Racial Categories on Applications = Deviation from Merit?
Knee-Jerk Reactions to Race Consciousness

When we met with the Fulbright representative, I was struck by how many of the program participants were white. I asked if a racial background question is included on the application. Her response was that there was no race question because "merit is very important." I had not brought up affirmative action or anything of the sort. I had only asked if there was any data on the racial background of Brazilian students who had gone through the Fulbright program. It was amazing how reflexively merit rhetoric was deployed. Perhaps this is because program administrators know that keeping racial data will reveal race-based disparities. Paradoxically, she described a certain test (for a prep school I believe) where it counts in your favor if your parent teaches at the school. How can this be justified as reflective of merit? According to the representative, it is because those students then have a vested interest in seeing the school’s reputation rise. In other words, these students will supposedly work harder. I wonder though if this is not bordering on a cultural and even biological understanding of what constitutes an accurate predictor of achievement.

In response to Priscilla's question regarding urban/black v. rural/white poverty, the representative told us that the former was more violent. Earlier in the meeting, she had mentioned that resourcefulness is something they look for in an applicant, as they will be in a new country and have to learn the ropes quickly. Would it not then make sense to distinguish between the two types of poverty as a way to promote merit -- I would assume that one has to be more resourceful to make it through the application process coming from a poor urban zone as opposed to a poor rural zone.