UCT Admissions Policy Proposals

1. UCT Admissions Policy Proposals QUICK SUMMARY

2. Background • Overview of the current policy • Successes and challenges of current policy • Proposed hybrid model • the implications of applying the hybrid model to the 2013 applicant pool • Myths to be dispelled

3. Current Policy • Stage 1 (policy): (for each programme) • Set race targets to increase diversity • Set minimum academic threshold • Stage 2 (procedure): • All applicants self classify and allocated to race categories. • Ranked by marks. Top # selected.

4. Some consequences of current policy • Selects students with top potential from all groups – recognised that marks not reliable measure of merit • Historically it was fair – race aligned with disadvantage (black people mostly poor and poor schooling, vs white) • Made progress in most areas of diversity • Most black students would not have been admitted in absence of affirmative action

5. Criticism of current system Fundamental dilemma: Do we de-racialise SA society by using race as the basis of redress, aiming to benefit communities racially defined and not primarily individual fairness (i.e. UCT’s current policy) OR Do we advance to a non-racial society by avoiding race classification, treating people equitably as individuals rather than by virtue of their membership of a race group - no preferential treatment based just on race Proposed policy represents a balance of the two

6. Changed circumstances permit adaptation of policy • Changing access to schools means many black students now don’t need affirmative action to be selected • Increasing unfairness: students with same socioeconomic and educational background treated differently because of race • Some misrepresent their race or can’t be classified in ‘New SA’

7. The Hybrid Model

9. Some criteria of disadvantage Through statistical analysis, we have identified the following usable indicators • quality of school • education of an applicant’s mother • education level of an applicant’s father • education level of applicant’s grandparents • language spoken by mother at home • financial indicators, such as whether the applicant’s family receives a social pension or child support grant.

10. Design of Disadvantage Index • Award up to 10 points for disadvantage in Home background OR School background – whichever is greater • Home background: • based on Education of parents and grandparents (No university education = more points) • Primary caregiver home language not English or Afrikaans • Social grant • School background: • School in top 10% = 0; • Increasing points until schools in bottom 70%=10

11. Disadvantage weighting • Disadvantage index (between 0 and 10) is a percentage increase of the Faculty points score E.g. if points = 70% and disadvantage index = 10, Then final Weighted Point Score = 70 + (10% x 70) = 77 So still merit ranking, but weighted by disadvantage

12. Applying the Hybrid Model

13. Some advantages • Substantial portion of class selected without regard to their race • Flexible – Band C (race-based) enables topping up to achieve race targets • Selects top students from disadvantaged backgrounds black and white – who may not have been selected • Increases socio-economic diversity of class • Fairer to students who are equally privileged

14. Dispelling myths • We are not discarding race. • Targets and monitoring are based on race • Race remains the basis for selecting a proportion of the class • Disadvantage-weighting strongly favours those discriminated against under apartheid • We will increase, not decrease the number of black and coloured students