Tougher standards stifle diversity

This month, the UC Board of Regents is going to make a decision
that may alienate the precious representation of minorities
statewide. With budget cuts in California, University of California
administrators have been exploring ways to ensure that students at
all UC campuses are provided with a quality education, but the
search has been halted over one particular controversial decision.
The decision, which stands to compromise the merits of the UC, is
packaged in a proposal termed “GPA increase.”

According to the California Master Plan for Higher Education,
the top 12.5 percent of California high school graduates are
ensured eligibility at one of the universities within the UC
system. But this rate of 12.5 percent has been overshot ““
more than 14.4 percent of high school students were eligible for
admission to at least one of the UC campuses this past year.

In order to counteract the number of high-achieving students and
save money, the Academic Senate has made four proposals, two of
which will go into effect for fall 2005. The other two proposals,
which would take effect in fall 2007, have yet to be approved
““ and for good reason.

The first of these delayed proposals allows for a minimum GPA
eligibility increase from 2.8 to 3.1 in order to decrease the
number of students eligible for UC enrollment. The other proposal
provides conditions upon which this minimum GPA could be increased
as necessary if the first round of proposals do not produce an
adequate reduction in eligibility percentages. But the
regents’ vote on these two proposals has been temporarily
deferred so they can produce a demographic study.

The results of this study are now available on the UC’s
Web site. The table, titled “Recommendation for Achieving a
12.5 Percent University of California Eligibility Rate,” is
an extensive display of the effect of the proposed plan. As a
member of the black community, I immediately focused on the effect
this plan would have on the minority presence at the UC campuses.
At first glance, nothing seems startling. In fact, the overall
decrease in percentage of black students and Latino students after
the GPA increase is less than the decrease of Asian and white
students.

But as my invaluable UCLA education has taught me to question
and research further in order to reach the most informed conclusion
possible, a closer look will show that the Asian population will
have a 3.6 percent decrease in eligibility by fall 2007 along with
a 1.9 percent decrease in the representation of white students.
Latino students will undergo a reduction of 1 percent, and black
representation will be reduced by 1.6 percent.

But 31.4 percent of graduating Asian students are UC eligible,
along with 16.1 percent of graduating white students. The decreases
to these groups are not nearly as detrimental as the decreases in
black and Latino populations. Only 6.3 percent of black students
and 6.5 percent of Latino students are currently UC eligible. As a
total percentage, eligible black and Latino communities will be
disproportionately decreased. Blacks will be the most affected,
with a 25 percent decrease in the number of UC eligible
students.

This discovery of sorts lies in direct opposition with the
prevailing idea that this GPA increase will affect all ethnic
groups equally. It shows that there is, in fact, cause for alarm in
passing these last two proposals because all students will not be
equally affected.

Minority representation on our own campus is embarrassing. With
a curriculum rich in cultural studies, and an awareness of the
necessity of promoting engagement with a diverse range of cultures,
the UC is doing a great disservice with this proposal. The black
population was a mere 3.8 percent of the 25,000 undergraduate
students at UCLA in 2002.

Imagine what we will be telling future applicants of color if we
close the doors of opportunity. Imagine what message we’re
sending to the elementary school students of color who no longer
see the UC as a friend in their journey toward higher
education.

The regents know the implications of the decision to increase
the minimum GPA. The diminished presence of minorities on campus
seems to be a secondary concern to their projected percentages.

As a student at this university, I have been fortunate enough to
benefit from an intellectually demanding and enriching
curriculum.

Perhaps that is why I am having such a hard time believing that
the UC would not opt to take measures that would embrace diversity
and send a radical message to the state and the nation.

Quick fixes in the name of the mighty dollar may help in the
short run, but I’m ashamed that the UC might make such a
long-term mistake, even with all the knowledge that it
possesses.

Kyle is a fourth-year philosophy student.