I think both are likely true, and to some extent two sides of the same coin. But this article from 2018 definitely supports and expands upon your points (gift link):
I think Merced is setting a good example in terms of how to attract first-gen students, students of color, etc. I just think that the “white flight” effect can be an unintended consequence that amplifies the demographic impact of these efforts. It stands to reason that people who are accustomed to the comfort of being “centered” may find an environment where they are less so, uncomfortable.
Reading through that article is interesting as Merced has already come a long way since 2018! However, this paragraph caught my eye:
The number of applicants from the Central Valley to the U.C. system have more than doubled since the Merced campus opened, many the first in their families to take that step.
This demonstrates how succesful UC Merced has been at expanding the applicant pool, the fourth point in the NYT article that started this thread.
At least at our Bay Area school the demographics of students attending UC Merced and Chico State are quite different. Generalizing somewhat, Chico is known as a social “party” school for average kids whose families may have middle class jobs but aren’t going to pay for well known PAC-12 schools like Oregon, Arizona or CU Boulder and who can’t get into higher rated CSU schools like Cal Poly or SDSU. Merced attracts very few kids from our school but is seen as an option by more serious (often first gen) kids for whom attending any UC is a way of becoming upwardly mobile (and don’t get into Davis, Santa Cruz etc and would consider Riverside too far away).
Yes, I think that tracks with what I’m saying. Many of those Chico kids could have gone to Merced but wouldn’t want to; and the Merced kids surely could have gone to Chico… but they self-select for different attributes. I’m not trying to say that the two schools are interchangeable, or anything like that. I was just trying to rebut the idea that the path to diversity is as simple as merely being “less selective.”
Would like to add to these last comments… I work with FGLI HS students, and the UCs are known for better financial aid than the CSUs. So that might be another reason they would choose UC Merced over a CSU.
Demographics (percentages) of some California public universities and 12th grade students for comparison:
School
Pell
Asian
Black
Hispanic / Latino
White
CPSLO
17
14
1
21
51
CPH
49
3
3
31
50
CPP
47
23
3
53
14
CSUB
63
7
4
68
13
CSUC
42
6
3
38
43
CSUFresno
59
12
3
60
16
CSULA
66
11
4
76
4
CSUSac
50
20
6
39
22
CSUSB
60
6
5
71
10
CSUStan
58
9
2
62
18
SDSU
33
13
4
35
34
SFSU
42
24
6
38
15
SJSU
36
39
4
31
13
SSU
34
5
3
41
41
UCB
27
35
2
20
20
UCD
33
31
2
24
21
UCI
38
38
2
27
13
UCLA
27
29
3
22
26
UCM
61
21
5
55
8
UCR
50
37
3
39
11
UCSD
32
34
2
24
19
UCSB
30
19
2
25
31
UCSC
32
23
2
28
32
12th grade
12
5
56
21
The CSUs shown above are some of the more residential ones (CPSLO, CPH, CSUC, SDSU, SSU), plus some of those in major urban areas (CPP, CSULA, CSUSac, SDSU, SFSU, SJSU), plus those in the Central Valley (CSUB, CSUC, CSUFresno, CSUSac, CSUSB, CSUStan). Italic indicates plurality, boldface indicates majority.
Added a few more of the larger CSUs to the above table.
Some observations:
Hispanic / Latino students make up the majority of 12th grade students, and make up the majority of students at many Los Angeles metro and Central Valley CSUs (9 of those listed above) and UCM. Even when underrepresented, Hispanic / Latino students are a significant presence and often a plurality (5 of the CSUs listed above and UCR).
Black students are underrepresented at 8 UCs and 9 of the CSUs listed above. Black students are overrepresented at CSUEB.
Asian students are overrepresented at all UCs and 7 of the CSUs listed above, but underrepresented at 9 of the CSUs listed above. Asian students are the plurality at 5 UCs and 1 of the CSUs listed above.
White students are overrepresented at 3 UCs and 5 of the CSUs listed above, but are underrepresented at 3 UCs and 10 of the CSUs listed above. White students are the majority at 2 CSUs and the plurality at 2 of the CSUs listed above and 2 UCs.
CPSLO has an unusually low percentage of students with Pell grants.
Looks like WSJ won’t allow rankings to be gift linked. Most local libraries have free digital WSJ subscriptions. Here are the top 10 schools for social mobility:
Top Colleges for Social Mobility
The social-mobility ranking considers graduation rates and salaries in the years after graduation, as well as the proportion of students who receive Pell Grants.
After looking at the graphs at the beginning of the article with SAT score on the Y axis and Wealth on the X axis I thought of looking at the issue from a different perspective, one that might not be well received in this forum. Try this thought experiment: replace the variable Wealth with Responsibility (or “Value of Education”, or “Work Ethic”, or whatever you want to call the discipline, drive and sacrifice necessary to excel in academics or any endeavor). Yes, many minorities score low in this metric, but so do many whites. Meanwhile, some minorities excel - look at the data on education, income and wealth for Nigerian immigrants in the US.
Admitting students into schools for which they are not qualified is a fool’s errand. First, it does the under qualified students no favors, as they do not perform well and drop out at comparatively high rates. A student with a 1350 would be better off at Cal Chico where he would likely graduate, than at UC Berkeley, where he has a high chance of dropping out. Second, it does a disservice to the students who earned the grades and test scores that merit admission to UC Berkeley, yet they are rejected because they are of the wrong ethnic background.
And there was no mention of the elephant in the room: if you want to improve the academic and professional success of minority students, it is too late to think about it when they are in high school applying to colleges. My niece works for an NGO that counsels junior high students who are interested in college to help prepare them. The NGO tells them what classes to take, what kind of GPAs and SATs are necessary for specific schools, and they arrange for tutors and test prep. Many of the students enter HS a few steps behind, and often play catch up, which suggests that the process of helping them needs to start earlier in their academic careers.
Recent court cases notwithstanding, universities will find ways to meet their desired affirmative action goals. They can follow the UT Austin model where the top students from all high schools in the state are admitted, regardless of how low their SAT scores and GPAs are. They can follow the Car magazine model. For those not acquainted with UK car magazines, whenever they do comparisons between British cars like Aston Martins and say, Ferraris and Porsches, even if the Astons are trounced in objective performance measures like acceleration, lap times, braking distances, etc. they include a vague, subjective measure like “driving pleasure” that is weighted heavily enough that the editors can get any result they want with this plug number. Amazingly, the Astons always win. I believe some schools already do this with ratings for “personality and leadership” to reach their desired outcomes.
It was an example because people here would be familiar with the relative selectivity of UC Berkeley and Cal Chico. If you would prefer, I could use Western Michigan and UofM.
There was a time, before prop 209 was passed, when this was the case in CA.
For God’s sake, let it go. It was an example - obviously poorly chosen - to demonstrate that a student would be better off attending a school that matched their academic record, rather than a school for which they were not prepared.