GPA Necessary For HYPSM At Big 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

That is a lie.

UCB is 4% AA and UCLA is 6%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

That is a lie.

UCB is 4% AA and UCLA is 6%.

The enrolled student population at University of California-Los Angeles (110662), both undergraduate and graduate, is 26.6% White, 26.2% Asian, 20% Hispanic or Latino, 6.23% Two or More Races, 3.62% Black or African American, 0.213% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.157% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders.

“The enrolled student population at University of California-Berkeley, both undergraduate and graduate, is 30.3% Asian, 22.9% White, 17.5% Hispanic or Latino, 5.48% Two or More Races, 2.52% Black or African American, 0.139% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.135% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders.”

https://datausa.io/profile/university/university-of-california-berkeley#:~:text=Enrollment%20by%20Race%20%26%20Ethnicity&text=The%20enrolled%20student%20population%20at%20University%20of%20California%2DBerkeley%20is,Hawaiian%20or%20Other%20Pacific%20Islanders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

Why?

Because I’m Black and that’s the group I’m most interested in knowing about on these campuses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

But it is a state school. The state is 5% black and they limit the number of OOS students enrolling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

Why?

Because I’m Black and that’s the group I’m most interested in knowing about on these campuses.

Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

But it is a state school. The state is 5% black and they limit the number of OOS students enrolling.

2 to 5% is still way less than 5%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

That is a lie.

UCB is 4% AA and UCLA is 6%.

The enrolled student population at University of California-Los Angeles (110662), both undergraduate and graduate, is 26.6% White, 26.2% Asian, 20% Hispanic or Latino, 6.23% Two or More Races, 3.62% Black or African American, 0.213% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.157% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders.

“The enrolled student population at University of California-Berkeley, both undergraduate and graduate, is 30.3% Asian, 22.9% White, 17.5% Hispanic or Latino, 5.48% Two or More Races, 2.52% Black or African American, 0.139% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.135% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders.”

https://datausa.io/profile/university/university-of-california-berkeley#:~:text=Enrollment%20by%20Race%20%26%20Ethnicity&text=The%20enrolled%20student%20population%20at%20University%20of%20California%2DBerkeley%20is,Hawaiian%20or%20Other%20Pacific%20Islanders.

We are talking undergrad here.

UC Berkeley: “We are 4% black”

https://diversity.berkeley.edu/reports-data/diversity-data-dashboard

UCLA: “We are 6% black”

https://www.ucla.edu/about/facts-and-figures

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

Why?

Because I’m Black and that’s the group I’m most interested in knowing about on these campuses.

Do you think a person who is not Black should be interested in knowing about the Black population on these campuses?