Record 96 Students to Enroll at UCLA for Fall 2006

<p>A Startling Statistic at UCLA</p>

<p>At the school whose alumni include Jackie Robinson and Tom Bradley, only 96
blacks are expected in this fall's freshman class.</p>

<p>By Rebecca Trounson
Times Staff Writer</p>

<p>June 3, 2006</p>

<p>This fall 4,852 freshmen are expected to enroll at UCLA, but only 96, or 2%,
are African American - the lowest figure in decades and a growing concern at
the Westwood campus.</p>

<p>For several years, students, professors and administrators at UCLA have
watched with discouragement as the numbers of black students declined. But
the new figures, released this week, have shocked many on campus and
prompted school leaders to declare the situation a crisis.</p>

<p>UCLA - which boasts such storied black alumni as Jackie Robinson, Tom
Bradley and Ralph Bunche, and is in a county that is 9.8% African American -
now has a lower percentage of black freshmen than either crosstown rival USC
or UC Berkeley, the school often considered its top competitor within the UC
system.</p>

<p>The 96 figure - down by 20 students from last year - is the lowest for
incoming African American freshmen since at least 1973. And of the black
freshmen who have indicated they will enroll in the fall, 20 are recruited
athletes, admissions officials said.</p>

<p>"Clearly, we're going to have to meet this crisis by redoubling our efforts,
which have not yielded the results we'd like to see," said Chancellor Albert
Carnesale, who met Friday with a delegation of undergraduates upset about
the situation.</p>

<p>In a telephone interview before the meeting, Carnesale described the
preliminary numbers for black freshmen as "a great disappointment" and said
that UCLA has been trying for years to boost those levels, within the limits
allowed by law.</p>

<p>He and other officials at UCLA and elsewhere said the problem of attracting,
admitting and enrolling qualified black students is found at competitive
universities across the country and that its causes are complex. In
California, the problem is rooted partly in the restrictions placed on the
state's public colleges and institutions by Proposition 209, the 1996 voter
initiative that banned consideration of race and gender in admissions and
hiring.</p>

<p>Other factors include the socioeconomic inequities that undermine elementary
and high school education in California and elsewhere, with minority
students disproportionately affected because they often attend schools with
fewer resources, including less-qualified teachers and fewer counselors.</p>

<p>Many students and professors also say the declining presence of blacks on
campus discourages some prospective students from attending, thus
exacerbating the problem. Some of those interviewed, including UCLA
sociologist Darnell Hunt, said the campus could be doing more than it is.</p>

<p>Hunt, who heads UCLA's Bunche Center for African American Studies, and
several colleagues have been studying the issue as part of a multiyear
research project on the challenges facing black students in California
universities.</p>

<p>In a draft of a report to be released this month, the researchers compared
the admissions criteria and processes at UC's three most competitive
campuses: UCLA, UC Berkeley and UC San Diego. (At the latter, the incoming
black freshman class stands at 52 students, or 1.1%, even lower than the
others.)</p>

<p>The report found that UC San Diego's admissions process relied most heavily
on numbers, while UC Berkeley's was most "holistic," allowing a single
reader to review all parts of an applicant's file, including academic and
personal achievements or challenges.</p>

<p>At UCLA, in what admissions officials have described as an attempt to
increase fairness and objectivity, applicants' files are divided by academic
and personal areas, and read by separate reviewers. The researchers asserted
that UC Berkeley's process may be the fairest, because it allows students'
achievements to be seen in the context of their personal challenges.</p>

<p>In an interview, Hunt acknowledged the difficulty for a campus like UCLA,
which received 47,000 applications this year. Yet he criticized the school
for rejecting many black students based on what he described as factors of
questionable validity, and that he said may be linked more to socioeconomic
privilege than academic merit.</p>

<p>"There's a common misperception that this is a horrible problem but that
black students just need to do better," he said. "But most of the black
students who don't get in go to other top-notch schools - Harvard, Duke,
Michigan. We're losing students who could be here."</p>

<p>Ward Connerly, the conservative former UC regent who was an architect of
Proposition 209, countered that the issue was not the law he helped create.</p>

<p>"The problem - and this is an old song, I know - starts with the small
number of black students who are academically competitive," he said,
pointing out that many also choose to attend historically black colleges or
private schools. "But I don't think we solve this problem by tinkering with
the admissions criteria to make it easier to get in."</p>

<p>No matter the cause, the effect is apparent on campus.</p>

<p>Karume James, 20, a graduating senior who led a recent student protest on
campus over the issue, said he remembered the excitement he felt when he
arrived at UCLA for student orientation in the summer of 2003.</p>

<p>Then just 17, James was preparing to transfer to the big-city campus from a
community college in Riverside, his hometown. And he recalled what he felt
when he looked around.</p>

<p>"That was a real shock. I spent about 14 hours at the campus, and I counted
only about 12 black people. I guess I'd had this feeling that UCLA was going
to be this truly diverse place, and it just wasn't," said James, who is now
the chairman of UCLA's Afrikan Student Union. "Not for black students."</p>

<p>James, who was among half a dozen students who met Friday with Carnesale,
called the session productive and said the UCLA chancellor was receptive to
the group's views. Carnesale, who is preparing to step down as chancellor
this month, promised to release a statement expressing concern about the
issue and work with alumni, students and others to raise the numbers.</p>

<p>The new figures were part of an annual report showing that a record-setting
37,000 freshmen plan to enroll at UC campuses in the fall. Overall, across
all nine undergraduate campuses, the new class shows a continued trend of
slight increases in black, Latino and Native American students. These
groups, which are still considered underrepresented at UC, will make up just
under 20% of the 2006 freshman class, compared with just below 19% for the
current class.</p>

<p>But the picture in the latest release varied by campus and by group, with
the underrepresented minority numbers at the system's most competitive
campuses - UCLA and UC Berkeley - drawing the most attention, as always.</p>

<p>At UC Berkeley, black, Latino and Native American students are expected to
make up 15.9% of the freshman class, up from 14.4% this year. And 140 black
students, 10 more than this year, have said they will enroll in the fall,
making up 3.3% of the overall class of about 4,200. The number of Latino
students also rose, from 449 to 509.</p>

<p>At UCLA, however, the numbers fell for both groups, and for the overall
percentage of underrepresented students, despite an increase of more than
300 in the size of the total freshman class.</p>

<p>Of the freshmen who say they will enroll at UCLA this fall, 15.9% are from
underrepresented groups, compared with 18.1% of the current freshman class.
The figure for Latinos dropped from 683 to 659.</p>

<p>"The critical mass of our African American students is eroding, and we know
the quality of our education experience is absolutely affected, as well as
our obligation to the citizens of this state," said Janina Montero, UCLA's
vice chancellor for student affairs.</p>

<p>Jenny Wood, UCLA student body president, belongs to a student committee
drafting recommendations to revamp the admissions process.</p>

<p>"I think it's been really detrimental to see this decline in African
American students and, overall, in the number of students of color on our
campus," she said.</p>

<p>In Los Angeles County, blacks accounted for 11%, or 9,152, of the 84,677
public high school graduates. Statewide, blacks made up 7%, or 25,267, of
the 343,481 students who graduated from California's public high schools in
2004, the most recent year statistics are available.</p>

<p>*</p>

<p>(INFOBOX BELOW)</p>

<p>Shortage of black freshmen</p>

<p>Ethnic and racial breakdown of UCLA freshmen*</p>

<p>1985 (peak year for black enrollment)</p>

<p>White: 49.7%</p>

<p>Asian/Filipino: 22.2%</p>

<p>Chicano/Latino: 14.8%</p>

<p>Black: 9.6%</p>

<p>Other**: 3.7%</p>

<p>2005</p>

<p>White: 33.3%</p>

<p>Asian/Filipino: 41.0%</p>

<p>Chicano/Latino: 14.8%</p>

<p>Black: 2.9%</p>

<p>Other**: 7.9%</p>

<p>Pie charts may not add up to 100% due to rounding.</p>

<p><em>Excludes foreign students. *</em>Includes Native Americans, other groups and
those who declined to state.</p>

<p>Source: UCLA</p>

<p>Well, it's not UCLA"s fault.</p>

<p>what can be done, the asians are just taking overrr</p>

<p>its not the Asians' faults if the African Americans can't compete with them academically.</p>

<p>why is this a problem exactly?</p>

<p>I really don't see this as a problem... it's a problem for those who think UCLA is racist or something I guess.</p>

<p>it is a problem because a uc school in california should have racial diversity it shouldn't look like chinatown,lol</p>

<p>well admissions are not based on race, so whoever gets in gets in. like someone said above, its not UCLA's fault black applicants weren't as competitive academically as other ethnicities. blacks generally have the reputation of being the jocks/trouble makers in schools, rarely the scholars/valedictorians, etc. thats just who they "is", nawww mean? :rolleyes:</p>

<p>food for thought, how many black students have you seen here that are NOT athletes? 'nuff said.</p>

<p>Well first off, all of you fools are being extremely ignorant around here. Stupid ignorant, and I say that as an Asian myself.</p>

<p>Second off, I've met plenty of black students here (in my 3 years here) who weren't exactly athletes. My roommate during my orientation was black (music major). I know 3 people in my major (computer science) in my graduating year who are black. I've lived on the same floors in my two years in the dorms with a couple of black students (at least 3 off the top of my head, and 2 more guys who played on the football team... real cool guys actually). So while there aren't many black students out there at UCLA, they do exist and deserve some recognition.</p>

<p>Third off, while this might not neccessarily be UCLA's problem, it should be something that should be recognized. I grew up in Long Beach, one of the most diverse cities in California, and my high school was nearly evenly divided between Asians, blacks, and Latinos, and whites weren't far behind. It's not neccessarily UCLA's fault for taking someone with higher test scores, higher GPAs, more challenging classes, but UCLA is a public institution and the state of our educational system is a public problem. The fact that there can still be such inequities in this day, 2006, is a public problem, a problem that is part of the same educational system that is tailor made to funnel into universities like this one, the same public educational system that helps fund this great university.</p>

<p>I'm not sure how many of you realize just how the California state university system was set up. While they were designed to be great research institutions and great ways for one to get themselves ahead in life (which they really are), back in the charter (the California Master Plan for Higher Education back in 1960, look it up), the public university system was also designed to provide a public service for the state. The top 12.5% of CA high school students were supposed to be able to attend the UCs, the top third the CSUs, and all the rest at least able to go to community colleges which were designed both to send people to 4 year colleges and provide vocational type training. Since the vast majority of graduates of the UCs and CSUs stay in California, these graduates are a huge boon for the community and economy. They can keep their advanced skills in-state and are the workforce that fuels all the major companies that are based in California. This is a huge reason why California has grown into the power that it has become today, and the California public university system is still the strongest in America.</p>

<p>When you've got a whole population of folks out there who aren't doing as well for some reason in a system that's designed to help everyone, then yes it is a problem for the state education system that UCLA is part of. You've got a whole group of people not doing as well off economically and it's going to fuel all kinds of social problems such as crime, etc. I'm not saying that UCLA should just ignore test scores, ignore GPAs, and just take kids because they're black or whatever race. In fact that goes against everything I'm for. That's just like the "good ol' days" where all instituations took folks just because they weren't black, Asian, or whatever. What I'm saying is that universities need to look at the entirety of the students situation, and the government is going to need to look at the entirety of its educational and economic systems. If you got two kids, say equally smart, equal test scores, equally hard working, but one of them happens to be well off and goes to a school with a million AP classes offered (and hence can earn a higher weighted GPA), and one of them happens to be a poor kid who goes to an underfunded school where they can't offer any AP classes, how is that fair for the poor kid? How is it fair to have the rich folks being able to send their kids, who let me remind you can be just as dumb and igornant as any average hoodrat out there, to SAT boot camps and individual tutors and summer camps when a poor family who might mean just as well can't afford to send their kids to SAT camp, can't afford special tutors, and have to tried their hardest to keep their kids off the streets?</p>

<p>Look at all of you, me included, you all are extremely freakin blessed to be where you are. You're all priviledged to a degree, you're all lucky to a degree to have what you have, whether it's being born with a family that's able to support you whatever you do or just being blessed with that natural ability to learn quickly. Just think of that black 2nd grader in Compton, or Oakland, or Watts, or wherever, who might have been born naturally just as smarter or even smarter than your lucky butt, but just won't get that opportunity that every single one of us has earned. And if we're taking in so many black and minority students right now, who exactly is going to come back and help those communities 10, 15, 20 years from now?</p>

<p>-"they say sleep is the cousin of death/so my eyes wide open cause a dream is kin to ya last breath":the game</p>

<p>I agree with McGizzle. I'm surprised at how ignorant many of you are. Don't take for granted the resources you've been given. In the part of Silicon Valley I live in, the average household income is over 100K. Yet, if I take a 30 minute drive up to Oakland, there's clear, visible differences. Many of these talented black students aren't given the opportunity to succeed because of their under-funded school systems. The University of Georgia and the University of California aren't allowed to accept take into consideration these differences by law, thus these talented students end up at private schools that allow AA.</p>

<p>Whoa there, fandango, at least at Berkeley there is a holistic admissions and people are viewed in context from where they come. Also, Berkeley and other UCs put lots and lots of money into outreach programs.</p>

<p>


:rolleyes:</p>

<p>hey its an Asian's World now!!</p>

<p>DRab: Berkeley isn't the only one with holistic admissions process; I'm aware that the UCs do have a holistic admissions approach and that they do have several outreach programs. Regardless of what they're doing, there's cleary something wrong when only 2% of the student body at a school like UCLA is black. They're not doing enough.</p>

<p>Here's a link on UCLA's position and actions on this subject - </p>

<p><a href="http://www.ucla.edu/bulletin/news_admissions_decline.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ucla.edu/bulletin/news_admissions_decline.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>McGizzle, I see what you're saying, and i agree that we (fairly well-off) have greater advantages monetarily than many students living in poverty attending inner-city public schools. We definitely do have access to more resources, such as SAT tutors, etc. It's definitely not a fair playing field as far as advantages go. However, I don't think letting in black and latino kids just because of the color of their skin is the way to go. In doing so, you are screwing over every single poor white and asian kid who has just the same amount of limited resources as the black or latino kid. There are plenty of dirt poor asians in this country, who, because of the private college's fears that their schools will become "too asian," have to turn to the schools that have race-blind admissions-the UC's.
A much better strategy would be to give advantages in admissions based on income level, not skin color alone.</p>

<p>I completely agree with what you're saying cashmoney, and I definitely think race-blind admissions is the way to go. I said in my earlier post that granting kids admission due solely to race was just as wrong (in principle) as the segregation we're trying to get away from. I agree that advantages in admissions are definitely tied more to income level than race per se, and I have first seen plenty of poor white and Asian folks growing up in Long Beach (like fresh off the boat poor straight from Cambodia and Vietnam and other places). It's just unfortunate that in this country that race is still so tied to economic status.</p>

<p>This is not a simple problem we're tackling here and really extends just beyond UCLA. You've got to start looking all the way back to the beginning, all the way back to the elementary schools, and see what kind of education we are really giving, and how different it can be in the poor neighborhoods to rich neighborhoods, black communities to white ones. Parents, families, and communities got to be accountable to themselves as well in keeping their kids on the right track. Every little thing has a factor here.</p>

<p>It just makes me mad to see that people think that this is not a problem, and that just because they are not directly affected by this that they are absolved of all responsibility and worry of this. Well guess what, in 10-15 years from now when we've run short of skilled workers, when we've got all kinds of social problems because we live in a stratified society (i.e. no one being able to move up or down economically), then it will be part of your problem. I'm not saying that UCLA's admissions are the cause of the problem, but it definitely a symptom of something much bigger. Like or not UCLA is part of a larger public educational system in the state of California, and while it's meant to be able to help the individual out, it is also meant to give something back to the community at large. And if you've got a whole large part of the community not getting back these benefits of higher education, even given their minority status, it's going to cause bigger problems down the road. UCLA and other universities like it are the pinnacles of our educational system, and college definitely isn't for everyone, but everyone is affected by it in some way or another.</p>

<p>well said dude. <em>applause</em></p>

<p>
[quote]
Well guess what, in 10-15 years from now when we've run short of skilled workers, when we've got all kinds of social problems because we live in a stratified society (i.e. no one being able to move up or down economically), then it will be part of your problem.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This seems dubious. In fact, much of your final paragraph has problems for me.</p>

<p>I'm not sure I completely agree with what some people are saying, which is that African Americans should be compensated for lower scores and GPAs on average, because they come from disadvantaged situations.</p>

<p>I think that's a pretty broad oversimplification of the problem. I think there are more factors to it than that. I mean, some African Americans have been in this country for many generations, and are quite well-off, or at least not living in a state of destitution. Some Asians, on the other hand, just immigrated here and don't speak English well, and their families are just barely struggling to make a living.</p>

<p>Yet time and time again we see Asians and Caucasians work hard and make good grades. I've never even heard of a black valedictorian or one who scored 2200+ on SATs or anything. Is it really because they are so poor that they can't afford an SAT class? Many SAT classes only cost several hundred dollars, something I'm sure many African American families can afford. Or, get a study book for $20. Surely they can afford that. There are even courses offered at high schools for free. But how many African Americans do you know who will willingly and proactively seek out these resources? Probably not that many.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Well first off, all of you fools are being extremely ignorant around here.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't see how some people here are being "ignorant" for saying that African Americans on average do not perform as well as Asians, and that this phenomenon is not UCLA's fault. In fact, it may even be ignorant for some to simply dismiss a high achieving Asian because of his/her race, and give more credit to an African American, who probably didn't work as hard.</p>