I’m sure many you are aware of the July 7 UC Santa Cruz “accept/rescind” letters that went to many of this fall’s first year students. There was great frustration and very little transparency about why this happened. Considerable time was spent by NACAC and WACAC leaders to help change the original policy for many students who deserved an appeal but were denied.
Chancellor Blumenthal’s letter follows. Our hope was that the 370 students he mentioned would all be reaccepted. While that didn’t happen, I do appreciate his transparency regarding how many students were affected.
- 370 students were denied based on a missed deadline (through no fault of their own).
- 251 were finally admitted for fall.
- The remaining 119 students have been offered admission for winter quarter.
Kris Zavoli, Chair, Government Relations, WACAC
**********************************************************************************************************************************
To: Chancellor’s Cabinet, Senate Executive Committee, and Deans
From: Chancellor George Blumenthal, UCSC
Re: Undergraduate Admissions
At UC Santa Cruz, our mission is to provide opportunity to students, not deny it. This summer, however, nearly 800 admitted first-year students saw their admission rescinded—an outcome that generated profound disappointment for many who aspired to join us this fall.
While some students are cancelled for academic shortfalls in their final year of high school, 530 were cancelled this summer based on a missed deadline, and 370 of those students appealed our decision. Of those who appealed, 251 students were reinstated for Fall 2015 because their failure to meet our deadline was through no fault of their own and because they maintained the level of academic achievement expected. Notably, there was a similar distribution of impacted students across various demographics such as first generation status, ethnicity and income levels. For example, of all students who met all requirements, 43.1% were first generation and of all students who missed a deadline, 33.8% were first generation. Today, I am writing about the remaining students, whose appeals were denied.
Despite the fact that the campus was very clear about our deadlines and sent several reminder messages, many people felt that the punishment—cancellation of admission—did not fit the crime. In light of the very real possibility that some students were misinformed by others, confused about our requirements, or missed the deadline by only a few days, the campus has reconsidered the cancellation for students whose appeals were unsuccessful. Today, we are sending offers of admission for Winter Quarter 2016 or Fall Quarter 2016 to 111 of those students who maintained the level of academic achievement expected and submitted the required records.
In short, nearly all of the 370 students who appealed based on a missed deadline have received, or will receive today, an opportunity to be a UC Santa Cruz student.
I believe it’s the right thing to do to offer enrollment to students who made every reasonable effort to follow the rules but may have received conflicting information from a variety of sources about what was required and when. At the same time, our campus communications have been clear and consistent, and it is reasonable to expect incoming college students to comply with those rules. This is and should be a teachable moment for both the campus and those who aspire to enroll here.
This has been a trying time for our aspiring students as well as colleagues in Undergraduate Admissions, and other areas of the campus. As always, our undergraduate admissions policies are the product of agreements reached jointly by the Division of Undergraduate Education and the Senate Committee on Admissions and Financial Aid; each year, our policies and procedures are established before any students are admitted. Our job isn’t done until both the campus and our aspiring students are well-served by that effort.
Looking ahead, it’s paramount that we protect our future applicants and their families from the heartache and disappointment experienced by so many this summer. I assure you those discussions are well underway.
Signed,
George Blumenthal
Please help me understand the teachable moment here. One of my students had his admission rescinded by UC Santa Cruz; it was reinstated upon appeal. We had one week between the date we entered final grades and mailed final transcripts and the July 1 deadline for Santa Cruz. From the high school standpoint, we often have students who report transcripts that were never received. We are told to “to be patient, if you mailed it, we’ll get it.” Nearly every time, the missing transcript turns up at the campus. This particular student was diligent, organized, and extremely persistent–which I believe is the only reason his appeal was successful. When he realized that his transcript really was not received, he was able to contact me via cell phone while I was on vacation in order to get me back in town to help deal with this appeal–the day after he missed his deadline. So, again, what exactly should this student have come away with after this experience? He was devastated and ended up with a really bad feeling about UCSC. I’m not sure how we can avoid this same issue next year–we’re going to have the same 7 days between final grades posted and the July 1 deadline. No room for error or slow post. God forbid the counselor leave town in June or July. I would seriously love to see UC accept electronic transcripts. Then we, the counselors, actually have a little control.
Erin, Thanks for your post and for your description of the problem with UCSC’s final transcript deadline. It is my understanding that all students who had the difficulty you describe were finally admitted to UCSC. I have forwarded your concern to UC Office of the President. I assume you have already sent it to Chancellor George Blumenthal, UCSC.