The Joint API Legislative Caucus has concerns that the proposed UC eligibility and admissions policy, which has wide ranging ramifications and unknown consequences, has not received the proper public vetting it deserves. The current proposal has only been available for public review for a few months before being presented to the UC Regents for a decision. Outreach regarding the eligibility proposal to the Joint API Legislative Caucus, API civil rights organizations, or API higher education associations has been non-existent. - Letter from Joint API Legislative Caucus to UC Regents, 02.03.09
Hello again, fair readers! Sorry that this post is going up a little later than the last ones have. After the long weekend, I had to go back to school/work. Today, we're gonna review the last point in the Caucus' letter. I hate to be a stickler and be kinda repetitive, but in the first sentence of the paragraph, I need to correct that the new policy is not regarding admissions. It defines who is Entitled to Review in the UC admissions process. So it's an admissions eligibility policy. But I digress back to earlier posts.
And really, what the Caucus is saying hits on a broader issue of how the UC conducts its business (public shared governance? PFFFFT! Whatever!) and how AAPI's engage with the UC... and really how AAPI's aren't very organized in articulating AAPI interests in education policy making overall.
Yup! We're gonna critique the UC governance structure, but then take a self-reflexive turn. After all, self-reflexivity and dialogue are the keys to community progress! Corny? Yet so true... so Freirean