Although frequently associated with the United States, affirmative action is not a uniquely American social policy. Indeed, 2003 witnessed review and revision of affirmative action policies affecting higher education institutions in both France and the United States. Using critical race theory (CRT) as a theoretical lens, this text compares the affirmative action programs and lawsuits litigated in both nations in 2003 and their impact on the educational and social experiences of people who are racially or culturally non-White.
Purpose
This article examines and compares affirmative action policies and lawsuits directed at higher education in France and the United States. Faced with similar challenges, controversies, and racial concerns, these courts offered somewhat diverging opinions on the purpose, meaning, and impact that affirmative action policies should have in this millennium.
Research Design
This article employs legal hermeneutics, a specific form of documentary analysis, to examine affirmative action policies and related court decisions recently issued in both France and the United States. U.S. court decisions such as Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) and affirmative action program self-study reports published by L'institut d'etudes politiques, or Sciences Po, serve as the primary sources for the text.
Conclusions
The 2003 rulings in both France and the United States provide the legal impetus needed for affirmative action programs to continue. However, none of the court decisions or programs on either side of the Atlantic makes any real attempt to address the larger racial issues that created the need for affirmative action from the start. With the exception of the limited use allowed in affirmative action programs, all forms of diversity in the United States have basically the same value and, accordingly, have virtually the same impact on social arrangements. Likewise, France accepted the CEP (Conventions éducation prioritaire [Priority Convention Education]) program as an affirmative action measure while giving no thought to the need to reform the overall ideology of the nation, which dictates that all citizens are French and no forms of heterogeneity exist. In essence, the affirmative actions programs upheld in these court rulings fail to enforce the equality principles imparted in the French and U.S. constitutions by inhibiting discussion and deconstruction of racial inequalities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmottT. L., and MatthaeiJ. A. (1991). Race, gender, & work: A multicultural economic history of women in the United States. Boston: South End Press.
BantonM. (2001). National integration in France and Britain. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 27(1), 151—168.
4.
BarryB. (2001). Culture and equality: An egalitarian critique of multiculturalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
BollagB. (2003). A French court supports an elite university's affirmative-action program. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 50(13), A34.
6.
BowenW. G., and BokD. (1998). The shape of the river: Long-term consequences of considering race in college and university admissions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7.
BrightM. (1998, May 22). Last days of the Grand Ecole?New Statesman, 40.
8.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
9.
BrownM. C., and DonahooS. (2003). Affirmative action compliance in higher education. In and and GuthrieJ.W. (Ed.), The encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 61—65). New York: Macmillan Reference USA.
CarnevaleA. P., and RoseS. J. (2004). Socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and selective college admissions. In and and KahlenbergR. (Ed.), America's untapped resource: Low-income students in higher education (pp. 101—156). New York: Century Foundation Press.
13.
ChatmanS. L. (2000). “There are no slaves in France”: A re-examination of slave laws in eighteenth century France. The Journal of Negro History, 85(3), 144—153.
14.
CheurfaM., and TiberjV. (2001). Le concours d'entrée a Sciences Po: Inegalites d'acces & inegalites sociales. Paris: Sciences Po.
15.
ClabaughG. K. (1995, Spring). Positive discrimination. Educational Horizons, 73, 103—104.
16.
CohenA. M. (1998). The shaping of American higher education: Emergence and growth of the contemporary system. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
DaggerR. (1997). Civic virtues: Rights, citizenship, and republican liberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
23.
DelgadoR. (1991, March). Affirmative action as a majoritarian device: Or, do you really want to be a role model?Michigan Law Review, 89, 1222—1231.
24.
DelgadoR., and StefancicJ. (Eds.). (2000). Critical race theory: The cutting edge (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
25.
DobbinF. R. (1993, February). The social construction of the Great Depression: Industrial policy during the 1930s in the United Stated, Britain, and France. Theory and Society, 22, 1—56.
26.
DonahooS. (2006). Derailing desegregation: Legal efforts to end racial segregation in higher education before and after Brown. Equity and Excellence in Education, 39, 291—301.
27.
EckesS. E. (2004). Race-conscious admissions programs: Where do universities go from “Gratz” and “Grutter”?Journal of Law and Education, 33, 21—62.
GreenD. O. (2004). Fighting the battle for racial diversity: A case study of Michigan's institutional response to Gratz and Grutter. Educational Leadership, 18, 733—751.
34.
GreenbergJ. (2002). Affirmative action in higher education: Confronting the condition and theory. Boston College Law Review, 43, 521.
35.
Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 982 (2003).
36.
GuinierL., and TorresG. (2002). The miner's canary: Enlisting race, resisting power, transforming democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37.
HarrisC. I. (1993, June). Whiteness as property. Harvard Law Review, 106, 1707—1791.
38.
Hopwood v. Texas, 78 F.3d 932 (5th Cir. 1996).
39.
JencksC. (1998). Racial bias in testing. In JencksC., and PhillipsM. (Eds.), The Black-White test score gap (pp. 55—85). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
40.
InnissL. K. B. (1999). Tricky magic: Blacks as immigrants and the paradox of foreignness. DePaul Law Review, 49, 85—137.
41.
KahlenbergR. (2004). Toward affirmative action for economic diversity. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 50(28), B11.
42.
KymlickaW. (1995). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. New York: Oxford University Press.
43.
LabiA. (2005). Lessons from–quelle horreur!–les Américains. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(2), A66.
44.
Ladson-BillingsG., and TateW. F. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97, 47—68.
45.
LemannN. (2000). The big test: The secret history of the American meritocracy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
46.
LewisH. D. (1985). The French education system. London: Croom Helm.
47.
LoveB. J. (2004). Brown plus 50 counter-storytelling: A critical race theory analysis of the “majoritarian achievement gap” story. Equity and Excellence in Education, 37, 227—246.
48.
Meredith v. Fair, 305 F.2d. 343 (5th Cir. 1962).
49.
MillotB. (1981). Social differentiation and higher education: The French case. Comparative Education Review, 25, 353—368.
OrfieldG., and MillerE. (Eds.). (1998). Chilling admissions: The affirmative action crisis and the search for alternatives. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Publishing Group, Civil Rights Project.
53.
OsbornM., BroadfootP., PlanelC., and PollardA. (1997). Social class, educational opportunity and equal entitlement: Dilemmas of schooling in England and France. Comparative Education, 33, 375—393.
54.
OsgoodS. M. (1966). Higher education in France today: A balance sheet. The Journal of Higher Education, 37(2), 68—75.
Podberesky v. Kirwan, 956, F.2d 52 (4th Cir. 1992).
57.
Polakow-SuranskyS. (2004, July/August). Crème de la crème: How a few dozen immigrant students at an elite French college created a crise constitutionnelle and still got good report cards. Legal Affairs [Electronic version]. Retrieved May 19, 2005, from http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/July-August-2004/story_suransky_julaug04.msp
58.
PremforsR. (1984). Numbers and beyond: Access policy in an international perspective. The Journal of Higher Education, 55(1), 1—18.
59.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978).
60.
RhoadesG. (1983). Conflicting interests in higher education. American Journal of Education, 91, 283—327.
PoSciences. (2003, September). Conventions éducation prioritaire (CEP). 3 ans après: Premiers enseignements et fruits de l'expérience [Priority education convention: Three years later: The first year of undergraduate education and effects of the experience]. Paris: Author.
63.
PoSciences. (2004, November 15). Conventions éducation prioritaire, 2004–2005: Cinquième année de mise en æuvre: Un triple effet de levier [Priority education convention, 2004–2005: Fifth year of implementation: A triple lever effect]. Paris: Author.
64.
Sciences Po Paris. (n.d.). Sciences Po, an overview: A hundred years of innovation. Retrieved October 5, 2005, from http://www.sciences-po.fr/english/
65.
SelingoJ. (2005). Michigan: Who really won?The Chronicle of Higher Education, 51(19), A21.
66.
Sipuel v. Board of Regents, 332 U.S. 631 (1948).
67.
SmithR. M. (1997). Civic ideals: Conflicting visions of citizenship in U. S. history. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
68.
SpannG. A. (2000). The law of affirmative action: Twenty-five years of Supreme Court decisions on race and remedies. New York: New York University Press.
69.
SpinnerJ. (1994). The boundaries of citizenship: Race, ethnicity, and nationality in the liberal state. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
70.
TateW. F. (1997). Critical race theory and education: History, theory, and implications. Review of Research in Education, 22, 195—247.
71.
Valls-RussellJ. (2000, March/April). France's hushed-up school crisis. The New Leader, 83, 16—18.
72.
VarsF. E., and BowenW. G. (1998). Scholastic aptitude test scores, race and academic performance in selective colleges and universities. In JencksC., and PhillipsM. (Eds.), The Black-White test score gap (pp. 457—479). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
73.
YoungI. M. (1995). Polity and group difference: A critique of the ideal of universal citizenship. In and and BeinerR. (Ed.), Theorizing citizenship (pp. 175—207). New York: State University of New York Press.
