It is no secret that California’s budget is in the red. And with lawmakers poised to sign a new budget today, our hopes for an increased budget are bleak at best.
Despite this, the news of the University of California admitting more low-income students than ever is a major boon to a public school system that has been under fire for limiting its accessibility.
In a time of frequent complaints that the UC is coming perilously close to privatizing, the statistics for the entering class are refreshing. The undergraduate population is comprised of 39 percent Pell Grant recipients, low-income students whose families usually make less than $50,000 a year. This is an 8-percentage point increase from 2008.
Additionally, more than a third are first generation college students, and a fifth of students come from a high school that was ranked in the bottom 40 percent of public schools. The UC has traditionally surpassed its counterparts such as University of Michigan and University of Virginia in Pell Grants recipients by a significant percentage. These numbers confirm that the UC continues to be a stalwart in education across socioeconomic backgrounds, alleviating secondary education inequality.
On previous occasions, this board has supported UCLA’s move to holistic admissions but cautioned that it is not the sole solution to academic inequality. Nevertheless, we stand by the need to maintain the holistic admissions process, one that is aimed at looking beyond an applicant’s numerical achievements. We believe it is at least in part responsible for the system-wide increase in low-income students.
But with a greater capacity to educate those from a broader background, the UC must now focus on ensuring and maintaining the financial resources for these roughly 70,000 students system-wide.
Admitting a diverse group of students gets the students in the door, but does not guarantee their success at the university. Low-income students are, in fact, more likely to enter the university academically less prepared because of vast elementary and secondary educational inequality.
If UCLA wants the students it is admitting to graduate, it must prioritize the services that have been the first to go during the budget crisis. Tutoring and mentoring programs must again become well-funded and widely available to entering freshmen, so that all students, regardless of their educational background, are put in a position to succeed.
The increase in admitted low-income students is the first encouraging step toward a UCLA that better represents the diverse backgrounds of the people of California. If the UC continues to increase the enrollment of low-income students and simultaneously provides the resources to help them succeed, the country’s top public school system will again be the vehicle to social advancement society needs.