UCLA holistic admission result: more URM, less low income

Parents Forum
1

<p>"The preliminary enrollment data for the first admissions cycle using the new holistic approach was released Friday, showing a significant increase in the number of underrepresented minorities who plan to enroll as freshmen, including 203 black students."</p>

<p>"Last year, when 96 black students submitted SIRs, UCLA administrators and members of the community labeled the situation a “crisis,” and UCLA changed the way it reads applications to the holistic review process."</p>

<p>"The number of students enrolled from families who make less than $30,000 a year also declined from 955 in 2006 to an estimated 689 for 2007."</p>

<p>"In addition to declines in low-income students, first-generation college students also decreased from 1,691 in 2006 to an estimated 1,260 in 2007."</p>

<p><a href="http://www.dailybruin.com/news/2007/may/14/minority-numbers-last-year/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.dailybruin.com/news/2007/may/14/minority-numbers-last-year/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

2

<p>So, what's the problem?</p>

3

<p>Gee, I don't know, a public university becoming a refuge for the rich?</p>

4

<p>From an overcoming something perspective, socioeconomic problems are much larger than being a URM, same with lack of parental education.</p>

<p>UCLA isn't moving people up the social ladder, they are taking middle+ class minorities that didn't really have the disadvantages.</p>

5

<p>BandTenHut,</p>

<p>um do you realize how little $30,000 a year is (and how hard it is for a non-homeless family to be making less then that)? Two parents working at McDonalds would make over $30,000 a year. The more telling number would be people making less than the national average--and the national average is pretty low income anyway, imo.</p>

<p>I would hardly call UCLA a "refuge for the rich"...</p>

6

<p>Lets manage the facts here. </p>

<p>How do you know if some of the black students who were admitted were also not first generation and or low income students? Unless you were sitting in when the admissions decisions, you don't. You are automatically assuming that they are all middle class minorities that really don't have the disadvantages, What is the basis for this assumption?</p>

<p>Lets really look at the facts:</p>

<p>
[quote]
The total number of students who decided to submit a SIR was 4,636.</p>

<p>The number of underrepresented minorities who plan to enroll as freshmen, including 203 black students.</p>

<p>This year, 51 percent of black students who were accepted decided to enroll</p>

<p>Another notable trend in the admissions data was that almost every measurable academic factor increased, on average, for admitted students. For example, from 2006 to 2007 the average GPA increased from 4.14 to 4.18 and the average number of honors courses taken increased form 16.8 to 17.5.</p>

<p>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Overall, ~ 398 African American students, were admitted. 203 decided to attend, which means ~4% of the admitted class will be African American.</p>

7

<p>
[quote]
refuge for the rich

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No way...year after year, each UC campus has ~33% Pell Grantees, which is 2-4 times higher than it peer group, public Unis (Mich, NC, UVa). Sure, any drop is cause for investigation, but let's be careful with correlation vs. causation (AP Stats!).</p>

8

<p>It also means that UCLA did a better job of looking at students as individuals and admitting them based on their behavior (also known as merit) rather than based on a social agenda intended to reward specific races. UCLA is moving in the right direction.</p>

9

<p>The UCs are still not permitted to use race as a criterion in their admissions decisions and there's no evidence they're giving preference to any URM based on their race.</p>