UCLA Accused of Admissions Coverup
Professor investigating race-based admissions says he was denied access to student applications
A UCLA professor who was a member of the admissions faculty oversight committee has resigned, charging that the university obstructed his attempts to get more information about whether the college was illegally using race in its admission decisions. The school has denied the professor's claims, which he has published online in an 89-page report.
Since 1996, it has been illegal for public universities in California to use race, gender, ethnicity, or religion in admissions, and for the decade since, UCLA has seen its black enrollment dwindle to as low as around 100 black freshmen in a first-year class of almost 5,000. Such numbers prompted the university to switch in 2006 to a more holistic approach to admissions, comparable to the one used at UC-Berkeley. Officials score all parts of the student's application as a whole as opposed to first considering personal essays separately from grades and test scores. Since the new process was implemented, the number of black enrollees has more than doubled, up to 230 students this year, an increase UCLA considers a sign of success.
But political science professor Tim Groseclose says the university could still be using race to admit students. His bigger grievance, though, has more to do with transparency than affirmative action and he says that is the actual reason he resigned his post on the committee just a few weeks short of the end of his term. In his sharply worded report, Groseclose states that he wanted to investigate the discrepancy between the admit rates for black students and other minorities, saying a higher percentage of blacks were being admitted in the new holistic process while the percentages of Latino, American Indian, and Asian students were going down. He says he also wanted examine other issues, such as possible religious and political biases.
Groseclose says he asked to see and research hundreds of raw student applications—looking to count, for instance, how often students mentioned race in their personal essays—but the university, citing federal privacy law, turned down his requests repeatedly over the course of several months. The university says the reason it did not hand over the files was because full applications—even with redacted names—would make students too easily identifiable, says Tom Lifka, assistant vice chancellor for student academic services. Lifka points out that the university was open to reviewing the admissions process, just not in the way Groseclose wanted. "What we tried to do is invite [him] to do a universitywide study," says Vice Chancellor of Legal Affairs Kevin Reed. Instead, "he demanded he have access to the raw applications himself."
The dispute suggests that the use of race in admissions is still a hot-button topic, even 12 years after it was banned in California. UCLA will now proceed with its own evaluation of its two-year-old admissions process, a move that Lifka admits was catalyzed by Groseclose's assertiveness. Officials say Groseclose was invited to participate in this research but has declined.
Reader Comments
who cares?
People are discriminated against all the time, and 90% of the time it can't be proven in a court of law. We pretend to be tolerant, but in reality we just hide our prejudices better now.
As for college..If you have decent SAT scores and GPA's you'll get into a good college. The universities want to make it seem like they are gods and have some secret to how they select their students. But you know what? It's all BS. I've sat on many an admissions board, and attended 'prestigious' schools. It's all about who you know and if you have money. Also today's applications have many nuanced factors, like extra curricular s, who should those count if at all? What does it mean to be a tri-sport Varsity athlete in comparison to a student with a 3.8 GPA taking all AP classes? What does it mean to a college if you have 1000 hours of comm. service but average grades? Hell what does it even mean that you are the valedictorian with a 4.6 GPA taking all AP classes?
The prestige of a school counts for little after graduation. Get into a college, get a good GPA and find an internship during college. When you graduate you'll find a job or acceptance into a graduate program. If not going into a grad program, focus more on getting good work experience as an undergrad-(do not work in the dining halls unless you need the money, try to find a professor or a family friend to intern for, or even start your own simple business, it counts for more in the real world.)
universities only pretend to be part of the real world. In the end they are businesses. that want to make money and they put applicants through many games to create some sort of educational greatness illusion. Don't worry about UCLA, many up and on the rise schools teach better. Harvard, Yale, UCLA and USC are like the Costcos of college degrees. They give them out like candy, because kicking out poorly performing students means less money for their school. (Cal Tech on the other hand has perhaps one of the highest dismissal rates, so you can bet who ever grads from there knows their stuff)
SO kids, join 1 club, play a sport, volunteer and study a bit. Have some fun and work when you have to. Life's too short to bother spending hours to get 10 more points on an SAT
Just my two cents
I have no idea what the whole selection process entails, nor would I presume to have that knowledge, but just based on what I have read in the article, I think it is safe to assume that the research that the Professor was asking for was something that UCLA would not be able to give him. And so, he's trying to "fight" them.
I think there may be some validity to his claims...but it seems like everyone's taking this whole situation to the extreme. Personally, I don't think it's such a big deal. So what if one year there are more African Americans accepted and then the next year, maybe more Asians instead and then the next year, there are more Caucasians - I'm sure if you group everything together, you'll see it does even out. I've been lucky to have attended both UCI and UCLA - and both schools are great.
But seriously, to argue about a school having too much diversity...that just seems ... a bit wrong. I guess judging by someone solely on race is wrong - but do you see us Asians (yes, I'm asian) complaining about changing our names - I think being named Qing Wong Chang kinda gives away my ethnicity. lol.
Seriously, everyone should be proud of the fact that they have the chance to study at a university. The prestigious nature of a school doesn't not matter. It's what you do with all your knowledge that determines your fate.
UCLA accused of Coverup
I can't imagine why black people would want to live in Califonia, let alone , attend one of its crowded overrated universities.That said, Harvard, Yale, and princeton reject over half of the valedictorians that apply! Moreover, the UC schools admit people with an average of 1200 on their SATs--which is below Ivy league schools.If the UC schools really admitted students based on grades and SATs, the student body would be 100 percent Asian.This is true because most Asians have much better credentials than the white students.The Asians should be lodging protest against the white affirmative action.
Black people have let the whites send their kids to inferior schools for generations. They should know white people do not want black children to get a good education. That was the reason behind housing segregation, Jim Crow laws etc. Not much has changed.You have be proactive. I have spent $150,000 so far on my child's private schooling through 8th grade.I am prepared to pay more. You can't expect the white public schools to educate your child. Hopefully,she can attend a top Eastern liberal arts college.
advertisement
