my survey in the most effective manner.

Task 3: Designing and conducting my own survey
Through the steps I accomplished in task two, I was able to build a concise
but effective survey that targets the key components surrounding this issue.
My survey questions are as follows:
1. Do you know what affirmative action is? (Yes or No)
2. Do you believe that affirmative action is a positive or negative thing?
(Positive or Negative)
3. Do you think that affirmative action is relevant at Washington State
University? (Yes or No)
4. Have you ever felt that affirmative action has played a role in your personal
admissions experience? (Yes or No)
5. Please write down any personal experiences or thoughts relating to
affirmative action below.
After creating this survey, I began distributing them online and in paper
form. I did so by having people take it at my booth that I set up in the CUB,
and by handing them out to my peers before class. Additionally, I had every
member of my fraternity take it after our weekly chapter meeting. By using

multiple means of distribution, I think that I have achieved a complete and

diverse demographic of survey takers.
I found that having two laptops set up at my booth was crucial for this task
because it simplified the process and students were much more willing to
take it in that form. I only utilized paper forms of the survey when I handed
them out before my classes.
After students were done taking the survey (at my booth only) I offered them
candy I had set out. Overall, this process was a little more difficult than I
expected because many of the students were in a hurry and didnt have time
to take my survey.
Myself and my two other team members accomplished this task over the
course of three days.

Task 4: Acquiring in depth statements from peers
After conversing with multiple people during my survey process, I was able
to arrange sit down interviews with three willing students of various races
and ethnicities. These participants were chosen because they stated that they
could provide me with some great personal experiences with affirmative
action.
I decided to conduct these in a one on one setting so that the participants felt
comfortable and knew that their statements would be kept confidential and
anonymous.
Through this process, I obtained statements and examples from these
participants that provided me with great insight regarding this issue at WSU.

Results

Task 1: Discussing with the Admissions Office at WSU



Through my interview with the dean of admissions I found that Washington
State University along with most other universities around the country have an
affirmative action policy. Basically, this was the only key fact that I drew from this
interview because the dean was not able to give me more detailed responses, as I
expected. This led me to explore other states where affirmative actions policies are
not implemented. I found that the states of Michigan and Texas have banned all
affirmative action policies at universities. Since the law went into effect in Texas in
1995, the University of Texas Law School saw its Latino student enrollment rate
drop by 50%. This shows some adverse effects that these types of laws can create,
and provides some reason for the use of these policies. Washington State University
has this policy in place under the belief that if a collegiate community is more
culturally diverse then the competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency will
increase among the student body. After thoroughly analyzing the policy, I ultimately
learned that the university does take cultural or ethnic background into
consideration when admitting students into the school. However, you have to
consider the other factors weighed into process like the home location of an

applicant because out of state students bring in much higher tuitions to the school
than in state students. Overall, this task not only showed me that affirmative action
policies are used at WSU, but also that many other hard to determine factors are
taken into consideration.

Task 2: Researching similar surveys conducted on this issue



After conducting secondary research into other surveys on this topic, I was
able to narrow down a couple sources to base my survey questions off of. It allowed
me to construct a brief five-question survey that asks the key questions surrounding
this issue.

Task 3: Designing and conducting my own survey



After compiling and analyzing my surveys results, I believe I have
trustworthy data regarding affirmative action at Washington State University. Here
are the results from my survey:
1. Do you know what affirmative action is? (Yes: 89% No: 11%)
2. Do you believe that affirmative action is a positive or negative thing?
(Positive: 32% Negative: 68%)
3. Do you think that affirmative action is relevant at Washington State
University? (Yes: 73% No: 27%)
4. Have you ever felt that affirmative action has played a role in your personal
admissions experience? (Yes: 59% No: 41%)


The first thing that caught my attention was that many students believe that
affirmative action is not a good policy. I also found that a very high percentage of
students believe affirmative action is relevant at WSU and indeed played a role in
their admission experience. This showed that many of the students surveyed
seemed to believe that the admissions office had some sort foul play when
considering the admissions of applicants. Overall, this proved that affirmative action
is a relevant issue at Washington State University that has affected a high
percentage of its student body.

Task 4: Acquiring in depth statements from peers


One of the most important things I noticed when interacting with the
universitys community was that a lot of the same issues that I felt when applying
was mutual with other students. The first student that I interviewed explained to me
his personal admissions story and how he was still somewhat upset with the
outcome. He told me that in high school he achieved a GPA of 3.85 and scored a
1700 on his SAT, which yielded him no scholarship money. He later discovered that
one of his classmates who was of a different ethnicity received a $5,000 yearly
scholarship from the university while only obtaining a 3.65 GPA and a scoring a
1500 on his SAT. This story was very eye opening to me, but not that shocking due
to results I have seen throughout my research. Additionally, other factors including

the students application essay and family background could have played a huge role
in the scholarship being awarded. Nonetheless, this example further shows the
relevance of affirmative action in the admissions process at WSU and the resulting
effects that it has on students.

The second participant that I interviewed told me about her admissions story
and how she believed affirmative action played a role in the process. She explained
to me that in high school she got a 2.00 GPA and a 1250 on her SAT, which resulted
in her initially being denied to WSU and therefore had to attend a community
college for 2 years before she was academically able to attend WSU. She then told
me that one of her friends who was of a different ethnicity and had a very similar
GPA and SAT score was admitted to the university straight out of high school. This
obviously frustrated her and she genuinely believed that affirmative action played a
key role in her admissions experience. Although, as I mentioned in the situation
above there could have been many other underlying factors which led to her friend
being admitted over her but nothing that could be conclusively said due to the
nature and tough to gauge factors that go into admissions decisions.

The third participant unfortunately never showed up to our scheduled
interview and never returned my phone calls. I used this time to explore secondary
resources to see if I could find any information that related to the experiences of the
first two participants that I interviewed. There really wasnt much out there on that
exact topic, but one startling fact I found was While research varies, affirmative
action in college admission offices is the equivalent of adding 150 to 310 points on
an SAT score for a minority. Even though I do question the credibility of this
statistic, it further shows how affirmative action is greatly taken into consideration
during the admissions process at universities. Overall, this task further opened my
eyes to the reality of what is considered during the admissions process at
universities and I believe provides solid evidence that affirmative action is a
relevant issue at Washington State University today.

Conclusions


According to the results of my survey I can safely say that affirmative action
policies are taking place in the admissions office at WSU. Considering that 59% of
the people who were surveyed believed that they have suffered from the negative
side of affirmative action, its safe to say that affirmative action is a relevant practice
at WSU. Additionally, the personal experiences I heard from my interview
participants added detail and further cemented the evidence that I found from my
survey. This is not only detrimental to the people who are negatively effected by
affirmative action, but also to the people who benefit from it due to the theory of
mismatch. This theory is the idea that using affirmative action during admissions
decisions places students in schools that they normally would not be accepted to
and ultimately hurts them because they might fall behind and struggle in their
academics. Therefore, qualities like your race, cultural background, and ethnicity
should not dictate your potential opportunities in life. Instead the personal
credentials of the applicant and nothing else should dictate it.

Recommendation



Based off of the results and conclusions I have formed from this research
study, I believe that a course of action should be taken in order to deal with this
problem. Due to the fact that a high amount of people surveyed saw a problem with
the affirmative action policies at the university, I believe that the public should not
ignore it. I would like to suggest that a committee be constructed at Washington
State University who would fight against these policies and keep the admissions
process based solely off of merit and nothing else. The overall goal of this committee
would be to remove all affirmative action policies that exist in the universitys
admissions office. As this project progresses, I feel that the work of this committee
could make some noticeable changes among the community that would better
Washington State University as a whole.

References

"11 Facts About Affirmative Action." 11 Facts About Affirmative Action. Web. 06 Mar.
2016. <https://www.dosomething.org/facts/11-facts-about-affirmative-action>.

"Affirmative Action Facts." University of Michigan.
Web. 19. Feb. 2016. http://www.umich.edu/~daap/facts.htm.

"COMMONLY ASKED QUESTIONS REGARDING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION." University of
Minnesota Duluth. Web. 25 Feb. 2016.

"Conflicted Views of Affirmative Action." Pew Research Center for the People and the
Press RSS. 2003. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.

"Defunis v. Odegaard, Casebriefs." Defunis v. Odegaard. Bloomberg LAW, 1 Sept.
2009. Web. 17 February 2016.
(Court Citation: 22 Ill.U.S. 312, 94 S. Ct. 1704, 40 L. Ed. 2d 164 (1974))

Yee, Vivian. "Affirmative Action." Court Hears a New Challenge [New York Times] 15
Oct 2012, n.p. Print.