Is UCLA Cheating?

[Please see ADDENDUM to this post]

Californians amended their constitution in 1996 via Prop. 209, which provided that

The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

As I have discussed here many times (such as Prof Charges UCLA Admissions Cheating, Resigns From Committee), there is a great deal of suggestive evidence that UCLA has honored this constitutional command primarily by exploring different methods of getting around it. See, for example, here, and here I quoted, among other sources, these findings reported in the UCLA Daily Bruin:

In fall 2006, before UCLA switched to holistic admissions, black and Latino applicants’ average SAT scores were 255 and 246 points lower than the average for their white and Asian counterparts.

That gap seemed largely unaffected by holistic review – in fall 2007, black applicants’ SAT scores were on average 293 points lower than those of white and Asian students, and Latino applicants’ scores came up 249 points short.

I’m not sure that average black SAT scores falling from 255 to 293 points below the white/Asian average means they were “largely unaffected” by the move to “holistic review,” but perhaps, thanks to the Pacific Legal Foundation, now we can find out.

In an effort to determine whether UCLA is obeying the state Constitution’s ban on race- and sex-based discrimination and preferences in undergraduate admissions, Pacific Legal Foundation today submitted a California Public Records Act request for relevant documents from UCLA’s applications process….

Among the documents sought by PLF’s Public Records Act Request:

• Undergraduate applications, including essays – with all personal identifying information redacted – from applicants to the classes of 2005 through 2008.

• The identities of all applications readers, the scores they gave each application, and documents revealing why they decided to admit or reject each candidate.

• All handbooks and other documents designed to guide application readers.

“UCLA asks for personal essays, which by definition have to be graded somewhat subjectively,” said [PLF Attorney Joshua] Thompson. “We’re asking for these essays – and evidence of how they’re scored and weighted – to make sure that admissions officials aren’t using these subjective evaluations as a way to bias the process in violation of Proposition 209.”

The PLF’s request to UCLA emphasizes that “all personal identifying information may be redacted,” and stated it is “willing and eager to work with UCLA to safeguard individual identities.”

Maybe now we can find out how willing UCLA has been to comply with the prohibition against preferential treatment.

ADDENDUM

If you know of any students who applied to UCLA in 2007 or 2008 and were not admitted, attorneys at the Pacific Legal Foundation would like to speak with them. They should get in touch with:

Sharon Browne, email hidden; JavaScript is required, or

Joshua Thompson, email hidden; JavaScript is required

Pacific Legal Foundation

3900 Lennane Drive, Suite 200

Sacramento, CA 95834

(916) 419-7111

Fax: (916) 419-7747