Volume XCII, Number
University of Southern California
Tuesday, November 2, 1982
University turns recruiting attention to students
Administrators try to target ‘right kind of student*
By Carmen Chandler
Staff Writer
When people hear about recruiting at the university, they typically think of football. However, there is another side of the recruitment process that has nothing to do with sports. Instead, it is a team of university employees that works to attract academically outstanding high school seniors and transfer students to the university.
The university has increased its efforts to attract new students in hopes of maintaining the 1 percent increase in enrollment it made last year.
A dwindling field of students and increased competition from other institutions have fueled the need for a successful recruitment program, university spokesmen say.
Marketing Program
“We are making a really big effort to keep the enrollment at the slight increase that we made, just 1 percent,” said Mark Johnston, assistant director of marketing and publications.
"We are developing an overall marketing program so we can target specific kinds of students to attend the university. It’s not just a matter of applications, we're trying to get the right kind of student to attend this university,” Johnston said.
Desirable students are those students who have good SAT scores, high grade point averages and a well-rounded background, he said.
Jon Strauss, senior vice president of administration, expressed a view different from Johnston’s. "I don’t think we can categorize any specific kind of student. We have some minimums. A 3.0 average in high school and combined SATs of 1.000.
“We have certainly had some pressures from the academic side to improve these admissions but we can’t get too high. We have got to have minimal norms so students can compete and can contribute,”
he said.
Eddie Ildefonso, associate director of admissions in school relations and the head of the recruitment program, defined a desirable student as someone who “can actively perform and survive on this campus, someone with an average GPA of 3.4: a student with at least a ‘B’ average."
Obtaining Information
Students obtain information about the university in numerous ways. Many students will write the university requesting information. Often, though, the university will use the Student Search Service to locate those students who it thinks will
have an interest in the university or might qualify for admission.
The Student Search Service, sponsored by the Educational Testing Services, provides information about SAT scores and any other information students gave their approval for release of when they took the SAT.
“We are using the student search to get the names of those students interested in the subjects offered by this university,” Johnston said. “We can provide descriptions of where students come from and the number of students from each area. We know what state every student comes from. You
use the student search to identify the type of student you want to get to the university.”
Once a desirable student is located, the university sends him a variety of financial aid literature, a prospectus, posters and letters describing the university.
If the student has expressed some interest in a specific school, then that school will send him information about its programs.
However, the university does not solely rely on the Student Search Service and letters to attract students. It also sends representatives to high schools throughout Southern California (Continued on page 9)
Security finding it hard to solve crimes
By Marc Igler
Assistant City Editor
Out of the more than 2.500 crimes reported to University Security each year, only a miniscule percentage of those are ever solved. Steven Ward, the department’s commanding officer, puts the figure at less than 5 percent.
This circumstance can be largely attributed to the absence of any investigative arm within the department and to the lack of a coordinated and modern system of record keep-
ing.
To counter this problem. University Security submitted a request this year for funds that would be devoted to obtaining a full-time detective position and for an administrative position to help modernize the department’s antiquated record-keeping system. But the request was denied.
Administration officials, in denying the request, said that the need for “high visibility” patrolmen outweighs the need for investigating crimes.
This decision did not go over very well with many of the officers and their superiors, who believe that a law enforcement agency that operates without an investigative division is far from complete and is ultimately incapable of per-■ forming its job.
“I see a desperate need for a detective who would do nothing but investigate crimes,”
said one high-ranking officer who wanted to remain anonymous because he feared losing his job. Officers are prohibited from commenting to the press on internal policy matters.
‘‘There’s no one here who does that.” he said. “There’s no one here who’s even trained to do it.”
University Security currently turns all of its crime reports over to Los Angeles Police Department detectives, who then determine which crimes are important enough to investigate. But because of an immense workload and shortage of manpower, LAPD detectives investigate very few of the crimes reported to University Security.
“LAPD investigates the crimes that it feels are worthwhile, but there’s a huge gap between what we consider worthwhile and what they consider worthwhile,” one officer
said. “In reality, they’re not going to touch a crime that doesn’t involve at least $1,000 or a serious injury.”
Ward agreed. “If nothing else, an investigator on our force would be able to do a lot of the legwork for the LAPD.” An investigator. Ward added, would give a signal to criminals who regard the university as “easy pickings” that their crimes would no longer go unpursued. “USC would no longer be seen as an easy caper,” he said.
This week, 17 new officers will start working for University Security in patrol positions. Chief Ward said he would gladly forfeit two or three of those positions in favor of creating an investigative division within the department.
But Ward said that creating such a divison is “easier said (Continued on page 11)
I WANT TO GROW UP
PLEASE VOTE YES ON PROP. 12
Evaluations of university administrators needed, says Faculty Senate chairman
Staff photo by Robert Heller
CAMPAIGN SPOKESMAN — Little Elizabeth Levy. 21 months, looks too tired to care about the nuclear freeze initiative that Rabbi Richard Levy is promoting for her benefit See page 7, and other election -related articles on pages 4,5 and 11.
By Jeannie Wong
Staff Writer
Students are assessed by midterms and finals. Faculty members are tested by student evaluations. The only ones who are not formally scrutinized are the deans and some administrators, said Don Lewis, president of the Faculty Senate.
“Deans and administrators insist that there be faculty evaluations, and that faculty salary raises be based on merit,” Lewis said. “But they have never been evaluated in a formal way, and it’s time they were.”
In a statement published in the October issue of the university “Faculty Newsletter.” Lewis said that the evaluation plan has been submitted to Cornelius Pings, senior vice president of academic affairs. The goal is to implement the plan by the end of this year. Lewis said. Whether raises would be based on the evaluations is still unknown, he said.
“An evaluation is important because everyone ought to know how they’re doing,” Lewis said. “It allows for corrections and for continuation of strengths.”
The plan calls for Pings to interview each dean personally, as well as by “some relevant senior faculty and a few members of more junior faculty,” Lewis said in the newsletter.
“I think sometimes chairs and faculty can have different points of view and I would like to see the view of faculty members represented independent from the chair.
“There’s some sentiment among faculty members that there is too much emphasis placed on the interview with just a chairman, and that this may produce a bias,” Lewis added.
An initial evaluation plan implemented three years ago received an explosive reaction from deans, Lewis said.
“Last time an evaluation was done, it was done by the Faculty Senate alone,” Lewis added. “That is not right. If it’s to be meaningful, you have to have the administrators involved. Otherwise. it’s only a sampling of opinion.
“I don't know of anything of consequence which came out of it because it wasn’t done formally and the administrators weren’t involved.” he said.
There has been no regulated form of evaluation since then, although informal evaluations have occurred from time to time.
“I guess we have just been moving very slowly,” Lewis said. “Also, the deans didn’t seem very interested in evaluations of themselves.”
Pings said that he is discussing the matter with members of his office and with the members of the executive committees of the Faculty Senate and the council of deans.
“Although it is not clear what role the Faculty Senate will play in this plan, I have every expectation that it will be successful,” Lewis said. “I don’t know why it wouldn’t be."