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

Only the Daily Bruin, in its evident disregard for the work of the Undergraduate Students Association Council, would defend questionable claims by the university over the real effects that have negatively impacted student lives.

By perpetually dissing USAC’s Expected Cumulative Progress survey as flawed when it was clearly explained (these “flaws” are specific guidelines set forth by the administration which require them to be anonymous), the editorial board is actively misinforming the student body.

We are aware of potential abuse on the survey, but potential abuse does not speak for the thousands of students who filled out the survey honestly – 200 pages of open-ended responses, and hundreds of other pages documenting how students feel.

Would the editorial board like to take a glimpse into the lives of students who disagree that “the policy isn’t flawed” or that “it’s not even in need of drastic change”? The editorial board has no idea what they’re even talking about.

Here are some quick facts: UC Santa Cruz has much more lenient minimum progress requirements, yet has the second highest-ranking status in full-time enrolled students. Why? They raised the number of units awarded for classes from four to five.

A remarkable idea? ’Fraid not. It was proposed to us many times by our professors, like Richard D. Anderson Jr. in his Viewpoint submission, “Officials shouldn’t blame students for unit change” (5/2/2001), but hasn’t been done systemwide at UCLA. Also, UCLA students have increasingly been graduating in four years over the past few years. That’s due to fee increases of over 65 percent over the last three years! Even administration members have commented that fees are the No. 1 reason why students are graduating faster.

Which begs the question, why have ECP in place? That is what USAC’s entire campaign has been about all along – assessing the reasons for ECP’s implementation, examining whether those reasons have held up and contrasting that to the impacts ECP has had on the quality of life for students. Simply put, this is a student evaluation to test the pros and cons and to describe what we know is true – that the costs of ECP far outweigh the potential benefits.

Why is ECP checked on a bi-quarterly basis, when students were previously checked on a yearly basis? Why is UCLA the only UC to increase the number of courses you must take to meet unit requirements as opposed to following other UCs and completely altering all of its unit numbering? There are better ways, period. And as USAC, we refuse to be complacent (like our peers on The Bruin’s editorial board) when we can improve our educational experience.

You think we are being melodramatic? Two members of the Daily Bruin’s own editorial board were previously on ECP probation. But then again, their lives are merely “anecdotal evidence.”

Regarding the ECP campaign, we are far from its climatic end, but USAC would like to thank the students who participated in the 4,000 received surveys for evaluating your education and giving the university your perspective on a policy that affects us all. I promise your voice will not go unheard, even as The Bruin works to delegitimize your opinions.

To the people who encouraged student participation, thank you. It is completely inappropriate and disrespectful for The Bruin to trivialize the suffering of countless students who are affected by ECP, and to render it OK for UCLA students to receive a compromised education.

Students at this campus deserve to decide for themselves the education they want to receive. We pay enough for it, we struggled enough to get here. If a student has to work while in school, if a student wants to explore the variety of classes UCLA has to offer before deciding their major without approaching the unit cap too quickly, if a student wants to perform community service, take part in student government, Greek life, the newspaper and so on, that is his or her choice. We all know that only half of our college experience is found in the classroom.

Perhaps instead of making it The Bruin’s first priority to delegitimize the work of USAC, they should work on investigating and exposing the issues that are critically affecting our quality of life. Whatever The Bruin’s petty clashes with USAC, students deserve better, and we should all work for the greater good.

Palma/Saracho is the president of USAC.