Matching Items (4)
Description
This dissertation examines the performance of various federal departments on the success of their integration of personnel based on race and gender. It determines if there are variations in the success rate and explores the reasons for the variations based on the literature review and data analysis. The data used are federal employee data compiled by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Merit System Protection Board, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission through use of personnel surveys from 1979 through 2002 and annual reports. The study uses a cross-sectional model to test whether women and minorities in General Schedule grades 13 -15 have benefited from the implementation of Affirmative Action policy in their prospective agency over time. The effect of department size and affirmative action on the success rate of women and minorities was observed. The data shows that women at the GS 13 -15 grades have made significant gains in their participation rates at all of the departments within the study from 1979 - 2002. The gains made by minorities at the GS 13 -15 grades were not at the same rate as women. In several departments, the participation rates were either flat or decreased. The regression model showed that there is a linear relationship between the success of women and the success of minorities at the GS 13 -15 grade levels within federal departments.
ContributorsSaunders, Romona (Author) / Cayer, Joseph (Thesis advisor) / Alozie, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Lan, Gerald Z (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
Affirmative action is an education policy adopted by higher education institutions in the 1960s, where an applicant’s race is taken into account to some degree when being evaluated for admission to a college or university. The practice of affirmative action, or race conscious-admissions, has been repeatedly challenged in the legal system and remains a controversial and polarizing topic amongst the general public, campus leaders, and policy makers. Despite a vast amount of research on the effects of affirmative action policies on student and institutional behaviors and outcomes, such as college applications and enrollments, considerably less research has examined students’ attitudes towards race-conscious admissions policies. Even less research has focused on students in academic disciplines, especially STEM or engineering. Likewise, there is a paucity of research that explores students’ perceptions and knowledge of how affirmative action is implemented in practice. To address these gaps, this study investigates undergraduate engineering students’ knowledge of and attitudes towards affirmative action admissions policies in higher education. The Student Attitudes Towards Admissions Policies Survey (SATAPS) was designed to assess students’ knowledge of and attitudes regarding affirmative action practices in higher education admissions. This survey was administered to undergraduate engineering students and a comparison group of education students at 42 colleges/universities in the United States. Data were analyzed utilizing confirmatory factor analysis and hierarchical regression. Results demonstrated that students have low levels of knowledge about affirmative action, and have misconceptions about how the policy functions in practice. There was no difference in engineering and education students’ level of support for affirmative action; however, underrepresented minority students in engineering were more supportive of affirmative action. Results also indicated that students’ beliefs and values were the strongest predictors of attitude towards affirmative action, so much so that this negated the significance of demographic and personal characteristics, which was observed in the majority of previous studies. Results highlight a complicated relationship between demographic characteristics, personal variables, knowledge, institutional context, beliefs/values, and attitude towards affirmative action admissions policies in higher education.
ContributorsRoss, Lydia (Author) / Judson, Eugene (Thesis advisor) / Dorn, Sherman (Committee member) / Powers, Jeanne M. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Law and science are fundamental to the operation of racism in the United States. Law provides structure to maintain and enforce social hierarchies, while science ensures that these hierarchies are given the guise of truth. Biologists and geneticists have used race in physical sciences to justify social differences, while criminologists, sociologists, and other social scientists use race, and Blackness in particular, as an explain-all for criminality, poverty, or other conditions affecting racialized peoples. Social and physical sciences profoundly impact conceptualizations and constructions of race in society, while juridical bodies give racial science the force of law—placing legal benefits and criminal punishments into play. Yet, no formal rules govern the use of empirical data in opinions of the Supreme Court. My dissertation therefore studies the Court’s use of social scientific evidence in two key cases involving race and discrimination to identify what, if any, social scientific standards the Court has developed for its own analysis of scientific evidence. In so doing, I draw on Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Institutional Ethnography (IE) to develop a methodological framework for the study and use of social sciences in the law. Critical Race scholars generally argue that race is a social and legal construct and racism is endemic, and permanent, while Institutional Ethnography provides a social scientific method for rigorous study of the law by mapping and illuminating relationships of power manifested in social institutions that construct consciousness and place for marginalized groups in society. Combining methods of IE with epistemologies of CRT, I propose Critical Race Methodologies in the study of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin and Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. These two cases from recent terms of the Supreme Court involve heavy use of social sciences in briefing and at oral argument, and both cases set standards for racial inclusiveness in Texas. Throughout this dissertation, I look at how law and social sciences co-construct racial meanings and racial power, and how law and social science understand and misunderstand one another in attempting to scientifically understand the role of race in the United States.
ContributorsChin, Jeremiah Augustus (Author) / Brayboy, Bryan McK.J. (Thesis advisor) / Tsosie, Rebecca (Committee member) / Gomez, Alan (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
I conduct a series of analyses aimed at assessing equity in selective American colleges over a 20+ year time frame. My main measures of equity are enrollment and completion in selective colleges, which I disaggregate by race/ethnicity. After creating an institutional-level panel data set with variables on college revenues and expenses, tuition, institutional control, and affirmative action case law decisions, I estimate a Generalized Least Squares (GLS) model with institutional level random fixed effects to identify factors associated with enrollment and degree completion for white and non-white students at selective United States colleges. My results suggest that affirmative action case law is associated with changes in enrollment and degree completion rates of white and non-white student alike. Increasing equity for non-white students does not compromise equity for white students. There was a statistically significant relationship between federal spending, enrollment, and degree completion for non-white students. When selective colleges increased tuition, instructional costs, academic support services expenditures, and student support services, Asian American/Pacific Islander students were likely to see enrollment and degree completion declines. Degree completion and enrollment differences were observed for Asian American/Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and white students at public, private and for-profit colleges. In the years after the Adams and Hopwood court decisions, equity for non-white students declined at selective colleges. Enrollment and degree completion for non-white students increased following Grutter, Gratz, Coalition, and Fisher decisions. Enrollment of white students increased following Fordice and Hopwood. Degree completion for white students increased post Coalition and decreased post Fisher.
ContributorsOkolo, Tiffany (Author) / Powers, Jeanne (Thesis advisor) / Fischman, Gustavo (Thesis advisor) / Pivovarova, Margarita (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020