2. 考研
  3. For more than two decades, U. S. courts have been limiting affirmative-action programs in universities and other areas. The lega

For more than two decades, U. S. courts have been limiting affirmative-action programs in universities and other areas. The lega

admin2014-11-24  29
问题     For more than two decades, U. S. courts have been limiting affirmative-action programs in universities and other areas. The legal rationale is that racial preferences are unconstitutional, even those intended to compensate for racism or intolerance. For many colleges, this means students can be admitted only on merit, not on their race or ethnicity. It has been a divisive issue across the U. S. , as educators blame the prolonged reaction to affirmative-action for declines in minority admissions. Meanwhile, activists continue to battle race preferences in courts from Michigan to North Carolina.
    Now, chief executives of about two dozen companies have decided to plunge headfirst into this politically unsettled debate. They, together with 36 universities and 7 non-profitable organizations, formed a forum that set forth an action plan essentially designed to help colleges circumvent court-imposed restrictions on affirmative action. The CEOs’ motive: "Our audience is growing more diverse, so the communities we serve benefit if our employees are racially and ethnically diverse as well" , says one CEO of a company that owns nine television stations.
    Among the steps the forum is pushing: finding creative yet legal ways to boost minority enrollment through new admissions policies; promoting admissions decisions that look at more than test scores; and encouraging universities to step up their minority outreach and financial aid. And to counter accusations by critics to challenge these tactics in court, the group says it will give legal assistance to colleges sued for trying them. " Diversity diminished by the court must be made up for in other legitimate, legal ways," says, a forum member.
    One of the more controversial methods advocated is the so-called 10% rule. The idea is for public universities—which educate three-quarters of all U. S. undergraduates—to admit students who are in the top 10% of their high school graduating class. Doing so allows colleges to take minorities who excel in average urban schools, even if they wouldn’t have made the cut under the current statewide ranking many universities use.
U. S. court restrictions on affirmative action signifies that______.
选项 A、minorities no longer hold the once favored status
B、the quality of American colleges has improved
C、racial preferences has replaced racial prejudice
D、the minority is on an equal footing with the majority
答案A
解析 推理判断题。第一段首句提到美国法院对平等权利法案的限制。第二句指出其理论依据是种族照顾政策是违反宪法的。第三句指出这种做法意味着对学生的录取不再考虑其种族或民族背景。由此可推知，A项是该做法的潜在含义。B项文中未提，C项明显错误，因为该举动恰恰是反对种族照顾政策。D项表面上看似乎有点道理，但根据第一段的论述可知，“平等”并不是本文主要涉及的内容，故A为正确答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/KcK4777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)