<p>
[quote]
It is the fault of those students who chose not to study or were unable to for certain reasons.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, it's the fault of URMs that they're statistically more likely to be in secondary schools that don't offer them the right resources. Yep.</p>
<p>it isn't always fair for URM, but it also isn't exactly fair for UCLA to try and sympathize with them, either.</p>
<p>Why isn't it fair?</p>
<p>ok i only skimmed through the whole thread, but i don't think i saw anybody, bring this point up....</p>
<p>"Applications from African American prospective freshmen for fall 2006 were 2,166, up from 1,844 last year."
(see <a href="http://www.ucla.edu/bulletin/news_admissions_decline.html">http://www.ucla.edu/bulletin/news_admissions_decline.html</a>)</p>
<p>2166 applicants out of what around 47000? WERE BLACK!!!!!!!!
that is less than 5% of the application pool.........</p>
<p>then why is it surprising that only 2% enrolled.....</p>
<p>if there were say 15-20% black applicants then, an enrollment rate of 2% would be a problem, if only 5% of the applicant's are black then what the heck is ucla supposed to do, accept half of them just to maintain diversity???????</p>
<p>i wouldn't wanna say black people are mostly jocks, but the truth is that they are..... and i should know i went to a "ghetto" school where caucasians were actually a minority...... obviously there were black kids who were smart(stereotypes are not set in stone) this one girls was garaunteed admission at stanford, if only she would take SAT II, but she didn't, she chose to go to some texas college instead. </p>
<p>It is a matter of choice........ it is something high schools have to correct, not colleges!!!!!!!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, it's the fault of URMs that they're statistically more likely to be in secondary schools that don't offer them the right resources. Yep.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So what do you think UCLA should do; accept less qualified students and deny the qualified students admission? Even at the worst high schools, students who study hard and get good marks can get into UCLA. If not, there is junior college and the transfer option (which about 1/3 of UCLA students went through).</p>
<p>Define "qualified?" What "qualifies" a student to go to a university?</p>
<p>
[quote]
If not, there is junior college and the transfer option
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course, but you know what's sad? The highest transfer rates are at CCs in affluent areas.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Define "qualified?" What "qualifies" a student to go to a university?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What should 'not' count as a qualification (or disqualification) is their race.</p>
<p>Saw the article/link above in the Times yesterday, although the first page was missing, about how UcLA is going to change their admission policies to be more "holistic" like UCB. They are going to study the UCB process and try to emulate that.</p>
<p>Just when we thought we were beginning to understand the admissions process they're going to go and change it..
Well, UCLA isn't the favored UC anyhow in our house, so far...</p>
<p>(Thx for pointing out the link allie, guess I'm up past my bedtime ; )</p>
<p>Emmeline posted the LA Times link above.</p>
<p>ucsd<em>ucla</em>dad,</p>
<p>Agreed. But I don't think that's the issue. What I'm betting is the issue in most people's minds are stats.</p>
<p>The issue is that black people are complaining that there aren't enough enrolled at UCLA for this fall. Well, what is misunderstood is that just because blacks are the under-represented race does not mean in any way that UCLA will just allow more to enroll. The students, in the case of all students, need to meet UCLA's qualifications and the high academic standard. The people protesting saying there needs to be more black people have no argument. I agree with the person on this board that said that only 2,000 (give or take) something black people applied to UCLA. So it's no wonder why only 96 enrolled.</p>
<p>Brassman,</p>
<p>The problem is that you may see a bit of a self-perpetuating cycle take hold where blacks don't apply because they may not feel comfortable in the program, so the next time nobody applies and so forth.</p>
<p>I'm not necessarily concerned with UCLA "allowing" more blacks to enroll, but with the notion that only scores are a valid metric for admissions and that it isn't a problem at all. </p>
<p>I mean, UCLA and other schools don't have a problem with lowering the "high academic standard" for athletes and other <em>ahem</em> special cases, yet the second we talk about applying modified metrics for other groups that are obviously in need of the resources offered by UCLA, we get this sort of popular uprising and call to arms.</p>
<p>many people of URM may have the skills, but as UCLAri said earlier, due to the unfortunate lack of proper resources, they may not be able to be as accomplished as those with the proper resources. </p>
<p>example:
Company A: wants to make a good product, has the funds and resources to create a good product, has the skills to create a good product, and creates a good product.</p>
<p>Company B: wants to make a good product, does not have the funds to create a good product, may have the skills to create a good product, makes a good product, but the product is inferior to Company A's product.</p>
<p>which product do you buy?</p>
<p>essentially, that's UCLA's problem.</p>
<p>we are talking about a public university in california......... you don't need to go to a prep school to be a competitive applicant (unlike elite privates "ivies and such"), also the ELC program allows you to get into a UC if you are in top 4% of oyur graduating class and that takes away the funds part from your analogy as a "UCLA level" person should be able to compete and stay in the top four percent of his class, when his peers are working under similar circumstances, and have same resources.</p>
<p>Rejected4life,</p>
<p>You...uhh...kinda left out the part where UCLA and Cal aren't "just publics."</p>
<p>well they are....... and i would think they are included in the ELC program too..... aren't they??????????
but then again you do have a lot more experience than me, so yeah i don't know, that was just my opinion.</p>
<p>also isn't being public the reason why 2% enrollment is being considered a big issue????
i mean i don't think anybody would complain about howard or any other historically black private college for having a much higher percentage of balck students than the general population of the region.</p>
<p>The UCs don't apply a strict formula based only on GPA/SAT to admissions. They also take into account "life challenges". This is as it should be since some applicants are more advantaged socio-economically than others and all things considered, it's possible that an advantaged applicant with the same GPA/SAT as the disadvantaged candidate may not be as strong as the disadvantaged one since the disadvantaged one had to jump hurdles on their passage around the track. </p>
<p>Here's what UCLA already does in this area:
[quote]
The review and consideration of life challenges covers three areas: environmental, family, and personal situations. Factors in this review may include, but are not limited to, disadvantaged neighborhoods, rural settings, limited curricular or advising opportunities, physical disabilities, serious family illnesses or challenging behavior, low socioeconomic status, and parents' educational levels. In the life challenge review, there is no specific emphasis on any identified situation, but rather the uniqueness of the experience an applicant might have, while striving to achieve academically. The result of the life challenge assessment is the assignment of a Life Challenge Level (LCL) to each applicant.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>rejected:</p>
<p>In the ELC program the top 4% are guaranteed admission to a UC but not necessarily the one of their choice. They could (and many do) still get rejected from some of the UCs based on selectivity at the campus and major. For example, to get into engineering at UCB, UCLA, UCSD, ELC standing may not be enough.</p>
<p>Rejected4life,</p>
<p>UCLA and UCB represent 2 of the top publics and therefore 2 of the top schools in the world.</p>
<p>This isn't like dealing with Cal State Sonoma.</p>