<p>
This doesn’t follow in grad school.</p>
<p>tylor09 asks,“what incentive does UCLA have to go against its ideals and interests by ignoring racial diversity”</p>
<p>Response: Yes, obeying the law is a BIG incentive. In California it is now illegal for UCLA to disobey the change in the California Constitution. In fact, not only are admission folks liable but they can be indicted. </p>
<p>In fact , considering the risks that they face, the real question is what is the incentive for them to ignore the law considering the penalties?"</p>
<p>Also contrary to what you have stated, I don’t feel that having diversity in a school is as beneficial as the admission’s officers and evidentally you believe. Most schools that I have seen that are racially diverse tend to result in voluntary segregation anyway. I haven’t seen many benefits of having a diverse population in a school. </p>
<p>My kids attended a very homogeneous high school where about 40% of the kids were Asian and the rest upper middle class white kids with a smattering of other minorities. The culture of the Asian population certainly dominated the school and most kids were workaholics. I didn’t see the same benefits at high schools that are diverse but without a lot of Asians. Diversity, in and of itself, doens’t seem to do much. In fact, it could lead to lower standards or even more crime. Look at Japan, they are NOT a very diverse country and have one of the lowest crime rates in the world.</p>
<p>Note: I am NOT saying that diversity is bad. I just don’t think that it is worth all the rish and hassle that affirmative action creates.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry, but your opinion is irrelevant. The UC’s mission mandates a student body that reflects the “diversity of backgrounds characteristic of California.”</p>
<p>My prediction is that the UCs will completely eliminate or make optional standardized test scores, lower the GPA threshold, and randomly admit students from an eligible pool. I don’t see any other solution to both sides of the argument.</p>
<p>Pro and con Op-Ed pieces from today’s LA Times:</p>
<p>[UCLA’s</a> new admission policy rights a wrong - Los Angeles Times](<a href=“http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-hunt7-2008sep07,0,5839771.story]UCLA’s”>UCLA's new admission policy rights a wrong)</p>
<p>[How</a> UC is rigging the admissions process - Los Angeles Times](<a href=“http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-mac_donald-2008sep07,0,6246862.story]How”>How UC is rigging the admissions process)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This appeases the straw man merit only people?</p>
<p>UCLA brags about it. The admins at UCB and UCLA view it as their solemn duty to push the limits of the state constitutional ban on AA past the breaking point. By the time the courts overturn one illegal initiative they are on to another. It costs them nothing. They are spending tax payor dollars on the court fights. Until the admins are personally sanctioned they will continue to violate the law.</p>
<p>Message Regarding UCLA Student Admissions
Tuesday, September 9, 2008 5:30 PM
From:
“Chancellor Gene D. Block” <a href=“mailto:chancellor@ucla.edu”>chancellor@ucla.edu</a>
To:
“The UCLA Community” </p>
<p>UCLA Office of the Chancellor</p>
<p>To the Campus Community:</p>
<p>In the last week, UCLAs admissions process has drawn attention from within our campus and beyond. It is important that you are aware of our position: Our admissions process is legal and fair, and UCLA neither discriminates against nor grants preference to prospective students based on race, ethnicity, sex or national origin. If you have questions about the holistic admissions process, I encourage you to visit [Campus</a> explains holistic review admissions process - UCLA Today Online](<a href=“http://www.today.ucla.edu/news/080905_holistic-admissions_reed/]Campus”>http://www.today.ucla.edu/news/080905_holistic-admissions_reed/).</p>
<p>Amid the public debate, however, we must not lose sight of a simple fact: The students we admit to UCLA are, by any measure, candidates of exceptional merit chosen from an outstanding applicant pool. They are sought after by other elite universities, public and private, and our campus thrives on the intelligence, experience, talent and drive each of them brings to our Bruin family.</p>
<p>I can say with confidence that every Bruin student has earned the opportunity to study among this amazing community of scholars. We all should be extremely proud of the accomplishments that have brought them here and their potential to become leaders for the next generation.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Gene D. Block
Chancellor</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That statement is just totally baloney. High-scoring students are too rare for that to be true. (On the other hand, students with straight-A grade point averages in high school are common enough for that to be true, especially if difficulty of courses is not considered.) </p>
<p>See </p>
<p><a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/sat_percentile_ranks_2008_composite_cr_m_w.pdf[/url]”>Higher Education Professionals | College Board; </p>
<p>for the data.</p>
<p>tokenadult, “near-perfect” may not be true, but depending on how one defines “high-scoring,” the latter is likely true. And, like the private Elites, UC rejects every year some 2400-score + 4.0 gpa applicants. I’ve seen the applications; therefore, I know. As with the privates, an unconvincing statement of purpose, a lack of focus, an uninspired essay can disqualify a candidate. This happens very regularly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, yeah, depending on how one defines “high scoring.” But that is a different notion from “near perfect.”</p>
<p>Any school can claim to reject some 2400 4.0 gpa students, but that is very different from the claim “can fill each of their incoming freshman classes with applicants with near-perfect standardized test scores and grade-point averages”. As token said there are just not enough of those students to go around. Harvard might be able to make that claim but definitely not UCLA.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Who gets to see applications to UCLA besides UCLA admission officers?</p>
<p>Sometimes selected ones are made public, without names.</p>
<p>Whole application files are made public? Where can I look them up?</p>
<p>You can’t “look them up,” because they’re not in a public database. As I said, selected ones are occasionally released, however.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While the first part of the above statement would strech anyone’s credulity to an extreme, the part is that “This happens very regularly” cannot possibly relate to “UC rejects every year some 2400-score + 4.0 gpa applicants.” There are no reasons to believe that the UC does not receive “some” applications from 2400 SAT students, but it is highly doubtful they **reject **more than a handful … if that many. I would further speculate that a 2400 SAT plus perfect GPA student who gets rejected by the UC admissions must have some serious negative items in his or her file.</p>
<p>In this case, I’ll interpret “very regularly” as a different meaning of “once in a blue moon.”</p>
<p>No, xiggi, they do this every year. I never made a claim about the percentage of total applications that are rejected. Never. However, since every year I meet such students & see their files, then read their rejection letters, you can bet it happens every year. My claim is not based on guesswork; yours is.</p>
<p>token:</p>
<p>The Univ of California uses app readers across the state since they don’t have enough Admissions officers on campus to read evey app. Readers may be local teachers and/or counselors, and the like, so apps ARE floating around.</p>
<p>Re: perfect test scorers…the last I’ve seen in print was in the days of the 1600 SAT. An article in the Daily Cal (if I recall correctly), reported that Berkeley rejected a handful of 1600’s that year (circa 2004). But, the article did not state gpa’s…</p>
<p>Don’t forget that spinmasters can be at work in the press releases. Near perfect scores oftentimes refers to 800’s on subject test scores, and those are rejected, particularly if both are in math/science only.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hogwash! Your claim is that this happens VERY regularly and mine is that it happens once in a blue moon. I do not dispute your claim to have seen such files, but it would be impossible for you to derive any meaningful statistics from your anecdotal and haphazard review of a few files. </p>
<p>As far as guesswork, I’ll rather start from the basis of the complete statistics that are available for the UC to arrive at my conclusions than trying to use a handful of anecdotes. </p>
<p>I maintain that the UC rejecting a 2400 SAT student must an EXTREMELY rare and odd event.</p>
<p>xiggi, do not mischaracterize or twist my statements. Never once here did I represent anything statistical. In fact I stated the opposite: that I <em>didn’t</em> have statistics. (“Derive any meaningful statistics”???)</p>
<p>However, annually is not in my thesaurus “once in a blue moon.” Perhaps it is in yours. The 2400 reject at UC is not at all a rare event; it’s an annual event. Nor is it surprising, given that many of those rejects make the foolish mistake to apply only to a favorite reach UC, (to no others), and to display a kind of presumptuousness about acceptance, in their applications. (Applying little effort to the application & to the essay.) They basically have nothing or little to say, & believe their record will stand on its own. (No, actually.)</p>
<p>I think you’re the one that is oozing hogwash here.</p>