Park includes a number of terms in Chapter 4 that are important to understand. Some should be familiar, others are new to this Chapter. Here is a short list.
RACE ON CAMPUS:
Debunking Myths with Data
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Discussion Questions
Topic Leader: Susan Vega García
Meeting: LMT 10.16
Please read the following & be prepared to discuss at our meeting:
Chapter 4: Why Affirmative Action is Good for Asian Americans -- pages 71-98
You can always read more from the book at any time, but this is the Chapter we will focus on in our discussions for today.
Note: This chapter focuses on alleged discrimination against Asian American students in college admissions, particularly at elite institutions. The author, herself Korean American, analyzes the data, college admissions practices, and cultural expectations and reaches very different conclusions. While there's much here to discuss, our questions for this chapter will focus on overarching issues of social justice and cultural competence.
Discussion Questions
1. Chapter 4 begins with the context of a 2017 plan to investigate whether white students were being discriminated against through college Affirmative Action policies (p71).
2. Park presents student enrollment data from several "highly regarded" universities, all of which show African American student enrollments are in the very low single digit percentages (pp 73-74).
3. Asian Americans comprise a very diverse group. In what ways does Park avoid stereotyping Asian Americans in this chapter? What strategies does she employ? What can we learn from her example?
4. Chapter 4 illustrates a number of ways that anti-affirmative action arguments have pitted various communities of color against each other. For example, see p. 72 and the "Rejected by Harvard" poster alleging a rejected Asian American student was of the "wrong race" to be admitted, and p. 95 with the complaint against Harvard report and its comparisons of SAT score differentials among students of color but no inclusion of differentials with white students.