|Read a Post for Contradictions in Women’s Education: Traditionalism, Careerism, and Community at a Single-Sex College|
|Reply to this Post|
Study Relevance Post The Supreme Court Decision In Michigan
|Posted By: Deborah Harrell on September 17, 2003|
|If things are equal, why did you exclude any minorities from your study? Things could not be equal for all persons regardless of the content of their character if all of their characteristics are the same. The demography of your study suggests an inequity in judgment and a Christain uniformity in your position. I understand that the Klan was also a religious organization that very much wanted segregated educational systems in the United States in the 60's circa 1963.|
This did not seem to be the direction of our founding fathers, so I fail to see why a minority or Women of Color, becoming party to your study would defer your research. Let me define Women of Color as all women who are non-white by classification in the United States Census. In fact, a socio economic agenda would have also been more suitable post the Supreme Court Decision. It was a white female who wanted to attend a state institution in the State of Michigan and her position was never defined by 60 minutes. I really don't see how the University of Michigan "out-weights," Harvard, Yale, Georgetown, Cambridge, Brown, Kent State, Penn State, Illinois State, Governor State, Chicago State, Marquette or Columbia University in New York, just to name a few. Perhaps, they had a great football team once.
Please explain this on the message board so that the entire membership can understand your decision making process.
Deborah B. A. Harrell, Ph.D.
Educational Leadership & Policy