On Disguises, Tokens, and Affirmative Action Policies

In Brilliant Disguise: An Empirical Analysis of a Social Experiment Banning Affirmative Action, Professor Deirdre Bowen provides a valuable service by undertaking an empirical assessment of the accuracy of some predictions associated with affirmative action bans. Her analysis suggests that minority students attending schools using affirmative action programs feel better about themselves and their educational experiences than those attending schools where such programs are not used. She offers evidence supporting the importance of having a critical mass of minority students in college classes, and she presents plausible hypotheses with respect to whether state bans on affirmative action in public higher education are likely to have the salutary effects for minority students that are sometimes claimed. Regrettably, in part because of the external constraints imposed on her study, her conclusions are not warranted by her empirical data. Indeed, her findings may well be viewed as providing support for the respective positions of both those supporting and those opposing affirmative action policies. While her study suggests a number of research avenues that might fruitfully be pursued, the results of this study alone are too indeterminate to provide the ringing endorsement of affirmative action that she would like. Professor Bowen argues that the “color-blind ideal” employs three premises to support the claim that affirmative action policies are no longer necessary: (1) it is not an appropriate method by which to combat racism because it may in fact cause it; 1 (2) minority students admitted under affirmative action programs will feel stigmatized both externally and internally, that is, they will feel that others are undervaluing their worth 2