Faculty at the University of California praised the university’s new policy of using comprehensive review to evaluate all freshman applications, stating in a recent report that the new methods uphold the academic strength of the freshman class.
“”Preserving the University of California’s high academic standards is a top priority for the faculty,”” said Gayle N. Binion, chair of the system-wide Academic Senate and a professor of political science at University of California at Santa Barbara. “”The faculty conducted a very thorough analysis of comprehensive review and found that it was implemented in accordance with Regents’ policy and in a manner that has maintained consistency in UC admissions.””
Competition for admission to the UC system has grown increasingly intense over the past few years. UCLA turned away almost 33,000 applicants this year, more than any university in the nation. UC Berkeley denied 28,000 and UCSD rejected 24,000 applicants.
In accordance with the newly implemented comprehensive review method, the UC Board of Regents stopped requiring each campus to admit 50 to 75 percent of students based solely on grades and test scores.
Comprehensive review, which was approved 15-4 by the UC Regents last year, was used when admitting the current freshman class. As part of the new process, instead of considering only SAT scores and grade point average, additional factors are considered.
The new procedure is intended for applicants to be considered for admission based on a broad source of academic and personal experiences and qualifications.
“”Our analysis found that academic achievement is still by far the predominant consideration in UC admissions and that access to UC has been maintained for students of all demographic backgrounds,”” said Barbara A. Sawrey, a chemistry professor at UCSD and chair of the Academic Senate’s Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools, which authored the report. “”We also expect that the process will be fine-tuned each year, and we have identified several issues for further study and discussion to facilitate that fine-tuning.””
Critics of the current policy are concerned that some applicants embellish their records in order to be given an edge in UC admissions. UC Regent Ward Connerly raised concerns at a Sept. 19 meeting of the Board of Regents, citing several newspaper articles that questioned whether the comprehensive review process was being administered fairly. He also questioned whether the policy was a way to bring race and ethnicity into the admissions process. This, Connerly said, would be a way to circumvent the California constitution. He suggested the university conduct an independent, outside audit of the policy.
Responding to potential criticism, two pilot programs verified additional information in the application during the first year of comprehensive review, and a systemwide verification process will begin in the fall 2003 admissions process to ensure the reliability of information on the application.
“”We want to be able to assure people that what we claim — that there is little to no falsification — is the case,”” Sawrey said. “”The only way to ensure the highest level of public confidence is through random verification.””
Two preliminary tests found that hardly any students lied on applications. Using a sample of 437 applications, UCSD wanted to verify either the self-reported family income or the portion of the application that lists honors, achievements and community service the student claimed. In the end, all but one applicant could provide documentation.
“”[Comprehensive review] has to do with economics and experiences, not races,”” said John Muir College sophomore Michelle Haft. “”[Applicants] of lower status who aren’t racial minorities are also taken into account. It’s like a racially fair version of affirmative action.””
