Regents’ Vote Prompts Diverse Response at UCI : Education: The rejection of affirmative action stirs reaction ranging from outrage to delight.

UC Irvine music professor James Newton described the University of California regents’ decision to abolish race-based preferences in admissions, hiring and contracting as a “racist, sexist policy” that will shut out many black and Latino youths from the university.

But to UCI senior Brian Fonseca, the regents’ action is a good policy that could improve his chances of getting into medical school.

“I’m glad to have all that lifted because it really was an unfair policy,” the 21-year-old biology major said. “Whoever’s deserving should get into the university. No one should be admitted just because they are a certain race.”

On Friday--a day after a 15-10 Board of Regents vote to end the university’s race-based affirmative action practices--UC Irvine students, faculty members and administrators vigorously debated the merits and faults of using race, religion, gender and ethnicity as criteria for admission decisions.

The new policy is scheduled to take effect Jan. 1 for hiring and contracting decisions and the following January for admissions decisions. Under the policy, between 50% and 75% of all entering students will be admitted solely on the basis of academic achievement. Between 40% and 60% of UC system’s students are now admitted solely on academic performance.

Some at UCI expressed delight with the decision and hailed Gov. Pete Wilson as a hero for pushing the regents to make the move. But others were shocked and outraged, and said protests and demonstrations are likely to follow.

Kimberly Davis, an incoming freshman at UCI, scored 1200 out of 1600 on her SATs and maintained a 3.59 grade-point average in high school. She acknowledges that affirmative action might have helped her get into school, but she resents people believing that she’s unqualified simply because she is black.

“I’ve proven that I have the right to be here,” she said. “Affirmative action helps minorities who haven’t had the same opportunities as other people. This whole thing has made me very worried about my future.”

Some high school administrators also predicted that the elimination of affirmative action will wipe out educational opportunities for many black and Latino students who have the capacity to do well in college but have not scored well on standardized tests.

“My experience is that their test scores are low because in many cases, English is not their first language. But it doesn’t mean their intelligence isn’t up to par,” said Elsa Gavan, an assistant principal at Santa Ana High School, where 95% of the students are Latino and 20 to 30 attend UC schools each year.

“We have a lot of top-notch kids . . . but they won’t have as much opportunity without affirmative action. It will probably make these types of kids go to a community college when they’re ready to go to a four-year college.”

But Lance Kwock, a UCI senior majoring in mechanical engineering, said he’s tired of seeing the university make special efforts to increase their black and Latino student population at the expense of white and Asian students who might be more qualified.

“I think the past policy was discriminatory against those who’ve studied really hard and deserve to be in college,” said Kwock, who is Asian American. “I think admissions should be based only on merit.”

Kwock said he’s discussed the issue with many of his Asian American friends, and many feel the same way.

“Lots of Asians came here from other countries, worked really hard while they were going through school and saw their parents sacrifice a lot to send them to college,” he said. “But then they see less talented people who didn’t work as hard get into college instead of them. It’s not right.”

Last fall, UCI’s student population was 47% Asian or Filipino, 37% white, 13% Latino and 3% black. No one knows exactly how the abolition of race-based preferences will affect the ethnic makeup of the school. But university administrators say they hope it will not decrease black and Latino student representation.

“The historically underrepresented students who come to Irvine have been UC-eligible students, and we think they’ll continue to be eligible and appropriate for admissions,” said Sidney Golub, UCI’s executive vice chancellor. “My understanding is what this policy does is prohibit us from using race or gender or religion as a determinant for admissions, but it does not prohibit us from using a variety of other factors, such as socioeconomic factors or the quality of recommendations.”

Golub said UCI is disappointed by the regents’ decision, and that all nine UC chancellors opposed the new policy.

“We didn’t think this was necessary, but it is now university policy and we will work with it,” he said. “But this does not end our commitment to diversity.”

Times staff writer Lisa Richardson contributed to this report.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Diverse Campus Efforts to diversify the UCI student body have changed its ethnic composition. From 1984 to 1994, while the number of students increased 41%, whites were the only group whose numbers declined. Student Population Ethnicity 1984 White: 57% Black: 3% Latino: 6% Asian: 24% American Indian: 1% Unlisted/other: 9% *

Student Population Ethnicity 1994 White: 33% Black: 2% Latino: 12% Asian: 41% American Indian: 1% Unlisted/other: 11% *

Percentage change, 1984-1994 All students: +41 White: -19 Black: +28 Latino: +152 Asians: +146 Native American: +47 Unlisted/other: +67 Source: UCI