Editorial: Flawed ECP survey swells policy’s bad reputation

For over a year, the Undergraduate Students Association Council
has relentlessly sought to repeal the Expected Cumulative Progress
requirement. But USAC’s analysis has ignored the
policy’s nuances, pursuing a futile agenda rather than
seeking meaningful change or debate.

As the council starts to compile the results of its flawed
survey, it should also analyze the campaign and determine what
actions would be truly beneficial and realistic.

Four years ago, UCLA implemented ECP at a time when students
were taking fewer units per quarter than most other UC schools.
UCLA was losing state funding, which is linked to the number of
full-time students (those averaging 15 units per quarter).
Additionally, a greater number of fifth- and sixth-year students
meant fewer students could be admitted.

The administration, pressured by the UC Office of the President,
saw ECP as a solution for both a funding and access problem.

USAC officers, armed with anecdotal evidence that the policy
puts undue pressure on students, have decided to fight ECP. The
result has been a year-long campaign that has dominated
councilmembers’ time and cost thousands of dollars.

The campaign’s climax began earlier this month when USAC
asked students to complete an online survey designed to gauge the
policy’s negative impact on the students in the UCLA
College.

But the survey is as flawed as the basic premise behind their
larger campaign.

The survey had several basic design problems, including that
those exempt from the policy and even nonstudents could complete
the survey ““ and anyone could take it more than once.

Still, USAC officers say the survey has provided them with
evidence that ECP really does harm students. Initial analysis, they
say, indicates that 53 percent of the completed surveys report ECP
has had a “negative effect” on student experiences.

But the question is misleading. More importantly, it illustrates
a fundamental misconception. While it is true that ECP places
pressure on students not to fall behind, it is far more a
counseling tool than a draconian mandate.

Since its implementation, only three students have been
dismissed for ECP violations ““ but none, according to the
university, because they had financial difficulties or too many
extracurricular activities.

Students can use various loopholes to get around ECP, such as
signing a contract or convincing a counselor to take pity. Also,
since 2002 many general education classes have been converted to
five units ““ further easing the progress burden.

The policy isn’t flawed ““ its reputation is. ECP
shouldn’t be repealed, it’s not even in need of
dramatic change.

Instead, the university needs to do a much better job
communicating and ensuring students have a stronger voice before
such sweeping programs are implemented. Had UCLA done a better job
on both fronts with ECP, students would likely hold much more
respect for it.

Students fear ECP much more than they understand it. Fixing that
problem should be USAC’s priority.