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

Wednesday, November 27, 1996

PROP. 209:

Committee to look at options for serving needs of underrepresented studentsBy Marisa Lowe

Daily Bruin Contributor

In the aftermath of the passage of Proposition 209, the Academic Advancement Program (AAP), the nation's largest and most successful undergraduate affirmative action program is faced with a serious dilemma: continue its support to historically underrepresented minority groups and students of low income while following the constraints of the new law.

Proposition 209 prohibits the university from granting preferential treatment to any group or individual on the basis of race, sex, or ethnicity. The law's passage requires that affirmative action programs like AAP either change their criteria or lose state funding.

Current, AAP eligibility criteria requires students be from historically underrepresented social groups (i.e. African American, Latino or Native American), and/or a low-income family.

While economic criteria remain untouched by Proposition 209, race and gender preferences must be eliminated from the selection process.

Although these criteria will remain in effect until the end of this academic year, AAP is already searching for new ways to stay within the legal boundaries of the new statute.

Starting winter quarter, administrators, faculty and students will begin devising alternate ways to continue to support those populations AAP has historically served. First on the agenda is the election of a new Faculty Advisory Committee.

The committee, composed of faculty and students, will recommend to AAP Director Adolfo Bermeo alternative criteria for AAP's future eligibility. Ultimately, the committee's goal is to continue to receive funding and maintain support to communities historically served, while functioning within the constraints of the law.

"The committee is an articulation of concerns from a group of faculty and students who have worked with AAP and understand the structure and culture of the program," said Faculty Advisory Committee Chairman Ray Rocco.

"Their number one priority is to continue to include students historically served," Rocco said. However, he is quick to add that the Faculty Advisory Committee is "not a rubber stamp committee. Suggestions (will be) supportive and scrutinizing."

There is no room for rubber stamping, especially when the UCLA administration expects the committee to examine social demographics from the last 10 years before making suggestions or recommendations.

So far, preliminary examinations of social demographics look promising for AAP supporters. New categories for eligibility can be devised which would, for the most part, include historically underrepresented groups.

Another possibility includes utilizing a larger quantity of federal aid, since national legislation supersedes state law.

All suggestions aside, however, no preliminary actions have been taken by AAP or the UCLA administration.

For many, there is no doubt that the last 25 years of AAP have been successful.

"AAP students leave UCLA having demonstrated their potential to succeed, excel and graduate," Bermeo said.

Grade point averages, retention and graduation rates have significantly increased among AAP participants over the past 10 years, which underscores the program's success, Bermeo said.

As members of AAP, students have the option to participate in various academic programs, counseling, tutoring, research opportunities and computer lab access. However, supporters of AAP believe that the program is more than just tutoring and counseling.

"AAP is committed to taking students who have fewer advantages, and encouraging them to excel," said Vice Provost of UCLA Undergraduate Education for the College of Letters and Sciences Judith Smith.

"Most importantly, though, AAP is a home base, a social family where students can interact and receive the positive feedback of academic recognition," she added.

But maintaining excellence and a steadfast commitment to students could be difficult in a post-Proposition 209 environment, officials said.

"(Law School analysts) have reached the conclusions that the very statement of or application of a goal to increase or maintain diversity is itself prohibited by 209," said Chancellor Charles Young. "Now, that's a new concept."

For others, the passage of Proposition 209 is a welcome relief. Supporters of Proposition 209 view the law largely as a way to include students previously excluded.

"I hope that the passage of Proposition 209 will expand opportunities, and not cut them down," said James White, a UCLA mathematics professor. "I want people from all walks of life to be included, not just the historically underrepresented."

For others, affirmative action programs like AAP hold a greater contradictory role in the overall philosophy of life.

"You can't turn around 200 years of history. It's a very noble idea, but its just absurd, ridiculous and entirely unrealistic," said Sarah Derynck, a second-year English student. "In an educational setting, programs like AAP try to level the playing field. That's great, but that's not the way reality works, life is unfair and people need to accept that."

With the redefinition of the program's eligibility criteria, only time will decide whether or not AAP will be successful in its attempt to service communities historically underrepresented.

"We need to be able to educate people who are going to be the leaders of the groups that form our society ... so that we don't have a huge disparity between the educated leadership, which is predominantly white and male, and the population in general," Chancellor Young said.

"That's a recipe for disaster, and I think that Proposition 209 is making the likelihood of that disaster great."

INGA DOROSZ

Chancellor Charles Young fears AAP will suffer at the hands of Prop. 209.