According to findings by the undergraduate student government
from a recent survey, the expected cumulative progress requirement
is ineffective at facilitating enrollment growth and has negative
effects on students.
The ECP requirement, first enacted for students entering in the
fall of 2001, is one component of the UCLA College’s plan for
enrollment growth, which includes increasing the percentage of
full-time enrollment students and reducing the average time to get
a degree.
The Undergraduate Students Association Council has announced its
finding that ECP is an ineffective policy and negatively affects
students, the viewpoint which it has portrayed publicly since the
policy’s inception.
The survey, which was available to all UCLA College students for
over two weeks in February, consisted of over 50 questions
inquiring about personal experience under ECP and students’
individual backgrounds and activities.
With the data they have collected, council members feel they
have a strong argument to present to the faculty.
Findings indicate ECP has marginal to zero correlation with the
increase of full-time enrollment and has had no marked effect on
increasing graduation rates or reducing time to degree.
ECP requires that UCLA College students meet cumulative unit
requirements which increase with quarters in attendance, as well as
minimum progress of 13 units per quarter.
The Academic Senate is expected to want to wait until the policy
has been in effect longer to gather more data before making a
decision, said Tommy Tseng, general representative.
The class of 2005 will be the first graduating class subject to
ECP, and the first complete set of data the UCLA College will
have.
“This is totally unacceptable,” said Tseng.
“We have a compelling case that shows the ineffectiveness of
ECP and its negative effects on students.”
According to survey data presented, students said that ECP
decreases their quality of life and education, and limits their
ability to engage in intellectual stimulation.
Jenny Wood, general representative, said that one possible
effect of student efforts to meet ECP is a decreased willingness to
take intellectual risks or pursue new academic interests.
The survey indicates that the negative effects of ECP are
concentrated on minority, low-income, working and first-generation
students.
The most commonly cited reasons why students had trouble meeting
ECP were limited class choice, class load and other academic
difficulties.
USAC will urge the Academic Senate to modify the minimum
progress requirement to 13 units per quarter and a total of 39
units per academic year. Currently, students must take from 42 to
48 units per academic year to meet ECP requirements.
Wood said the motivation for supporting minimum progress is that
13 units per quarter are required to maintain financial aid
eligibility.
USAC will also encourage the reuniting of the more difficult
upper division courses and science lab classes, as well as
increasing the availability of educational materials and counseling
resources on ECP.
Some students are concerned that continuing to allot more units
to more classes will make them hit the unit cap sooner and will
discourage students from double majoring or minoring.
Hundreds of survey respondents said ECP is unclear and confusing
or called counseling inadequate.
USAC is continuing its efforts to mobilize students on the issue
and to lobby members of the faculty, as the fate of the policy is
ultimately in their hands.