Admission cap suggested

Cal State Long Beach officials should limit the number of new freshme n who do not meet admission requirements, according to a faculty report that has sparked criticism of the university's minority recruitment efforts.

The report, released in May, concludes that students who do not meet admission requirements should be capped at 15 percent of new freshmen because these special admissions are more likely to drop out of the university than students who meet admission criteria. President Robert Maxson said the 15 percent seems reasonable.

Nearly 25 percent of las t fall's new freshmen did not meet minimum standards for admission, and that percentage has been growing in recent years.

The study also suggests stepping up recruitment efforts to attract better students and providing more counseling and support services to all students so that fewer drop out.

Some professors and college deans support the report's conclusions, and add that allowing too many special admissions burdens the university with students who are unprepared to do college-level work.

"If we bring [students] who are ill-prepared to be here and we simply flunk them out, we haven't helped them and we haven't helped the state," said C.J. Walter, dean of the College of Business Administration.

Any cutback could be sensitive, howe ver, because part of the goal of special admissions is to increase minority enrollment. About 85 percent of the students admitted under special circumstances are minority.

Administrators argue that the university is obligated to make admissions exc eptions because these students otherwise have few chances to earn a college degree.

"It's the university's responsibility to serve the communities that support it," said Doug Robinson, vice president for Student Services. "If they come from econom ically disadvantaged communities, so be it."

Instead of limiting the percentage of special admissions, advising and tutoring should be bolstered to keep students from failing, Robinson said.

The percentage of special admissions among CSULB's new freshmen has grown from 11 percent in fall 1989 to 22 percent last fall. In actual numbers, the growth is not so dramatic: as the freshman class shrank from 2,579 to 1,566 over that period, fewer of the regularly admitted students ended up enrolling, o fficials said.

Across the 20-campus California State University system, the average percentage of special admissions among first-time freshmen rose over the same period from 13 percent in 1989 to 18 percent last fall.

Standards required of most CSU incoming freshmen consist of a high school diploma, a "C" grade average in college-preparatory courses and a "B" average in all subjects. Students who have worse than a "B" average must compensate by scoring high on a standardized test such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test.

Transfer students, a category that represents most of CSULB's new students, are seldom exempted from admission requirements, school officials said.

The report's recommendations have prompted Maxson to set up a special committee of administrators, faculty and staff members and a student to discuss the issue. And in his 1994-95 budget, Maxson set aside $50,000 to improve freshmen advising to discourage students from dropping out.

He added that limiting special adm issions to 15 percent sounds reasonable, but he has not decided whether to take that step.

"I think it's wrong to take in any student who is academically weak ... that you're not willing to provide some support service to help them get up to speed," Maxson said.

Some professors want to limit the number and percentage of special admissions because these students require resources that the university cannot afford, such as small remedial classes and intensive tutoring, which detract from opportunities afforded other students.

A better starting place for high school graduates who do not meet the CSU's admission standards, they say, is community colleges.

"We don't have the funds to help everyone," Walter said. "The community colleges are simply better prepared to handle less-prepared students."

History professor David Hood agreed, adding that enrolling students who are not ready to attend a university could backfire for them and the university alike.

"You have to ensure access and ensure [minority] representation ... [but] at the same time you have to maintain a certain level of academic performance," said Hood, who worked on the report. "I'm not sure it's good for (special admissions) students to invite them into an atmosphere into which 75 percent of them are going to fail."

Administrators, however, fear that the alternative for these students - starting at a community college - doesn't provide enough encouragement for academically weak students.

"There are (academically under prepared) students who in some cases would be better off coming to a four-year school," said Keith Polakoff, associate vice president for Academic Affairs. "I don't think we can be the primary providers (for these students), but I do think we have to do our part."

One focus of the report that both sides can agree on is the need to change freshmen recruitment practices.

In the past, the university has worked hard to draw freshmen from local high schools that tend to produce few college graduates. This should be continued, the report said, but there should be a new effort to reach the kind of students who can afford to choose which university to attend.

"It's the best qualified students who have been going elsewhere and not coming to us," said Dorothy Goldish, chair of the university's Academic Senate. "We'd like to see an expansion in the recruiting efforts."

Alma Salazar, Associated Students vice president, said she would resist limiting the number of special admissions because it would effectively deny many students a college education. Instead, she supports increasing support services to improve graduation rates.

"There's a lot of students who are borderline (when they decide) whether to come to a university," Salazar said. "People who come in through special admissions see that they have potential to succeed in the university."

The report was commissioned by university Provost Karl Anatol in response to a survey of graduation rates across the nation. According to the 1993 survey by the National Collegiate Athletic Association, 52 percent of public university students nationwide graduate within six years. Only 36 percent of CSULB students graduate within six years, the survey said.

As members of the faculty commission put together their report, special admissions were especially scrutinized because of their high drop-out rate. According to the report, 74 percent of special admissions drop out within six years, as compared to 51 percent of regularly admitted students.