UC Reforms Make Sense

Shock waves rolled through the state in April when the University of California directed more than 7,000 freshman applicants toward community colleges, even though they had rightly expected admission. It was the first time in four decades that eligible students had been turned away, and there was much outraged talk that the state was abandoning its long-held promise to admit the top 12.5% of high school seniors to the elite university system.

As it turns out, the outrage was somewhat misplaced. Under the 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education, the grades and SAT scores that qualify a student are supposed to reflect that top 12.5%, but a May report by the California Postsecondary Education Commission found that wasn’t the case. About 6,000 students who weren’t in the top percentage still met the UC’s eligibility mark. Though the report reflected 2003 figures, UC officials said this year’s situation was similar.

The last study on the issue was performed eight years ago, which gave the numbers plenty of time to get out of whack. No one seemed to care when economic times were better; budgets simply stretched to accommodate greater numbers. Now, tight fiscal limits provide plenty of reason to care. Last week, the university’s Academic Assembly took the right step by voting to raise the minimum eligible grade point average from 2.8 to 3.1 (from just below a B average to just above it). The UC regents should approve the change when they meet this month -- and the state should do a better job of funding regular eligibility studies to avoid a repeat of this year’s mess.

UC also could provide space for more incoming students by getting existing undergraduates out the door in less time. Only 40% of UC students earn a bachelor’s degree within four years, and many of those manage to do so only by taking summer classes, which means even more state funding. Some can’t get required courses; others cling to university life, where they have interesting surroundings, cheap health insurance and great pools and gyms. Most hangers-on take only an extra semester or two, but those are expensive semesters for the taxpayers and fill seats that other students need.

The California State University system, which has the same problem, is reducing some upper-level courses so professors can teach more required classes. UC should do the same. Then the university should consider raising fees substantially after a student’s fourth year, unless he or she has a valid excuse such as the need to maintain a job in order to pay tuition.

The eligible students who didn’t get into UC for this fall are guaranteed admission after two years at a community college. The university should make sure there’s space for them by getting the current crop of juniors capped, gowned and gone by then.