1
2
3
4
The term under ‐ represented minority (URM) is typically used to mean the three subgroups African American, American Indian, and Chicano/Latino. For the purposes of this talk, we’ll primarily focus on African American and Chicano/Latino students, only because the cell sizes for American Indian students are often unfortunately too small to draw generalizable conclusions. 5
6
Of all 12th ‐ graders in AY2015 ‐ 16, 59% were from URMs, which is 6 in 10 students ‐‐‐ a strong majority. However, URMs only comprised 47% of fall 2016 UC freshman applicants, 42% of admits, and 41% of enrollees. There were about 33,000 African American 12th ‐ graders, representing 6.6% of all 12th ‐ graders, but African Americans only comprising 4.7% of all UC enrollees. The decrease in share from 6.6% to 4.7% might not sound like a lot, but it has a big impact on UC diversity. In fall 2016, about 1,400 African American freshman enrolled; had the share of African American enrollees been 6.6% instead of 4.7%, there would have been more than 2,000 African American freshman enrolled, which is nearly 600 additional African American enrollees ‐‐‐ a 40% increase. Similarly, there were about 257,000 Chicano/Latino 12th ‐ graders, representing 52.2% of all 12th ‐ graders, but Chicano/Latinos only comprising 36% of all UC enrollees. And had the share of fall 2016 Chicano/Latino enrollees been 52.2% instead of 36%, there would have been nearly 16,000 Chicano/Latino freshman enrolled, which is 7
nearly 5,000 additional Chicano/Latino enrollees ‐‐‐ a 45% increase. In other words, were there not significant pipeline issues, resulting in the shares of URM students dropping substantially along the path from 12th ‐ graders to UC enrollees, UC would have been significantly more diverse in fall 2016; assuming enrollment stayed fixed, maintaining parity would have resulted in nearly 18,000 of the 30,000 new freshman being URMs. 7
Overall, about 4.4% of African American 12th ‐ graders make it through the funnel to UC enrollment, compared to 4.3% of Chicano/Latino 12th ‐ graders, and 4.5% of White, American Indian, and multi ‐ ethnic students, meaning the throughputs for all groups are basically statistically indistinguishable, except for Asian/Pacific Islander students, who have 19.1% of their 12th ‐ graders end up as UC enrollees. Breaking this down by stage, (1) 94% of Asian/Pacific Islander students graduate from high school, making them 12% more likely to graduate than URM students and 4% more likely than White students; (2) 69% of Asian/Pacific Islander graduates complete the SAT, making them 55% more likely to complete the SAT than URM students and 38% more likely than White students; (3) 61% of Asian/Pacific Islander SAT ‐ takers apply to UC, making them 80% more likely to apply than URM students and 120% more likely than White students; (4) 77% of Asian/Pacific Islander applicants are accepted to UC, making them 27% more likely to be admitted than URM students and 11% more likely than White students; and 8
(5) 63% of Asian/Pacific Islander admits enroll, making them 12% more likely to enroll than URM students and 20% more likely than White students. 8
For African American students, only about one ‐ third of those with SAT ‐ total scores below 1800 applied to UC in fall 2016, yet about half of those who apply are admitted, and about half of those who are admitted enroll, suggesting that potential enrollees could be self ‐ selecting out and interventions could be targeted at increasing the number of African American SAT ‐ takers with total scores less than 1800 who apply to UC; e.g., if African American SAT ‐ takers scoring less than 1800 applied, were admitted, and enrolled at the same rates as Asian ‐ Pacific Islander students, there would have been an additional 302 African American freshman in fall 2016. In addition, interventions could be targeted at African American students who are admitted in order to increase the enrollment yield. In a follow ‐ up analysis, we plan to at the college destinations of students who are admitted to UC but chose not to enroll, since, based on their SAT scores, one would assume UC to be an aspiration choice for them. On the other hand, virtually all African American students with scores above 1800 on the SAT apply to UC and virtually all are accepted, yet only about one ‐ half of those scoring between 1800 and 2100 enroll, and only about one ‐ third of those scoring about 2100 enroll. This suggests interventions could also be targeted at increasing the enrollment yield for high ‐ scoring African American SAT ‐ takers, whom we assume have competitive offers 9
from other highly selective institutions. However, were their enrollment rates on par with Asian/Pacific Islanders, which are consistently about 60% for all SAT score bands, there would have been 86 additional high ‐ scoring African American UC enrollees in fall 2016. In summary, if African American UC application, admission, and enrollment rates matched those for Asian/Pacific Islander students, and all other variables were kept constant, there would have been nearly 400 additional African American UC freshman – a 25% increase. For Chicano/Latino students, less than one ‐ third of those with SAT ‐ total scores below 1800 applied to UC in fall 2016, yet, like African American students, about half of those who apply are admitted, and about half of those who are admitted enroll, again suggesting that potential enrollees could be self ‐ selecting out and interventions could also be targeted at increasing the number of Chicano/Latino SAT ‐ takers with total scores less than 1800 who apply to and who enroll at UC; e.g., if Chicano/Latino SAT ‐ takers scoring less than 1800 applied, were admitted, and enrolled at the same rates as Asian ‐ Pacific Islander students, there would have been an additional 4,824 Chicano/Latino freshman in fall 2016. Also, as with African American students, virtually all Chicano/Latino students with scores above 1800 on the SAT apply to UC and virtually all are accepted, yet only about one ‐ half of those scoring between 1800 and 2100 enroll, and only about two ‐ fifths of those scoring about 2100 enroll. This suggests interventions could also be targeted at increasing the enrollment yield for high ‐ scoring Chicano/Latino SAT ‐ takers; were their enrollment rates on par with Asian/Pacific Islanders, there would have been 278 additional high ‐ scoring Chicano/Latino UC enrollees in fall 2016. In summary, if Chicano/Latino UC application and enrollment rates matched those for Asian/Pacific Islander students, and all other variables were kept constant, there would have been more than 5100 additional Chicano/Latino UC freshman – a 45% increase. Were these specific interventions used to close the application and enrollment gaps between URM and non ‐ URM students, we’d already be at about 17,000 of the 30,000 new freshman being URMs. 9
Focusing again on SAT ‐ takers but this time disaggregating by high ‐ school GPA, we can see similar patterns for students with a GPA of 3.0 or higher, which is the minimum GPA for UC eligibility. However, while there are opportunities to increase application rates and enrollment rates for African American and Chicano/Latino SAT ‐ takers with GPAs of 3.0 to 3.5, as well as enrollment rates for URM SAT ‐ takers with GPAs between 3.5 and 4.0, who are already very likely to apply, it turns out that only about two ‐ thirds of African American SAT ‐ takers and one ‐ half of Chicano/Latino SAT ‐ takers with GPAs above 4.0 even apply to UC, suggesting that UC is losing the opportunity to accept many high ‐ performing URM SAT ‐ takers who aren’t even applying to UC in the first place. As with the last slide, if these specific interventions were used to close the application and enrollment rate gaps between URM and non ‐ URM students, and if the number of UC enrollees were kept constant, these interventions would have also resulted in about 17,000 of the 30,000 new freshman in fall 2016 being URMs – a 40% increase. In addition, HS GPA is widely considered to be the best predictor of college ‐ preparation, and, unlike SAT scores, there are significant numbers of URMs students in all GPA bands, meaning any one of these interventions by itself could already have a significant impact on UC diversity. 10
Now that we’ve seen the statewide context, we’ll close with some questions for you to consider, as a way of moving from context to actionable steps. 11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Recommend
More recommend
