Will on UCLA Tutoring Program

George Will has criticized UCLA groundlessly (Commentary, March 1). Will’s comments resurrect 2-year-old claims refuted many times before.

Will accuses UCLA’s Academic Advancement Program of not hiring an undergraduate as a student tutor because, he claims, that applicant could not pass a political litmus test. Decisions to hire student tutors at UCLA are based on each applicant’s expertise and ability to challenge fellow students to excel. No one is hired or denied a job in AAP because of political views; in fact, we never ask about political beliefs at all--not in written applications, not in interviews.

Will’s account is based on statements made by the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed against the university. His account is inaccurate, both by inclusion and omission. Will fails to mention, for example, that the applicant in question was an entering community college transfer student who had just enrolled in his first quarter at UCLA; when he applied for a position as a tutor, he had not yet completed a single UCLA course. Will also fails to mention that the applicant was hired for another job in AAP. The AAP Tutorial Program director encouraged him to apply for that position--a job that did not require academic experience at UCLA.

Will leaves readers with the impression that UCLA’s Academic Advancement Program is currently open only to “historically underrepresented” peoples and low-income students. That was true in 1995, but now, with Proposition 209 a state law, UCLA does not use race and ethnicity as criteria for admissions or program eligibility.

BRIAN P. COPENHAVER

UCLA, Provost

College of Letters & Science