J. Scott Carter and Cameron Lippard
- Published in print:
- 2020
- Published Online:
- September 2020
- ISBN:
- 9781529201116
- eISBN:
- 9781529201161
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Policy Press
- DOI:
- 10.1332/policypress/9781529201116.001.0001
- Subject:
- Education, Educational Policy and Politics
In the light of high-profile Supreme Court cases surrounding affirmative action, this book looks at the actors involved in the debate and what they are saying. That is, the book looks at who is ...
More
In the light of high-profile Supreme Court cases surrounding affirmative action, this book looks at the actors involved in the debate and what they are saying. That is, the book looks at who is setting the line of discussion in the Supreme Court by look at legal documents arguing for and against the case as well as the framing techniques they use to make their arguments noteworthy. Findings demonstrate that while supporters are made of a heterogeneous array of individuals and groups with a stake in affirmative action in higher education (e.g., students, professors, etc.), opponents are mainly represented by think tanks and other interest groups. Furthermore, this book finds that frames vary greatly between the groups, with supporters raising concern of what eliminating the policy will mean for minority students and opponents conversely arguing that such a policy is dangerous for our society and for those who merit inclusion into elite universities would not benefit from affirmative action. This book uses prominent sociological theories to put these arguments in broader contexts.Less
In the light of high-profile Supreme Court cases surrounding affirmative action, this book looks at the actors involved in the debate and what they are saying. That is, the book looks at who is setting the line of discussion in the Supreme Court by look at legal documents arguing for and against the case as well as the framing techniques they use to make their arguments noteworthy. Findings demonstrate that while supporters are made of a heterogeneous array of individuals and groups with a stake in affirmative action in higher education (e.g., students, professors, etc.), opponents are mainly represented by think tanks and other interest groups. Furthermore, this book finds that frames vary greatly between the groups, with supporters raising concern of what eliminating the policy will mean for minority students and opponents conversely arguing that such a policy is dangerous for our society and for those who merit inclusion into elite universities would not benefit from affirmative action. This book uses prominent sociological theories to put these arguments in broader contexts.
J. Scott Carter and Cameron D. Lippard
- Published in print:
- 2020
- Published Online:
- September 2020
- ISBN:
- 9781529201116
- eISBN:
- 9781529201161
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Policy Press
- DOI:
- 10.1332/policypress/9781529201116.003.0004
- Subject:
- Education, Educational Policy and Politics
The purpose of this chapter is to assess who are the actors leading the charge for and against affirmative action in the most recent U.S. Supreme Court cases on affirmative action in the 21st ...
More
The purpose of this chapter is to assess who are the actors leading the charge for and against affirmative action in the most recent U.S. Supreme Court cases on affirmative action in the 21st century. We are interested in the primary “lobbyist” of the Court during cases dealing with higher education and affirmative action (Gratz/Grutter and Fisher I and II) who make use of amicus briefs to make their cases for and against the policy. Amicus briefs are often described as “friends of the court” because they provide unique information to the court as well as elucidate broader social and political implications of the case's potential decision. However, scholars also argue that such briefs act to lobby the court for a specific resolution. While we look at all variation in authorship (e.g., individuals, civic organizations; universities, etc.), we pay particular attention to advocacy groups who have joined the fight for and against affirmative action in the public arena. Concerning opponents of affirmative action, scholars have stated that the backlash in the U.S. over policies and initiatives associated with the Civil Rights Movement has been led by elite-backed advocacy organizations, including special interest groups and think tanks.Less
The purpose of this chapter is to assess who are the actors leading the charge for and against affirmative action in the most recent U.S. Supreme Court cases on affirmative action in the 21st century. We are interested in the primary “lobbyist” of the Court during cases dealing with higher education and affirmative action (Gratz/Grutter and Fisher I and II) who make use of amicus briefs to make their cases for and against the policy. Amicus briefs are often described as “friends of the court” because they provide unique information to the court as well as elucidate broader social and political implications of the case's potential decision. However, scholars also argue that such briefs act to lobby the court for a specific resolution. While we look at all variation in authorship (e.g., individuals, civic organizations; universities, etc.), we pay particular attention to advocacy groups who have joined the fight for and against affirmative action in the public arena. Concerning opponents of affirmative action, scholars have stated that the backlash in the U.S. over policies and initiatives associated with the Civil Rights Movement has been led by elite-backed advocacy organizations, including special interest groups and think tanks.
R.V. Vaidyanatha Ayyar
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- April 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780199474943
- eISBN:
- 9780199090891
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780199474943.003.0007
- Subject:
- Sociology, Education
This chapter describes the process of revising NPE, 1986, and offers an insightful account of the manner in which the Education Secretary Anil Bordia protected NPE, 1986, from the onslaught of the ...
More
This chapter describes the process of revising NPE, 1986, and offers an insightful account of the manner in which the Education Secretary Anil Bordia protected NPE, 1986, from the onslaught of the Ramamurti Committee which if it had its way would have done away with non-formal education, vocationalization of secondary education and total literacy campaigns, and of his outmanoeuvring the attempt made by the State Governments to divest the AICTE of its statutory regulatory powers. It elaborates the insightful analysis of educational finances by the Ramamurti Committee and its forward looking recommendations being given a short shrift in the revised NPE even though India slid ingot a deep macroeconomic crisis. It highlights the lack of policy perspective and strategic thinking in the making of NPE, 1986 and its revision as a result of which no steps were taken to stop the higher education systems in the States drifting into a deep abyss.Less
This chapter describes the process of revising NPE, 1986, and offers an insightful account of the manner in which the Education Secretary Anil Bordia protected NPE, 1986, from the onslaught of the Ramamurti Committee which if it had its way would have done away with non-formal education, vocationalization of secondary education and total literacy campaigns, and of his outmanoeuvring the attempt made by the State Governments to divest the AICTE of its statutory regulatory powers. It elaborates the insightful analysis of educational finances by the Ramamurti Committee and its forward looking recommendations being given a short shrift in the revised NPE even though India slid ingot a deep macroeconomic crisis. It highlights the lack of policy perspective and strategic thinking in the making of NPE, 1986 and its revision as a result of which no steps were taken to stop the higher education systems in the States drifting into a deep abyss.
