By Matt Krupnick, Contra Costa Times

With budget cuts straining California’s public colleges and universities, some are worried about the effects on Latinos, who are particularly difficult to recruit to higher education in the best of times.

The California State University system, where more than one-quarter of students are Latino, plans to cut enrollment by 10,000 next year. Although the university still plans to guarantee entry to the vast majority of qualified California residents, the plan could discourage students from applying.

Several organizations have worked for years to increase college-attendance rates among the state’s 14.3 million Latinos, and some are concerned the new challenges could roll back gains. More than 43 percent of California’s 18- to 24-year-old population is Latino, compared with 27 percent of the state’s public college and university enrollment.

Although a recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of California showed Latinos are far more likely than other ethnicities to value higher education, some parents are recent immigrants who did not attend college and do not understand the challenges their children face.

Budget problems serve to complicate that obstacle, said Deborah Santiago, a co-founder and vice president of Excelencia in Education, which researches Latino education issues. The resulting obstacles will contradict the state’s longtime mission to provide widespread college access, Santiago said.

“Even if we got these first-generation students better educated (about college), I think California would be challenged to have the capacity to serve them,” she said. “Talk about a misalignment of messages.”

But support groups are continuing to convince Latinos that a college education is possible. At the Parent Institute for Quality Education, students whose parents complete courses about the college-going process are given priority in Cal State admissions.

And Excelencia in Education promotes programs that address the needs of the Latino community, such as in-depth counseling and bilingual nursing courses.

“The messaging is still optimistic, but we are realistic about the possibility that things might not be working out,” said Rosa Armendariz, Los Medanos College’s activity director for the Pittsburg school’s federal Hispanic-Serving Institution grant.

Most of the groups say the added challenges mean students need to prepare early for college by taking the required classes through high school.

About 30 percent of the state’s nearly 2.8 million community college students are Latino. Although that’s a higher percentage than either the Cal State or University of California systems can boast, students and educators point out that people of all races have trouble making the leap from two-year to four-year colleges.

Researchers have estimated that as little as 18 percent of Latino community college students seeking a four-year degree succeed in transferring from the two-year schools. Many Latino students give up after four or five years in community college, said Miguel Marez, a 27-year-old master’s degree student at Cal State East Bay.

Latino students whose parents have no college experience need help filling out financial-aid forms and figuring out college paths, he said. Marez recalled many of his childhood friends giving up on college aspirations early.

“A lot of my friends would become landscapers or housekeepers,” said Marez, a social-work student. “I can think of a lot of male Latinos going into the military, but I can’t think of many who went into college.”

The state budget problems aren’t making that pathway any easier. Even at the particularly accessible community colleges, required courses are being cut, leaving fewer opportunities for working students to fit school into their schedules.

And UC leaders have left open the possibility that they will limit enrollment next year, perhaps shutting off another possibility for some students.

Even though many Spanish-speaking immigrants don’t understand the technical aspects of applying to college, they do understand the consequences if their children don’t attend college, said Michele Siqueiros, executive director of the Campaign for College Opportunity.

“Latinos understand that in this country, if you’re going to get ahead, you need to have an education,” she said. “If we don’t do anything about it, we’re not going to meet the state’s workplace needs.”

Popularity: 8% [?]

by Michelle J. Nealy, Diverse

The highly anticipated announcement of the next U.S. Secretary of Education brought varied reactions from three key African-American higher education constituencies and at least one Latino organization.

Antonio Flores, president of the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities, which had offered up several names of Latinos to Obama’ transition team as potential education appointees, says he holds out hope that Duncan will look to some of those names, particularly for the slot of undersecretary that oversees higher education.

Flores said Duncan was “an excellent choice” since he will soon have to take up the reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act.

“My sense is, in his work with the Chicago Public Schools, he has had some relationship with higher education institutions in Chicago,” Flores said. “I suspect he would be a good person to work with… I realized he might not have hands-on policy experience in terms of higher education, but Congress just passed the Higher Education Act this year, so that’s not something he’ll have to take up early.”

Lezli Baskerville, president of the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, was less gracious.

“NAFEO is disappointed,” said Baskerville. “We were supporting a number of compelling candidates including Dr. Belle Wheelan of the Southern Association of Colleges and Universities.”

Now the president of the Southern Association of Colleges and Universities, Wheelan was the Secretary of Education for the state of Virginia under former Governor Mark Warner and she was head of Virginia’s community college system.

Baskerville praised Wheelan for having a mix of pre-primary, primary, secondary and higher education experiences.

“At a time when we are losing 60 percent of African-American boys, the growing student populations are African-Americans as well as Latinos, and HBCUs continue to be the economic engines for the most distressed communities in the nation, it was my hope that we could have someone at the Department of Education that would signal the national priority to be placed on closing the achievement gaps, creating culturally sensitive educational opportunities for all students and pipeline them through diverse institutions.”

Other advocates question Duncan’s credentials on higher education.

Although Duncan serves on the Board of Overseers for Harvard College and the Visiting Committees for Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education and the University of Chicago’s School of Social Service Administration, he has never taught in a classroom and has little experience formulating policy.

“He isn’t someone who has had a lot of background in higher education,” said Dr. Michael Lomax, president of the United Negro College Fund. “That will pose problems, but also some opportunities. One opportunity will be to bring others to the table who are highly experienced in [higher education].

“The number one issue facing this nation is our failure to ensure that our kids are graduating from high school in the cohort that they started in,” adds Lomax, who is rumored to be among those in consideration for assistant secretary of education. “That is a critical issue for the nation and anyone who brings experience in that is ahead of the game.”

Duncan, the latest member to be named to Obama’s Cabinet, has been touted by many as a reformer, raising achievement in the nation’s third-largest school district.

Duncan, has been called a “budding hero in the education business” by President Bush’s former education secretary, Rod Paige. After President-Elect Barack Obama announced Duncan as his education choice, current Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings hailed him as a “visionary” school leader.

Under his leadership overall high school graduation rates in Chicago improved 8 percent, growing from 47 percent to 55 percent, according to Catalyst Chicago, an independent news magazine. The number of Chicago students enrolling in college has also increased.

“Our college-going rates are up,” said Joyce Brown, manager of secondary school counselors in the Chicago Public Schools at a news conference in Washington last week.

Among the class of 2007 graduates, for example, half enrolled in college within the year after completing high school. That rate reflected an increase of 6.5 percentage points since 2003.

Still, inner-city schools, such John Marshall Metropolitan High School in the impoverished West Garfield Park community, have not done much better under Duncan’s leadership than under previous administrations. Marshall’s graduation rate, for instance, is 40 percent, up only four points; and its college-going rate actually declined 4 points to 31 percent under Duncan, according to Catalyst.

Some inner-city schools in low-income neighborhoods of Chicago are performing so poorly that Illinois state Sen. James Meeks helped to organize a mass boycott of Chicago Public Schools earlier this year as part of his Save Our Schools Now campaign. On Sept. 2, nearly 1,000 Chicago students skip school as part of the boycott, The Chicago Tribune reported.

The students were bussed to high-performing suburban schools on the outskirts of Chicago where they attempted to register. The goal of the boycott, says Meeks, was not to overwhelm high-performing school districts, but to illuminate the inequity of school funding in the city, he told a Chicago television station at the time.

Disparities in funding for struggling inner-city schools versus the amount of money that goes to wealthier, mostly White suburban schools has been a long-term problem for many school districts across the country. Chicago is no exception.

A Chicago Public Schools report shows that New Trier Township, located north of Chicago in Cook County, spent nearly $17,000 per student in 2005-06, while Chicago Public Schools spent an estimated $10,400 per pupil.

Meeks did not immediately return phone calls to Diverse to respond to questions about Duncan’s selection to become the next top education chief.

Chicago has made some strides under Duncan’s leadership, but district-wide high school test scores remain stagnant—only 31 percent of juniors meet state standards—leading many to question whether Chicago Public Schools graduates can succeed in college or in the job market.

Under Duncan, the lowest performing schools actually got worse, Catalyst reported this month. All but two of the city’s 10 lowest performing high schools in 2001 further deteriorated in 2008, Catalyst states.

Confronting the perils of a large urban public school system is a significant accomplishment, but enduring the rigors of a nation falling further and further behind is quite another, education officials say. When asked whether or not Duncan was a strong choice for education secretary, Dwayne Ashley, CEO and president of the Thurgood Marshall College Fund responded, “I think the proof is going to be in the pudding.”

“I think Arne is going to bring a new energy. He is progressive. He is a reformer. He understands K-12 and what we need to do to fix some of the challenges we have there,” Ashley said. “It’s going to be exciting to work with someone who brings the kinds of innovative ideas that he has.”

Lomax called Duncan an “outstanding choice.”

“Arne is going to bring on the ground experience to the office of Secretary of Education,” Lomax said. “He is going to bring experience from an urban school district with a large low-income minority student body. He hasn’t just talked about helping kids of color. He has really put his shoulder to the wheel.”

Popularity: 10% [?]

New report finds that the groups are doing better on meeting application requirements for UC and CSU but still trail whites and Asians.

By Larry Gordon, The Los Angeles Times

Despite recent improvements, Latino and black students continue to lag behind whites and Asians in becoming academically eligible to enter California’s two public university systems, according to a state report released Tuesday.

The study by the California Postsecondary Education Commission also showed that female high school seniors still do significantly better than males in taking required classes and earning grades and test scores that could gain them admission to the University of California and California State University systems.

Murray J. Haberman, the commission’s executive director, said he was pleased by the improved eligibility rates for African Americans and Latinos in the Cal State system. “Things are certainly moving in the right direction, although we still have a long way to go,” he said.

Haberman criticized recent proposals to reduce or cap enrollment at Cal State and UC. “Exactly at the time that more students are preparing themselves to go on to higher education, we are beginning to close the doors on so many of these students,” he said.

A student who wants to be admitted to either university first has to establish basic eligibility, then must typically meet separate, often tougher standards for the campuses at which they hope to enroll.

The study reported that 22.5% of Latino high school graduates were eligible for Cal State in 2007, up from 16% in 2003, when the last such study was done. For black students, Cal State eligibility went up to 24%, from 18.6%.

Latino and black eligibility for UC’s more rigorous standards were 6.9% and 6.3%,respectively, last year, slightly higher than four years ago.

White and Asian students did better in meeting requirements for both universities. For Cal State, 37.1% of white high school graduates were eligible last year and 50.9% of Asians, both somewhat higher than in 2003. For UC, 14.6% of white graduates and 29.4% of Asians met course, grade and test score requirements; those rates were both slightly lower than in the previous survey.

Factors holding down eligibility rates for black and Latino students include shortages of the necessary courses and sometimes inadequate counseling at high schools in many low-income, often predominantly minority areas, Haberman said.

Overall, Cal State rates rose mainly because more students met new requirements to take a second year of history and lab science, said Adrian Griffin, the commission’s research director. Griffin presented the report at a meeting Tuesday in Sacramento.

“It takes time for schools to adjust their offerings, and it takes a while for the message to sink in for students,” he said.

Griffin attributed the drops in white and Asian eligibility for UC to tighter course and grade requirements at the university.

Griffin also suggested that California’s high school exit exam, required since 2006, cut out weaker students and may have affected eligibility rates somewhat.

Continuing a gender imbalance at many U.S. colleges, more women than men were ready for California’s state universities. About 15.3% of female high school graduates were eligible for UC, compared with 11.2% of males, and 37.6% of women for Cal State, compared with 27.3% for males.

On a sliding scale that also includes standardized test scores, UC’s minimum grade point average in required high school courses is now a 3.0 — a B average on a 4-point scale — and Cal State’s is a 2.0, or a C average.

Those minimums, however, do not guarantee a spot at the most popular campuses, where much higher standards usually are enforced.

The eligibility study, which surveyed 72,000 transcripts at 158 public high schools around California, found that UC and Cal State requirements are well-aligned with their missions under the state’s 1960 master plan for higher education.

About 13.4% of California high school graduates were found to be eligible for UC in 2007, near the university’s target under the master plan of drawing from the top 12.5% of the state’s high school graduates. The Cal State eligibility rate was 32.7%, very close to its 33.3% master plan guideline.

Previous commission surveys influenced university requirements.

For example, four years ago, a report found that many otherwise UC-eligible students could not be accepted because they had not taken the two subject exams required by UC in addition to the basic SAT or ACT tests. Now, UC is on the verge of changes that, among other things, would drop the subject tests mandate.

Popularity: 11% [?]

Report also shows income, race gaps in college attendance

By Jean Cowden Moore, Ventura County Star

The United States, once a world leader in producing university graduates, is falling behind other countries in getting students ready for, into and through college.

Beyond that, there is still a significant gap in who goes to college and who doesn’t — a gap based on race, income and geography.

Those are key findings from “Measuring Up 2008,” a national report card that grades states on measures such as college preparation, participation, affordability and completion. States’ grades are based on how they perform when compared with the top-rated states in each category.

The report, released today, is issued every two years by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.

The findings are especially troubling as the United States fights to remain competitive in today’s global economy, said Pat Callan, president of the center. Internationally, the United States has fallen to 10th in the percentage of young adults who have an associate degree or higher.

In addition, baby boomers, the best-educated generation in U.S. history, are retiring, creating a need for more college graduates, Callan said.

“We’ve made some modest gains, but that progress does not begin to match the challenges we face, or the progress other countries are making,” he said.

One of those challenges is the cost of college, which continues to rise, even as family income has flattened. Students from well-off families are far more likely to go to college than students from poor households, according to the report.

Among families earning $100,000 or more, 91 percent of students go to college. That number drops to 78 percent among middle-income families ($50,000 to $100,000). And for families earning less than $20,000 a year, it’s 52 percent.

“We need a new social contract about tuition,” Callan said. “It’s a political football that discourages low-income people from attending college and middle-income people from saving for it.”

California got mostly C’s on its report card, although it scored higher than any other state on affordability because community college fees here are so low.

That doesn’t mean the state’s four-year colleges are affordable. Poor and working-class families must spend 40 percent of their income, even after financial aid, to send their children to a four-year public university, the report says.

The state also got a C in participation, primarily because there is such a disparity in the percentage of white and Latino students who go to college. While 45 percent of white young adults in California are enrolled in college, only 27 percent of Latino students are enrolled, according to the report.

That disparity could widen as the CSU system limits enrollment next year because of state budget cuts. That move is expected to have the biggest impact on minority students and those who are the first in their families to go to college, because those two groups tend to be less familiar with the application process.

“States should take any step, rather than close college doors,” Callan said. “California has been the most ruthless about cutting enrollment during a recession.”

The state did somewhat better on college completion, earning a B-minus. About 62 percent of the state’s college students get their bachelor’s degrees within six years. The gap between white and Latino students, however, persists in this category, too. Two-thirds of white students graduate within six years, compared with 53 percent of Latinos.

Ventura County universities are working to address some of the issues. CSU Channel Islands in Camarillo, for example, works closely with local high schools through several programs to encourage low-income, minority and first-generation students to go to college and make sure they know and meet academic requirements.

The university also participates in the national Educational Opportunity Program, which provides support for students once they get to college.

“We begin these partnerships early,” said Jane Sweetland, CSUCI dean of enrollment services. “We catch kids before they fail and give them a support network.”

California Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks has a program that allows students to attend the private university for the cost of a public school. Under the CLU Guarantee Scholarship, students admitted to either UCLA or UC Santa Barbara can attend CLU for the same price.

CLU also offers an extended summer orientation program for students who are the first in their families to attend college, or who come from low-income households.

In addition, the college has a new office of retention, aimed at tracking and supporting students at risk of dropping out.

“We’re getting a new mix of students, so the needs change,” said Matthew Ward, CLU vice president for enrollment management. “The assumptions we previously had about what students need will have to be turned on their head.”

Popularity: 9% [?]

Cost of four-year college education is particularly large concern for minority students

Shortly after Jesse Melgar was accepted to UCLA, he sat down with his dad to tackle his financial aid application, an especially daunting process for the Melgar family.

Now external vice president of the Undergraduate Students Association Council, Melgar is a first-generation college student, so his dad was just as new to the application as he was. The two men were guided by one glaring fact: between both their bank accounts, they had $5,000 to pay for college.

Melgar’s dad said he’d try to stretch that to fund a year at UCLA at most.

Melgar’s experience is shared by Latino students entering four-year institutions across the country, according to a study released earlier this month by the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA’s Graduate School of Education and Information Studies. The survey of college freshmen showed the difference in household income between Latino and non-Hispanic white students at four-year institutions is four times what it was 30 years ago. The jump was from $7,986 in 1975 to $32,965 in 2006.

Melgar said that while a generous collection of student loans helped pay for his four years at UCLA, he still remembers the effect of that conversation with his father.

“That kind of put it into perspective for me, what the realities of college would be and how money would impact that,” Melgar said.

The study also revealed that money weighs more heavily on the minds of Latino freshmen, 20 percent of whom listed major concerns about paying for college, as opposed to only 8.6 percent of white freshmen.

Chris Ibarra, a fourth-year history student, said money had an enormous effect on his college choice.

After transferring from community college, he still spends most of his work income to pay for college. “I had to keep my parents out of the loop only because they simply do not have the money to send me to college,” Ibarra said.

The study showed that the number of college-bound Latinos has increased, but researchers said that figure is misleading.

“If you look at the raw numbers, you’ll say, ‘Oh, gee, everything’s hunky dory,’” said Sylvia Hurtado, director of the Higher Education Research Institute and one of the study’s coauthors.

According to her, the increase in Latino freshmen has not kept pace with the growing number of Latino high school graduates.

“There was as an astounding amount of stability over 30 years in terms of still being in last place for a number of things,” Hurtado said.

The study brought troubling news for Latino males who were 39 percent of Latino freshmen in 2006, down from 57.4 percent three decades earlier. The downward trend for Latino and other minority males is a complex mix of societal influences that deserves more research, said Victor Saenz, a professor of education at the University of Texas and a coauthor of the study.

“I do not buy the notion that black and Latino boys don’t want to be academically successful,” Saenz said.

Using self-surveys, the study also found that Latino freshmen express a higher drive to achieve compared to non-Hispanic white students. Latinos also reported aspiring to higher-level degrees relative to white students.

Latino students on campus agreed that they often notice a stronger drive among their peers.

Gaby Rosca, president of the Latin American Students Association, said that increased work ethic most likely stems from growing up in a low-income environment.

“If coming into college, your reality is that if you don’t succeed … you’re going to be having a low minimum-wage job, of course that drive is going to be that much stronger,” Rosca said.

Jesse Melgar didn’t hesitate to link his low-income background to his current job as USAC external vice president, a job where he said he works to make college more affordable for other underrepresented students. He said he sees a lot of students like himself inspired to work in groups advocating for social justice.

“We kind of have this sense of obligation to use our time here and our privilege of receiving higher education to return that privilege back to the communities we come from.”

Popularity: 10% [?]

By JUSTIN POPE – AP

The number of minorities in college has increased substantially in recent years, but not fast enough to keep up with demographic changes.

As a result, U.S. adults in their late 20s are reaching only about as far as the age group immediately above them in terms of educational attainment. And among Hispanics, a lower proportion has completed at least an associate’s degree when compared with those age 30 and older.

Unless the trend is reversed, the increases in Hispanic participation in higher education won’t be enough to ensure that a growing proportion earn a college degree.

The findings are highlighted in a biennial report to be released Thursday by the American Council on Education, supported by the GE Foundation.

“One of the core tenets of the American dream is the hope that younger generations, who’ve had greater opportunities for educational advancement than their parents and grandparents, will be better off than the generations before them,” said council President Molly Corbett Broad. “Yet this report shows that aspiration is at serious risk.”

In fact, the report shows notable progress for minorities in higher education in several areas.

Between 1995 and 2005, total minority enrollment on U.S. campuses rose 50 percent, to 5 million students. The numbers of Hispanics receiving bachelor’s degrees has nearly doubled over that period, as has the number earning doctorates.

However, significant gaps among racial groups remain, and by some measures are widening. In 2006, among 18- to 24-year-olds, 61 percent of Asian-Americans were in college. That compares with 44 percent of whites, 32 percent of blacks and 25 percent of Hispanics.

Department of Education figures show that in 2006, 18 percent of older Hispanics had at least an associate’s degree, compared with just 16 percent of 25- to 29-year-olds. Council researcher Mikyung Ryu said the numbers do not suggest that’s simply because students are delaying getting an associate’s degree until after 30.

“The fact that this younger generation is attaining less than the older generation should really be ringing bells across this nation, and we really should be asking ourselves why,” said Dolores M. Fernandez, president of Eugenio Maria de Hostos Community College, which is part of the City University of New York.

The report also highlights the growing gender gap in higher education, a trend that has been building steadily for a number of years and which some colleges have tried to staunch with everything from giving men an admissions advantage to starting football teams to recruit them.

Still, according to the report, 36 percent of young men were enrolled in college in 2006, compared with 44 percent of young women.

Popularity: 16% [?]

Via The Daily Californian

A state appellate court ruled on Monday that a state law granting subsidized in-state tuition rates to undocumented California college students conflicts with federal law.

California’s AB 540 law had allowed undocumented students to pay in-state tuition if they had attended a state high school for three years and if they attended one of the state’s public secondary education systems, among other criteria.

The ruling overturned the dismissal of a 2006 lawsuit, which claimed that the state law violates a federal law. According to federal law, undocumented immigrants are ineligible for secondary education benefits unless a U.S. citizen is also eligible for the same benefit, regardless of the citizen’s residency.

“It means that California is going to have to stop providing state tuition rates to illegal immigrants,” said Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri at Kansas City law professor and attorney for the plaintiffs. “It means U.S. citizens paying out-of-state rates may finally be given a remedy in court for the discrimination they’ve suffered.”

Currently, out-of-state students pay about $17,000 more a year than undocumented and resident students in the UC system, he said.
Daily Cal News Blog

The exact number of undocumented students on campus is unknown as the admissions application does not require proof of citizenship, according to campus spokesperson Marie Felde. She said estimates are that there are dozens of undocumented high school graduates at UC Berkeley.

“The chancellor has said that he does not believe we should penalize these young people because their parents brought them here illegally,” Felde said.

The case will now be returned to Yolo County Superior Court, where it was first dismissed in 2006, to “determine the form of remedy,” such as calculating damages, Kobach said.

UC counsel Christopher Patti said the ruling could prohibit the university from exempting undocumented students from non-resident tuition.

“We’re disappointed in the court’s decision,” he said. “The regents supported AB 540 and our belief was that the legislature had crafted a statute that did not conflict with federal law.”

Patti is evaluating the overturned decision and is considering an appeal to the California Supreme Court.

But Kobach said the ruling is good news for California taxpayers.

“California taxpayers are spending over $100 million dollars a year subsidizing the higher education of illegal aliens who cannot legally work in California anyway,” he said. “This subsidy is not only illegal, it’s senseless and this decision means that it will likely come to an end very soon.”

But undocumented students are barely getting by under current laws, said Ronald Cruz, a Boalt student and organizer for the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary.

“I think it’s untenable to force undocumented students to have their dreams deferred because of something they cannot change like where they were born,” Cruz said. “We see this as a new Jim Crow, imposing a badge of inferiority on students for something they have no control over.”

Cruz is working with others in support of the California Dream Act, which would allow undocumented students to receive campus-based financial aid. The act was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last year.

An undocumented UC Berkeley sophomore originally from Mexico, who was granted anonymity because of her legal status, said the talents of undocumented students benefit the country, but current policies are putting their dreams out of reach.

“I know a lot of AB 540 students who are trying to a receive a higher education and because of racist policies, we don’t receive the same opportunities,” the sophomore said.

The student said she has been in the U.S. for nine years and is working with Cruz and the coalition to build a civil rights movement to help make the California Dream Act a law.

“If I were documented, I would still defend this,” she said. “It just doesn’t make sense to deprive anybody from equal education.”

Popularity: 16% [?]

California law bans the state’s public universities from recruiting students based on race.

But it can’t stop student volunteers.

Call it the outsourcing of affirmative action. Stepping into jobs made off-limits to university officials by Proposition 209 — the 1996 California ballot proposition that prohibited public schools from targeting students based on race, sex, or ethnicity — students are reaching back into their own communities to boost diversity on campus.

“We feel an obligation to help open the door to allow for more of our brothers and sisters to enter,” said Fuifuilupe Niumeitolu, a Tongan student at UC Berkeley who is a member of the student group Pacific Islanders Higher Education Recruitment Program. “It is a labor of love, rooted in creating social change.”

The passage of Proposition 209 hit UC Berkeley’s racial and ethnic communities hard. The number of incoming freshmen from underrepresented groups — African-American, Latino, American Indian and Pacific Islander — shrank by half.

The numbers are just now beginning to recover. But the campus is still far from reflecting the state’s diversity. Although about 47 percent of public high school graduates in California are members of underrepresented groups, they make up 25 percent of UC’s incoming freshman class. At UC Berkeley, the system’s most elite campus, there are 15.7 percent.

Read Full Article

Popularity: 12% [?]