Let’s talk diversity. It is, without a doubt, something to strive for, whether it’s for the betterment of a society, school, an employer or the world at large. Anyone who has read “Brave New World” knows homogeneity and predictability can be highly detrimental to a society. Differing races, beliefs, genders, ages, personalities and backgrounds are all vital to many aspects of a society including creativity and the challenging of others that leads to a more successful establishment. But when does this drive for a diversity of ideas and beliefs go too far?
It has gone too far at UW with the amount of financial grants awarded to minorities. Although these grants are based on financial need, three of the 11 main grants are restricted to specific races with intentions of helping “underprivileged” families. Helping the “underprivileged” is a wonderful thing, and I am in no sense implying that one race is more deserving over another, but should these awards really be restricted by skin color? The university considers Caucasians as the majority and the more “privileged” race, but how many Caucasians find themselves equally in need of significant aid to get the education they deserve? Madison is striving to expand the diversity of its student population so it can make claims about significantly representing races other than Caucasian. I see nothing wrong with striving to represent different races, but perhaps this should be based on academics, work ethic and community involvement through high school instead of on skin color. Should a Puerto Rican woman with a 3.4 GPA in high school with moderate extracurricular involvement be awarded this money instead of the Caucasian women with a 3.7 GPA and substantial involvement? By awarding financial aid based on race or ethnicity, the university is cutting off aid from students of other races who may have worked harder and may be more deserving of it.
Representing a wide range of races is a positive attribution to the university’s success, but setting aside financial aid for specific races is completely unacceptable and unfair. If I were Cambodian or Vietnamese, perhaps I would have been awarded one of the $3,000 per year Wisconsin Undergraduate Lawton Minority Retention or Wisconsin Indian Grants that are unavailable to Caucasian students. Where are the Caucasian grants? With my entire family including aunts, uncles and grandparents working hard to send me to a great school and receive the education I deserve, I find it completely unfair that someone with equivalent high school academics may have been given money because of the color of their skin, while I am left with 10 years of loans to pay off after I graduate.
Not only does skin color contribute to the awarding of financial grants, but also a handful of races have advantages based on this factor when it comes to getting into the business school, med school, etc. By trying to fulfill certain quotas of racial representation, these institutions are able to claim that they are unbiased toward certain races and represent a truly diverse establishment.
This idea goes beyond the university. The current United States government funding for minority grants totals $55.5 billion. To put it into perspective, grants for minorities surpass those set aside for community development ($37.5 billion) and government spending on key agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, NASA, Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Homeland Security. This $55.5 billion is basically being spent for the government to make claims about representing minorities and striving for diversity among the educated population.
Simply put, grants with race restrictions are completely unfair to students. These grants should be distributed based solely on criteria that the student has worked hard to excel at like GPA, rigor of courses and ambition, community involvement and extracurricular activities without the influence of uncontrollable factors like race.
Katlyn Grinwis ([email protected]) is a sophomore intending to major in journalism.
