By Robert Salonga
Daily Bruin Staff
As time winds down for students to apply to the University of California for fall 2002 – applications must be postmarked by midnight – high school seniors are putting final touches to maximize their chances of acceptance following a new admissions policy.
Because the UC Regents did not approve the new policy until midway through this month, some students who sent off their applications before the vote worry their applications won’t reflect what admissions officers will now look for.
On Nov. 15, the UC Board of Regents passed comprehensive review, a plan to better balance an applicant’s unique personal experiences and academic performance when evaluating the application.
Applicants at UCLA will be given three rankings based on academic achievement, personal achievement and life challenges.
Some high school students had a chance to revise their applications to accommodate the new policies. However, those who had already turned in their applications before the plan’s approval were not as fortunate.
“They’re not able to illustrate their qualities like others who knew about it,” said David Shamouelian, a senior at Yeshiva University High School in Los Angeles.
“I’m at an advantage right now,” he continued.
Upon learning of comprehensive admissions Shamouelian revised his UC application to UCLA, Berkeley and Irvine to further emphasize his personal achievements.
“I spent a lot of time on the application and really took time on the essay,” Shamouelian said.
Other students felt the timing and lack of clarity of the new policy confused them.
“We’ve already sent (our applications) in, and it puts us at a disadvantage because we don’t know what’s going on,” said Justin Miyamoto, a senior at Esperanza High School in Anaheim.
After talking to classmates and peers, Miyamoto – who applied to UCLA, Berkeley, San Diego and Santa Barbara – concluded that it would make more sense to delay implementation of comprehensive review.
“Juniors and sophomores don’t have the chance to gear themselves to become a more competitive college applicant under the new plan,” he said.
“The regents should make it more clear how much this is going to affect admissions,” he continued.
But UC applicants are not being judged any differently, said proponents of the immediate implementation.
“This is nothing less than what we’ve asked (students) in the past,” said student regent Tracy Davis, who also works as an admissions reader for UCLA.
“We owe it to students who have really challenged and engaged themselves,” she continued.
Other regents advocated for delayed implementation.
“Any time you make a significant change in policy, you have to give sufficient lead time to make adjustments,” said regent Ward Connerly.
“When we passed SP-1, we delayed it for two years because students needed to acclimate themselves,” Connerly added, referring to the 1995 regent policy banning affirmative action in UC admissions and hiring.
The regents rescinded this past spring.
Despite qualms with the timing of the policy, Shamouelian and Miyamoto said comprehensive review is a step in the right direction.
All applicants will now be evaluated under the same set of criteria, as opposed to former UC policy which admitted 50 to 75 percent of incoming freshmen based on academic performance alone.
“This is really the correct way of doing things,” Shamouelian said. “By being subjective, they can identify the individual and take everything into consideration.”