UC Berkeley has made no secret of its desire to eliminate Proposition 209, which was passed in 1996 to eliminate discrimination against certain races in the California public university admissions process. Specifically, Prop 209 made it illegal to continue the practice of giving applications with "minority" designations preference and a boost up in the admissions process despite having inferior "numerical" (GPA and SAT) qualifications. You could tell the process of discrimination was rampant before Prop 209 because minority enrollment plunged and their numerical data points surged upward, as evidenced by the data in the links I have provided.
The question in front of us now is whether UC Berkeley has disobeyed state law as mandated by the people of California by subverting the non-racial application review process in its admissions office. The evidence is quite overwhelming to support this.
Here's a pretty non-shocking yet explosive allegation made by an admissions committee member at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), who claims in his report that UCLA has covered up the fact that it takes race into account in its admissions process through this really dodgy process called "holistic" application review, or basically the notion that the application reader's touchy feely opinion of the student is king. The major charge is that application readers look at the application more favorably if there is a mention of race, and that is not likely preferable as a applicant if your father is a diplomat from Hong Kong and your major hardship was getting a lesser BMW than you wanted for your sweet 16. The report also charges that UC Berkeley uses similar admissions review processes and is more touchy feely; therefore is also quite likely to be subverting state law.
Now here is the primary beef at UC Berkeley. Look at the admissions data by SAT Score for applicants who were admitted and decided to come to Berkeley. The margin between the median SAT Score by race from Black/Hispanic and White/Asian is enormous. Furthermore, the margin between Chinese and everyone else is even more enormous. This data is unfortunately pre-2006, but it still says a whole lot about what's been going on these last few years. From what I've heard, the present data trends are similar.
Year 2005 Median SAT Scores For Freshman Registrants: 135
• American Indian: 1335
• White: 1360
• Asian American Average: 1380
• International: 1430
• Chinese & Korean: 1410
• East Indian: 1410
• Filipino/Pacific Islander: 1290/1300
• African American: 1080
• Hispanic: 1140
Look at that enormous discrepancy! What factor specifically caused the average admitted and enrolled Hispanic and African-American groups to get in despite scoring an average of about 200-300 points below the major White and Asian peer groups? What elements were so spectacular in their applications that made up for the obvious deficiency in test scores? Did these groups have an abundance of extra curricular or leadership attributes that the average Asian or White did not have? It certainly can't be GPA, as the school's provided tables show a lower average GPA for these groups as well. Maybe it is just me, but I'm going to say that, in the words of David Letterman, "something doesn't smell right."
This is a civil rights issue. This is a government entity discriminating against its citizens. This is a whole group of people in that 200-300 point SAT margin that did not get into Berkeley. Citizens have a right to an investigation of UC Berkeley's admissions office for these potentially high crimes.
More Links on the Issue
No comments:
Post a Comment