UCLA to Alter Student Admissions Policy Next Fall

Inundated with applications to its freshman classes, UCLA is altering its admissions procedures for next fall so that no applicant will be evaluated solely on the basis of standardized test scores and grades from high school. The new UCLA system, which has been evolving for several years, includes a “subjective” review process similar to that used by private colleges. It requires that at least two faculty members or admissions officers read and evaluate every application.

In the past, UCLA has granted virtually automatic admission to applicants with extremely high standardized test scores and grade-point averages, and conducted the more thorough review mainly to help it evaluate borderline applicants.

“In essence, we have decided that it is not fair to use strictly objective numbers to select students, even at the top of the applicant pool,” said Thomas E. Lifka, UCLA’s assistant vice chancellor for registration.

“What it means,” he explained, “is that it is not enough just to have a 4.0 GPA and high test scores. We now have so many applicants that if we evaluated students just on the basis of objective numbers, we would be admitting one student with a 3.9 and rejecting another with a 3.8. . . . When the numbers are that close, such arbitrary cuts simply are not fair. Some kind of subjective evaluation must be made all the way up and down the line.”

At UC San Diego, a subjective system traditionally has been used for all but the very top students, said Ronald Bowker, director of admissions and registrar.

The school typically uses a formula based on GPA, Scholastic Aptitude Tests and Achievement Tests to set a high threshold for automatic admission to the university, Bowker said.

“The student who’s a 4.0 and a 1600 (the highest possible combined SAT score)--there aren’t very many of those,” Bowker said. “It would pretty hard to send him away no matter what he’s done.”

Other freshman applicants will have their records more thoroughly examined. Admissions officers look at the kinds of courses a student takes, offices he has held and his participation in extra-curricular activities, he said.

The threshold will be set when the university decides how many students it will accept this year. Bowker expects a small class--about 3,000--because UCSD enrolled a large class of 3,650 for fall 1986.

Mountain of Applications

A mountain of applications that far exceeds the number of available places for students also exists at UC Irvine and at Berkeley, the one other University of California campus that shares with UCLA what one university official calls “brand-name recognition.” As a result, Berkeley is also modifying its admissions policy, though not nearly as dramatically as UCLA.

At the other five undergraduate UC campuses, applications and openings are more or less evenly matched.

The UCLA system will have a direct impact only on regular applicants, namely whites and Asians, who are not members of “under-represented” minority groups, said Rae Lee Siporin, UCLA’s director of admissions. Students who are designated as under-represented--that is, blacks, Latinos and American Indians--and who meet the state’s minimum eligibility requirements for UC will continue to be automatically admitted to UCLA or any other UC campus under state guidelines designed to boost enrollments of certain disadvantaged groups.

The procedure will be used for those students who are applying to UCLA for the fall of 1987. Those applications are due at the end of this month. Letters informing students whether they have been admitted are scheduled to go out around the middle of February, somewhat later than the Feb. 1 notification date scheduled for most of the other UC campuses, Siporin said.

What the UCLA admissions committee will be looking for in the applications is not just obvious objective indications of students’ abilities and achievements, Siporin said, but more subjective measures, such as the quality and content of their courses, the overall difficulty of their high school programs and, in certain borderline cases, their commitment to extracurricular activities and their ability to express those commitments in a written essay.

Elaborate Selection System

In some departments, particularly engineering, other UC campuses have been using and will continue to use a selection process similar to that now being employed by UCLA for its entire undergraduate program. Most of the UC campuses, however, have not had to develop such an elaborate selection system simply because they do not have a volume of applications that warrants it.

In deciding that UCLA should abandon its practice of taking any student on the basis of test scores or grades alone, Siporin said she thinks that “there is something drastically wrong when a university reduces a student to a number.”

“Practically speaking,” she said, “I am confident that 80% of the students we admit to UCLA we would admit anyway, whatever review process we used. But there is 20% that I am not so sure about. In order to make better decisions about those students, we need to look very carefully at the entire applicant pool.”

UCLA officials are eager to publicize their approach in the hope that it will eliminate some of the public misunderstanding about what it means to be “eligible” to attend the University of California.

Under state law, all California high school students who complete a set of required courses and who rank in the upper 12% of their high school graduating classes on the basis of grade-point average and standardized test scores are eligible for admission to the UC system, just as students in the upper third of their graduating classes are eligible for admission to the California State University system. Eligibility, however, only assures students of a place somewhere in the university system, not necessarily the campus of their choice.

Process Changed

Although students are now free to apply to whatever campuses they choose, the campuses are in turn free to choose the students they want.

Last year, the overall application process was changed so that for the first time in the university’s history, students could apply to as many UC campuses as they wished. Under the old procedure, eligible students who did not get into the campus they applied to were “redirected” to a UC campus that had fewer applicants. Now the students are free to make their own selection from the available options.

In its first year of operation, the multiapplication process left all eight undergraduate campuses uncertain as to how many offers of admission to extend. The result was some unexpected under-enrollment problems on some campuses and overcrowding on others.

At UCSD, the new system led to a glut of applications--about 16,000 from high school seniors and 3,000 from transfers--that forced the school to abandon for a year its practice of subjectively reviewing most applications. Despite what appeared to be some temporary glitches in the system, over the years there have been fairly consistent patterns in student applications at the various UC campuses, said Ed Apodaca, UC’s coordinator for admissions. While Irvine, Riverside and Santa Cruz have often had to struggle to fill their classes, UC’s San Diego, Santa Barbara and Davis campuses have traditionally had about as many qualified applicants as they could accommodate in most departments, although some campuses have had shifts from year to year, he noted.

‘Good News’

“Applications appear to be growing at all the campuses that do not have the brand-name recognition” of UCLA and Berkeley, which in the future may mean that some alterations will have to be made in the admissions practices of all eight undergraduate campuses, said Alice C. Cox, assistant vice president in UC’s central office. But for the time being, she said, the apparent increase in popularity of the lesser-known campuses is “good news” for the system as a whole because it means a more even distribution of students throughout the system.

For years, however, Berkeley and UCLA have received a disproportionate number of applications, far exceeding their available slots.

For the freshman class that entered this September, for example, Berkeley reached a new high of more than 20,000 applications for about 3,400 places, while UCLA had more than 21,500 applications for about 4,000 places.

In contrast to UCLA, Berkeley will continue to select a portion of its freshman class on the basis of scores and grades alone, according to Richard H. Shaw Jr., associate director of admissions.

Admission will be automatic, Shaw said, for students who score in the top 8% on either the math or verbal portions of the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Overall, the top 40% of Berkeley’s applicant pool will be admitted on the basis of a formula derived from test scores and grades--down from 50% in previous years.

Awarded Extra Points

The remaining 60% of Berkeley’s applicant pool, he said, will be granted a “supplemental review” in which they may be awarded extra points in the formula for such factors as California residence, economic hardship, proficiency in written English and additional years of foreign languages, sciences and mathematics.

Like the other campuses, Berkeley will also continue to admit all eligible under-represented minorities for next fall. Although it no longer follows this practice, some preference will be given next year to students who live in rural areas or attend high schools that normally do not send any students to the campus, said Robert L. Bailey, Berkeley’s director of admissions and records.

Although some of those who apply to Berkeley do not meet the minimum eligibility requirements, many far exceed them. Bailey noted, for example, that 3,500 students with GPA’s of 3.9 and above were turned away last year, either because they were applying to such highly competitive fields as engineering or because their test scores were significantly below those of other applicants.

‘Hear a Pin Drop’

“When I talk to parents (about UCLA), I say, ‘Yes, it’s true. We turn away students with 4.0 averages. Last year we turned down about 500 students with 4.0s in the College of Letters and Science,’ ” UCLA’s Siporin said. “When I say that, you can hear a pin drop. Their hearts stop beating. But what they don’t understand and what we keep trying to tell everyone is that we admit plenty of students with less than 4.0s too. Grades are not the only thing we look at. There are a whole host of factors.”

One factor that is clearly taken into consideration is race--surely the single most controversial aspect of UC’s admissions process.

By any measure, a black or Latino student has a far better chance of being admitted to UC than does a white student. Last year at UCLA, for example, only about one in three eligible white students was admitted, while virtually every black and Latino who met the university’s basic eligibility requirements was invited to enroll.

Minority Admissions

By law, no more than 6% of the students in a freshman class on each campus can be admitted without meeting the university’s basic eligibility requirements--that is, by completing the prescribed high school courses and ranking in the top 12% of their graduating class in test scores and grade-point average. While minorities make up part of that group, so do a number of other categories of students that the university wants to accommodate--athletes, talented artists and musicians and older students returning to college, for example.

On the whole, the overwhelming majority of minority students have to meet the same basic requirements as other students.

“It is true that blacks and Latinos score lower and get lower grades,” Siporin said. “But the difference is not as great as some people would like to believe.”

Out of a possible score of 1,600 on the SATs (math and verbal scores combined), whites admitted to UCLA averaged 1,162, blacks averaged 917 and Latinos 950. On a 4.0-grade scale, blacks admitted to UCLA had an average of 3.33, Latinos 3.50 and whites 3.78.

The patterns are similar at Berkeley, where whites averaged 1,244 on the SATs, Latinos 1,040 and blacks 971. On the grade-point scale, the white average was 3.86, compared to 3.37 for blacks and 3.58 for Latinos.

At UCSD, the average GPA for last year’s class was 3.6. SAT scores were 496 on the verbal and 577 on the math. Blacks averaged a 3.03 GPA, 424 on the verbal test and 462 on the math. Latinos averaged a 3.3 GPA, 450 on the verbal test and 500 on the math.

Emphasize Obligation

“When one considers that test scores are correlated most closely with income and the size of one’s family, rather than a student’s prospect for success in college, and that minority students rarely have the same educational advantages that Caucasian students have, you begin to understand why these differences are not only of little relevance but quite inflammatory if one were to put much emphasis on them,” Siporin said.

What the university has had to emphasize is its obligation, mandated by the state, to provide educational opportunities for minority members, whatever their qualifications. By 1990, the Legislature has said, the proportion of minority students enrolled at UC should equal their share of California’s public high school graduating classes--which stood in 1985 at 27.8%, according to the latest figures from the California Postsecondary Education Commission.

The problem for UC has been finding enough minority students who meet the eligibility requirements. In contrast to white high school graduates, 15.5% of whom are eligible for UC, only 4.9% of Latinos and 3.6% of blacks meet the basic requirements, according to the commission’s latest survey, done in 1983.

One of the most troubling aspects of these figures, according to the commission, is that the proportion of blacks qualifying for admission appears to be declining rather than increasing, not only in California but nationally as well. As a result, UC President David P. Gardner appointed a task force this fall to look into the reasons for the decline and determine what UC can do about it.

Earlier, Gardner set up a task force on the learning problems of “linguistic minorities” and has provided small grants to faculty members to find new ways to improve the language skills of those students.

Despite these obstacles, both UCLA and Berkeley are getting closer to meeting the Legislature’s mandate. In this year’s freshman class, 27% of UCLA’s students and 22.1% of Berkeley’s were members of under-represented minority groups. Moreover, at both campuses, but particularly at Berkeley, the dropout rate for minorities who are already enrolled has been steadily declining--suggesting that the students who are admitted are succeeding at the university as never before, said Ray Colvig, spokesman for Berkeley.

UCSD is not doing nearly as well. Blacks comprise only 2.9% of the 13,094 undergraduates enrolled this fall, and Latinos make up only 7.1% of the total. Another 16.6% of the student body is Asian.

“We just don’t attract that many blacks and Chicanos . . . “ Bowker said. “We’re all out recruiting. Berkeley and UCLA have the name. There is probably a larger percentage of those students living in those areas, and those kids tend to go to campuses closer to their homes.”

Asians Complain

At the other six UC campuses, the minority share of the freshman classes ranged from 10% to 13%, according to figures compiled by UC’s central administration.

Asian students, who are not considered under-represented, contend that they have taken the brunt of these affirmative-action efforts.

At Berkeley, a group of Asian critics has even lodged a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice, charging that Asians are being subjected to discrimination in the admissions process.

Although Asians are rapidly growing in numbers in California, they still make up only 8% of high school graduates. Yet, compared to other groups, including whites, a larger proportion of those high school graduates who are Asian--26%--qualify for admission to UC. At both UCLA and Berkeley, entering Asians have lower verbal test scores than do whites but slightly higher GPAs and math scores.

While their representation in the freshman classes of the last decade has fluctuated, the Asian percentage has hovered somewhat above 15% at UCLA and about 25% at Berkeley--and has grown dramatically in the UC system as a whole. During that same period, the proportion of whites has plummeted from nearly 69% to 46% at UCLA and from 63% to 45% at Berkeley.

The reason for this drop in white enrollment, Berkeley’s Bailey said, is that “affirmative action is working. All the special efforts . . . we have made to get more minority students into the system are clearly paying off.”

It’s a simple matter of mathematics, she said. “If you’ve got a pie and you don’t change the size of the pie and you give somebody a bigger piece--which we as a state and a society have decided to do--than someone is going to get a smaller piece. To a certain extent, Asians may be feeling the new cuts. But it is clearly Caucasian students who are experiencing most of it.”