<p>patuxent,</p>
<p>Your observation about the contradictory nature of UC activities is spot on. Keep in mind that all higher ed, particularly prominent state U's, operate in a political fishbowl. So they will have many contradictory statements and activities as they try to balance conflicting objectives, from inside or outside. Add to that the gap between what institutions say and what they do (just look at the admissions process) and you have a real mess.</p>
<p>Calmom,
I have no quarrel with the UCs (or anyplace else) not awarding money to NMS finalists, but I don't like their attempt to influence other institutions (by calling the program "bogus", etc.).</p>
<p>"The way I read that article is that the UC faculty committee faulted the use of funds to attract NM scholars who did not need financial aid."</p>
<p>How does the UC faculty committee explain the use of funds to attract international students to a state supported school?</p>
<p>How does the UC faculty feel about the use of funds to attract new faculty members who do not "need" a job. I'd suggest the lazy worthless pinko buggers spend less time telling everybody else how to run the world and more time lecturing on Peace Studies or Mediaeval Poetry or whatever the heck their specialty is. If we got a little more productivity out of them nobodies tuition would be as high.</p>
<p>actually, I don't think its the money per se, but the perceived negative impact on URMs. In today's LA Times, Berkeley's new Chancellor had a well-written piece on the need for more diversity at the flagship campuses and what he is doing to encourage more outreach. Obviously, anything that detracts from this goal (i.e., PSAT that makes awards to other than URM's at a much higher rate), needs to be carefully scrutinized. Since the CB and NM program flat out refuses to release any data on their awardees (hmmm....what do they have to hide?), methinks UC is raising a valid point for its state residents.</p>
<p>It is always about the money.</p>
<p>How does a small scholarship to a NMS negatively impact URMs? If the UCs and their faculty are so concerned about minority enrollment why don't they vote themselves a 10% payroll tax and earmark it for URM scholarships? I'll answer that for you. They are concerned about minority enrollment only so long as the costs of that enrollment are carried by someone else. </p>
<p>The universities in this country and their faculties including the state funded schools have decided they will take on the redistibution of wealth and opportunity of function that elective governments and legislatures are declining to do. That is why no school in the country has a fixed rate for tuition. Every school and admissions department decides what they are going to charge after they have had a look at your tax return and decided what you can afford to pay.</p>