Session I: Ending Affirmative Action: The Current Effects of Proposition 209 in California and the Potential Effects of Proposal 2 on Public University Education in Michigan
This panel focuses on the likely impact of the passage of Proposal 2 on public university education in Michigan by examining the effect of Proposition 209, the California constitutional amendment similar to Michigan’s, on California public universities. Panelists will be asked to examine whether Michigan universities will have an equivalent experience as California universities by examining the similarities and differences between the two states in regards to economics and class, racial and ethnic diversity, and local and statewide politics. Because testimonial experiences are just as valuable as facts and data, professionals who are currently teaching and working under the effects of Proposition 209 and Proposal 2 have been selected for this first panel.
Session II: Measuring Diversity in Other Ways: Potential Legal Alternatives to Affirmative Action
After discussing the potential positive and negative effects Proposal 2 will have on Michigan public university education, this panel will focus on possible alternatives to using race and gender classifications to achieve classroom diversity. Are there other quantifiable characteristics that would maintain a healthy level of diversity? Should the use of proxies to race and gender be encouraged, and if so would they be legal under most federal and state constitutions? Panelists will be asked to express their opinion on the effectiveness and legality of the various techniques for obtaining and retaining diversity that have been popularly debated. Panelists will also be asked to voice their approval or concern with the methods public universities have embraced when faced with restrictions on the use of race or gender classifications.p>
Session III: Existing and Emerging Efforts to Remedy K-12 Educational Disparities
The final panel will shift focus from public universities to K-12 public schools. A frequent argument is that affirmative action at the university level is often too late and that the real assistance needs to be made at the K-12 level. This panel will examine several questions including: What duty, if any, do affirmative action supporters have to refocus their efforts on these children after the passage of ballot initiatives like Proposal 2? What disparities should be targeted first? How should they be targeted? Are lawyers in a unique position to address these disparities? Does Proposal 2 limit the techniques that can be used at the K-12 level? The hope is that this panel will generate ideas and excitement to help combat the gross educational disparities that have lead to the need and creation of affirmative action.