Perspectives on affirmative action in academic dental institutions

the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the University of Michigan cases.

Melanie R. Peterson, Joan Kowolik, Gary Coleman, Susan Dietrich, Ana Karina Mascarenhas, Michael McCunniff, George Taylor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

In June 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of using race as a factor in higher education admissions decisions. This article considers the impact of the Supreme Court decisions on admissions procedures at selected academic dental institutions (ADI) and their parent institutions. We interviewed fifty-eight leaders considered to be individual stakeholders at seven ADI and their related parent institutions, state dental associations, and state legislatures using a common set of questions about the Supreme Court decisions. Educators from the ADI and their parent institutions were consistent in their responses that the rulings upheld affirmative action as necessary to achieve diversity. State organized dentistry officials did not appear to be as aware as others of the rulings, whereas legislators were mixed in their responses. Except for the University of Michigan undergraduate admissions procedures, it remains to be seen what the impact will be for other higher education institutions and for academic dental institutions. Although the rulings have provided guidelines for achieving diversity using race/ ethnicity as one of several factors, the rulings will possibly be challenged, thus requiring vigilance on the part of parent institutions and their ADI to ensure compliance with the spirit of the rulings and to avoid attack from opponents of affirmative action.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)932-937
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Dental Education
Volume68
Issue number9
StatePublished - Jan 1 2004
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

affirmative action
Supreme Court
Tooth
Supreme Court Decisions
parents
State Dentistry
Education
court decision
constitutionality
Guidelines
dentistry
education
ethnicity
stakeholder
educator
leader

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Peterson, M. R., Kowolik, J., Coleman, G., Dietrich, S., Mascarenhas, A. K., McCunniff, M., & Taylor, G. (2004). Perspectives on affirmative action in academic dental institutions: the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the University of Michigan cases. Journal of Dental Education, 68(9), 932-937.

Perspectives on affirmative action in academic dental institutions : the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the University of Michigan cases. / Peterson, Melanie R.; Kowolik, Joan; Coleman, Gary; Dietrich, Susan; Mascarenhas, Ana Karina; McCunniff, Michael; Taylor, George.

In: Journal of Dental Education, Vol. 68, No. 9, 01.01.2004, p. 932-937.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Peterson, MR, Kowolik, J, Coleman, G, Dietrich, S, Mascarenhas, AK, McCunniff, M & Taylor, G 2004, 'Perspectives on affirmative action in academic dental institutions: the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the University of Michigan cases.', Journal of Dental Education, vol. 68, no. 9, pp. 932-937.
Peterson, Melanie R. ; Kowolik, Joan ; Coleman, Gary ; Dietrich, Susan ; Mascarenhas, Ana Karina ; McCunniff, Michael ; Taylor, George. / Perspectives on affirmative action in academic dental institutions : the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the University of Michigan cases. In: Journal of Dental Education. 2004 ; Vol. 68, No. 9. pp. 932-937.
@article{97b1a91d0dd04d69849f0ad122b14060,
title = "Perspectives on affirmative action in academic dental institutions: the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the University of Michigan cases.",
abstract = "In June 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of using race as a factor in higher education admissions decisions. This article considers the impact of the Supreme Court decisions on admissions procedures at selected academic dental institutions (ADI) and their parent institutions. We interviewed fifty-eight leaders considered to be individual stakeholders at seven ADI and their related parent institutions, state dental associations, and state legislatures using a common set of questions about the Supreme Court decisions. Educators from the ADI and their parent institutions were consistent in their responses that the rulings upheld affirmative action as necessary to achieve diversity. State organized dentistry officials did not appear to be as aware as others of the rulings, whereas legislators were mixed in their responses. Except for the University of Michigan undergraduate admissions procedures, it remains to be seen what the impact will be for other higher education institutions and for academic dental institutions. Although the rulings have provided guidelines for achieving diversity using race/ ethnicity as one of several factors, the rulings will possibly be challenged, thus requiring vigilance on the part of parent institutions and their ADI to ensure compliance with the spirit of the rulings and to avoid attack from opponents of affirmative action.",
author = "Peterson, {Melanie R.} and Joan Kowolik and Gary Coleman and Susan Dietrich and Mascarenhas, {Ana Karina} and Michael McCunniff and George Taylor",
year = "2004",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "68",
pages = "932--937",
journal = "Journal of Dental Education",
issn = "0022-0337",
publisher = "American Dental Education Association",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Perspectives on affirmative action in academic dental institutions

T2 - the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the University of Michigan cases.

AU - Peterson, Melanie R.

AU - Kowolik, Joan

AU - Coleman, Gary

AU - Dietrich, Susan

AU - Mascarenhas, Ana Karina

AU - McCunniff, Michael

AU - Taylor, George

PY - 2004/1/1

Y1 - 2004/1/1

N2 - In June 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of using race as a factor in higher education admissions decisions. This article considers the impact of the Supreme Court decisions on admissions procedures at selected academic dental institutions (ADI) and their parent institutions. We interviewed fifty-eight leaders considered to be individual stakeholders at seven ADI and their related parent institutions, state dental associations, and state legislatures using a common set of questions about the Supreme Court decisions. Educators from the ADI and their parent institutions were consistent in their responses that the rulings upheld affirmative action as necessary to achieve diversity. State organized dentistry officials did not appear to be as aware as others of the rulings, whereas legislators were mixed in their responses. Except for the University of Michigan undergraduate admissions procedures, it remains to be seen what the impact will be for other higher education institutions and for academic dental institutions. Although the rulings have provided guidelines for achieving diversity using race/ ethnicity as one of several factors, the rulings will possibly be challenged, thus requiring vigilance on the part of parent institutions and their ADI to ensure compliance with the spirit of the rulings and to avoid attack from opponents of affirmative action.

AB - In June 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of using race as a factor in higher education admissions decisions. This article considers the impact of the Supreme Court decisions on admissions procedures at selected academic dental institutions (ADI) and their parent institutions. We interviewed fifty-eight leaders considered to be individual stakeholders at seven ADI and their related parent institutions, state dental associations, and state legislatures using a common set of questions about the Supreme Court decisions. Educators from the ADI and their parent institutions were consistent in their responses that the rulings upheld affirmative action as necessary to achieve diversity. State organized dentistry officials did not appear to be as aware as others of the rulings, whereas legislators were mixed in their responses. Except for the University of Michigan undergraduate admissions procedures, it remains to be seen what the impact will be for other higher education institutions and for academic dental institutions. Although the rulings have provided guidelines for achieving diversity using race/ ethnicity as one of several factors, the rulings will possibly be challenged, thus requiring vigilance on the part of parent institutions and their ADI to ensure compliance with the spirit of the rulings and to avoid attack from opponents of affirmative action.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4644288332&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4644288332&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 68

SP - 932

EP - 937

JO - Journal of Dental Education

JF - Journal of Dental Education

SN - 0022-0337

IS - 9

ER -