Daily Bruin File Photo UC President Richard
Atkinson (left) sits through a regents meeting last
year.
By Robert Salonga
Daily Bruin Staff
SAN FRANCISCO “”mdash; In the aftermath of postponed dual
admissions, the University of California Board of Regents met on
Wednesday to discuss another strategy for diversifying the student
population.
The board, which assembled in UC San Francisco, entertained the
possibility of eliminating the current two-tiered admissions system
in favor of a unitary process, dubbed the “comprehensive
review,” that would evaluate UC applicants on academic
achievements, personal achievements and life challenges in no given
ratio.
“Merit is best assessed by taking the context of
achievement into account,” said Dorothy Perry, chair of the
Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools.
Currently, the UC admits 50-75 percent of its undergraduate
students based solely on academic criteria, which consists
primarily of a student’s grade point average and standardized
test scores. The rest of the class is admitted on the consideration
of non-numeric criteria, including extracurricular activities,
economic hardships and lack of educational access.
As UCLA receives around 40,000 freshman applications per year
““ the most in the nation ““ it has tended to admit 75
percent of students under the first tier to accommodate the
competitiveness of the incoming class.
Perry said the UC cannot depend only on test scores, but that it
must look at the context in which a student achieved success. For
instance, a relatively high-achieving student in a poorly
performing school would have their situation taken into
consideration.
“It’s important in order to select the best students
in this growing and changing state,” she said.
Talks of a comprehensive review emerged as plans for dual
admissions were postponed.
The dual admissions plan, which the regents passed during their
July meeting, would have guaranteed students in the top 4 to 12.5
percent of their respective high school graduating class UC
eligibility as long as they completed two years of prescribed
undergraduate courses at a community college first.
However, when the state legislature went into recess on Sept.
14, the UC had not secured the $2.5 million needed to implement the
plan. According to university officials, effort for the plan will
continue as soon as the legislature reconvenes in January.
One objection to the comprehensive review plan was concern over
funding, which also caused the postponement of dual admissions.
“I’m concerned about the fiscal effect,” said
regent Ward Connerly, “How do we find the resources if we
can’t even fund dual admissions?”
According to a BOARS report, $750,000 was allotted by the state
legislature to the UC this year to fund efforts similar to
comprehensive admissions. The report said that if necessary, the
chancellors at all the UCs are committed to providing funding to
implement comprehensive admissions effectively.
Most of the funding would go toward recruitment readers to
extensively evaluate freshman applications. Moore said 35 of the 66
readers at UC Berkeley are existing staff members.
Student regent Tracy Davis told the board not to underestimate
the value of current admissions staff throughout the UC, saying
their regular interaction with students and outreach would make
them better qualified for helping implement the proposed plan.
Davis, a doctoral student at UCLA, added that moving the
emphasis of admissions away from academic numbers would benefit the
university as a whole.
“We don’t want just scholars,” Davis said.
“We want motivated citizens who can improve the social and
economic future of California.”
Connerly argued against the assertion that comprehensive review
would improve the non-academic quality of the university’s
students.
“How do we determine (a student’s) contribution to
society based on a cursory review of an essay?” he asked.
Jack Citrin, a professor of political science at Berkeley who
addressed the board, refuted the claim by many members that
comprehensive review would increase the diversity of the
university. He said a student who achieved well in educationally
poor circumstances could be given more merit than a student
achieving well in a middle-class situation.
“A disadvantaged background cannot be a positive advantage
for a student,” said Citrin, who was a member of the Berkeley
Academic Senate Committee on Admissions from 1995-98.
Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, a regent by virtue of his office, said
he was heartened by the extensive discussion by the regents and
stressed that they should focus on the results of the policy as
well.
“If it takes more money to improve the process, then we
should do that,” Bustamante said. “But the public
perception hinges on the outcome.”
A comprehensive review is already underway at many UC
campuses.
UC Berkeley currently uses a form of comprehensive review in its
admissions, which some say could serve as a platform for the rest
of the UC to model.
Calvin Moore, a mathematics professor and chair of the Faculty
Admissions Committee at Berkeley, said the campus still follows the
two-tiered system, with modifications. The two-tier system was
formalized with SP-1, a policy that ended affirmative action in
university admissions which the regents passed in 1995 and
rescinded last May.
Freshman applications to Berkeley are scored first on a purely
academic basis, with readers giving each a score of one to seven,
with one being the highest. The top half of its 8,800 freshman
admits are accepted solely based on their academic rank.
To fill out the other 4,400 spots, the remaining eligible
applications are given a “comprehensive” score of one
to five. At this point, numerical academic achievement is no longer
considered. Instead, evaluators look at aspects such as
extracurricular activities, leadership, athletics and the required
two-page essay as basis for admission.