A UCLA education is in higher demand every year, but this growing popularity has begun to burden our limited resources.
This year alone, UCLA received about 100,000 applications from potential freshmen and transfer students, making it the “most applied-to” school in the country.
UCLA has also seen a steady increase in undergraduate enrollment. Since 2007, the total number of undergraduates has increased by 2,000, and in the past three years, UCLA has tried to squeeze more freshmen into campus classrooms; expected enrollment has increased by about 1000 students since 2010.
While this spike in applications makes acceptance more competitive and may increase the university’s prestige, it comes with unavoidable pragmatic costs.
So maybe it’s time to do something differently. Maybe it’s time to lower our enrollment targets – the number of students admissions hopes will accept their offer, set by the university – and refocus attention on the students already here.
The effects of having the largest UC population on the smallest UC campus is evident in overcrowded classrooms, spaceless libraries and competitive class enrollment.
UCLA has a responsibility to cater to as many California residents as possible, but it must do so in a way that ensures quality.
UCLA Admissions decides how many students to admit based on algorithms set by the university’s administration, said Youlonda Copeland-Morgan, the associate vice chancellor of enrollment management.
This year, UCLA accepted a record high of 16,177 freshmen out of 80,472 freshman applicants.
The university does not make its decision based on the number of applications it receives but rather on the applicant pool’s academic excellence and geographic diversity, she said.
UCLA has separate targets for enrolling in-state students versus out-of-state and international students, as well as for first-year and transfer students.
All of these separate targets have increased steadily in recent years.
This year’s in-state freshman target grew by 100 students. California state government told UCLA that it would be able to subsidize this increase, said Ricardo Vazquez, a UCLA spokesman.
The government may be able to help pay for these students, but UCLA still has practical limitations on the number of students it can support.
On average, the university tends to fall reasonably close to its enrollment target.
However, 2011 stands in stark contrast. A record 600 more freshmen than anticipated enrolled, bringing the class total to 5,825. Last year, UCLA enrolled 100 students past the target.
This year, UCLA’s in-state freshman target is 4100, and non-resident target is 1600, for a total of 5700 expected freshmen. This new enrollment target is almost equal to 2011’s enormous class.
Although UCLA raises enrollment targets in order to increase both access for California students and revenue from out-of-state tuition, UCLA can only handle so much growth.
In 2011, the university had to adjust to the unexpected enrollment swell with increased funding for general education and entry-level courses. As this class enters its third year this fall, departments have also had to request more funding for upper division courses.
Reactionary funding is not sustainable. Rather, UCLA should better use tools like its waitlist to closely monitor and control enrollment.
Although enrollment targets grow for good reasons, this year’s increase will ultimately hurt students by reducing class availability and quality.
UCLA should focus on serving the students already on campus before prioritizing the next generation.
Email Ferdman at mferdman@media.ucla.edu or tweet her @maiaferdman. Send general comments to opinion@media.ucla.edu or tweet us @DBOpinion.