• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

High school students throughout the state will log on to the Internet in the latter half of this month looking to see whether they were accepted to a University of California campus.

For several years, the anxiety has stemmed from anticipation of one of two outcomes: acceptance or rejection. But in light of an announcement made last week by the UC, some of these students could receive an unanticipated message: acceptance, but only after two years at a community college.

Due to a proposal by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to reduce freshman enrollment by 10 percent in 2004-2005, the UC system will not be able to directly admit thousands of students who typically qualify for a spot somewhere in the university. For the UC, this leaves 3,200 graduating high school students with the option of going somewhere else for college, or agreeing to complete courses at a community college for a guaranteed spot at a UC for their junior year. In the latter plan, students would not have to pay any student fees for their terms in community college.

“The bottom line is that we are doing the best that we can to accommodate as many UC-eligible students as we can,” said Susan Wilbur, director of UC admissions, in a conference call on Thursday.

The community college plan offered by the university parallels an existing plan for students who fall in neither the top 12.5 percent of the state’s graduating high school students, nor the top 4 percent of a student’s particular high school – the two bases for UC eligibility.

But now the logic behind the “dual admissions plan,” as it’s known, is being applied to students who would have been otherwise eligible for the university if not for a recent cut in the amount of state funding the UC expects to receive.

The system’s announcement to turn away eligible students also marks a break from the Master Plan for Higher Education – a policy adopted by the state in 1960 that delegated the education roles of the UC, California State University and California Community College systems, and among other things, enshrined the 12.5 percent eligibility index for the UC.

It is not yet clear whether the UC has broken its policy promise under the master plan, as the UC has historically admitted students in excess of the 12.5 percent stipulation to account for the fact that not all admitted students choose to enroll in the university. Figures detailing the UC’s adherence to the 12.5 percent policy will be released in May.

But one regent said if anyone is breaking the master plan, that liability falls on the state.

“The state for a couple years has broken its side of the agreement, so the state has been breaking the master plan for a number of years, and now they’re pushing to break it even more by telling us they’re not going to fund enrollment,” said Student Regent Matt Murray.

“We can’t do it all on our own,” he added. “For the UC to say it can only take some students is sad but reasonable.”

The UC Board of Regents had discussed the prospects of a community college transfer plan during its January meeting in San Francisco. Since then, administrators in the California Community College system have said their current level of funding leaves them ill-equipped to handle an influx of UC-eligible students in addition to their current teaching load.

Martha Kanter, chancellor for the Foothill-De Anza Community College District – one of the state’s largest – said in January that community colleges statewide had turned away 175,000 students last year.

Also at that meeting, UC President Robert Dynes expressed uncertainty about how efficient such a transfer program would be, even with the state’s proposed $1.6 million toward helping the transfer process. He said though community colleges are cheaper for the state to fund, students may just decide to attend college elsewhere.

Dynes also noted the importance of a student’s first two years at a UC campus in terms of the overall college experience.

“How much are those first two years worth, and how much do you save?” he said. “I haven’t determined that yet.”

With reports from Charles Proctor, Bruin senior staff, and Bruin wire services.