College is a race – a race against each other for the best grades, internships and leadership opportunities and a race against the clock to get everything done before four years are up.
But some students begin that race already behind, and one university policy designed to encourage timely graduation is weighing them downthem even further.
This quarter, the Campus Retention Committee, a student-run program within the Community Programs Office, is pushing for UCLA administrators to change the expected cumulative progress policy, which requires students to have completed a certain number of units at mandated checkpoints. ECP progress is monitored every two quarters.
The CRC’s concerns about the ECP policy stem from the adverse effect it has on traditionally underrepresented communities on campus, who often have to deal with difficult life circumstances that prevent them from meeting unit requirements.
In light of this fact, the practice of dismissing students after they’ve failed to reach the target number of units for three monitored quarters is particularly troubling and demonstrates the need to make definitive changes to the way degree progress is monitored at UCLA. Administrators should look for a way to remove the provision for dismissal altogether.
The ECP policy mandates that students complete 42 units by the end of their first year, 86 by the end of their second year and 132 by the end of their third year. The first time a student does not meet the benchmark, a hold is placed on their account and they must meet with a counselor to create a plan for catching up. The second time, another hold is placed on their account and they must meet with their counselor to readjust their plan.
The third time a student fails to meet the required number of units, that student is subject to discontinuation from the university, and if the student’s appeal to discontinuance is not accepted, he or she may have to complete their degree at another institution.
The fact that falling behind in units can put a student at risk for dismissal is problematic in itself. But even more problematic is the fact that students coming from underprivileged backgrounds are particularly susceptible to falling behind in units because they often have trouble acclimating to a university course load.
Brittany Bolden, the chair of the Campus Retention Committee and a fifth-year Afro-American studies and sociology student, has faced issues with ECP personally.
She said she won’t be able to return to UCLA next quarter to finish up her double major because she has been unable to comply with ECP requirements for a third monitored quarter.
Bolden, who said she is a low-income student, said that her financial situation, family issues and health problems have made it difficult for her to keep up with unit requirements, and she is now facing the choice of taking classes at UCLA Extension, dropping one of her majors or simply not graduating.
It’s unreasonable for the university to present Bolden with this type of ultimatum.
Bolden and students in situations like hers do not benefit from a threat hanging over their heads, but should instead receive increased help and understanding from administrators.
Fostering diversity is about more than creating opportunity for students from diverse backgrounds to gain admission to the university – it’s about committing to their success when they get here.
Students from underprivileged backgrounds are particularly vulnerable to circumstances which make it difficult to keep up with ECP requirements, such as financial problems, having to work full-time jobs and acclimating to the academic rigor of college life.
In light of this disparity, administration should revisit the policy and communicate with leaders at the Campus Retention Committee and elsewhere on campus to create a workable compromise.
For instance, Bolden has suggested in a meeting with Patricia Turner, dean and vice provost for undergraduate education in the College of Letters and Science, that the administration could add a CRC member to the board that considers student appeals against dismissal.
ECP requirements are meant to make sure students are on track to graduate – in theory, their goals are in line with those of the Campus Retention Committee. But the punitive nature of the policy for those who have difficulty complying works against the goal of retention and diversity.
College is competitive, and it often feels like the race is every man for himself. But it’s the administration’s job to listen to students and prop them up when they need it, not help weigh them down.