Although we do not have information on how many students
have accepted UC offers of admissions for 2015-16, we do know that there has
been another large increase (2,453) in non-resident student acceptances and a
decrease in students from California (down 1,039). We also know that extra tuition for
non-resident students will go up 5% to $24,700 per student, while in-state tuition
will remain at $12,192. This increased
incentive to enroll non-resident students has resulted in the following
admissions figures:
“45 percent of offers at UC Berkeley went to out-of-state and internationalstudents; the figure was 42 percent at UCLA, 39 percent at UC San Diego and 35percent at UC Davis.” In other words, these campuses stand to take
in a huge amount of extra funds. For
instance, if a campus enrolls 1,000 non-resident students for four years, the
increased funding is $100 million. It is
no wonder that UC has rejected the legislature’s offer of $25 million if the entire
UC system increases enrollments for Californian students by 5,000. Instead of getting an extra $5,000 per
resident student, the UC can get an extra $24,700 per non-resident
student.
Of
course this whole logic means that money has become the main value, and many
students from California will end up paying more to go to public schools in
other states or to expensive private universities. Moreover, the rush for non-resident student
revenue will enhance the inequity of the system so that the campuses with the
highest number of underrepresented students (UCR, Merced, UCSB, UCSC) will
continue to receive the lowest level of revenue, and the campuses with the
highest number of wealthy students will receive the most funding. As I have previously reported, last year’s
admissions enhanced the inequity among the campuses:
This chart tells us that campuses that received higher
funding in the past (see the last column) built up their reputations and now
can cash in on non-resident student revenue (NRT) (the second column).
Moreover, the extra NRT funds on one campus do not help the students on other
campuses, and the amount of financial aid for non-resident students ($32
million last year) is almost as much as the total amount of rebenching ($37
million last year).
As
the state auditor pointed out in 2011, the campuses
receiving the lowest level of per student funding were also the campuses with
the highest number of underrepresented minority students.
The chart below lists the percentage of
undergraduate underrepresented minority students and Pell grant students for
each campus in 2014-15:
Underrepresented Pell
UCB
|
16
|
27
|
UCD
|
19
|
37
|
UCI
|
22
|
48
|
UCLA
|
21
|
31
|
UCR
|
41
|
56
|
UCSD
|
17
|
30
|
UCSB
|
27
|
41
|
UCSC
|
30
|
51
|
Merced
|
47
|
63
|
|
|
|
Thus,
while 16% of undergrads at Berkeley were underrepresented minority students this year,
Riverside had 41%, and while Berkeley took in over $40 million in extra
non-resident student tuition revenue, Riverside only brought in $7.5
million. Furthermore, 31% of undergrads
at UCLA are Pell grant eligible, but 51% at UCSC fall into this low-income
category, and yet UCLA brought in an additional $41 million in non-resident
student tuition, while UCSC brought in $19 million. These statistics clearly show that UC has a
separate and unequal funding model based on race and class, and this situation
only promises to get worse next year.
When
the state auditor pointed out the racial component of the campus funding
imbalance in 2011, President Yudof wrote
that, “There is absolutely no basis – statistically, historically, or ethically
– for drawing such a connection. Furthermore, the BSA makes no investigation
into or observation of disproportionate or inequitable treatment or outcomes
for students at different campuses” (p. 81).
However, after making this statement, the UC then later admitted that
the correlation between funding and race may have been the unintended result of
an ad hoc funding process, and yet, nothing has changed and things are only getting
worse. The UC can no longer plead ignorance and must find a way to share NRT revenue among the campuses.
