Last week, thousands of California high school seniors received the disappointing news that they were refused admission to one or more of the University of California’s ten campuses. These taxpayer-built public universities are some of the finest in the nation and competition for admission to each is stiff. It is certainly no disgrace to have received a rejection letter or to have been put on a waiting list by any of them.

What is disgraceful is UC’s confession that it routinely admits between 250 and 300 student-athletes who do not achieve minimum grades and test scores. These campuses quietly use an “admission-by-exception” policy that enables them to accept some underperforming students over those who could legitimately compete for admission. UC Berkeley granted 63 such exceptions in 2007, about two-thirds of whom were athletes. UCLA admitted 167 ineligible students last year, the majority of them athletes. Fewer admission exceptions were granted by UC campuses that do not compete in Division I athletics.

Sue Wilbur, the UC system’s undergraduate admissions director defended the policy as a means of promoting diversity.

“It’s not as if we are admitting students who are uni-dimensional,” she explained.

Apparently, the UC system believes that high school grades, standardized test scores, application essays, school and volunteer activities, employment records and teacher and employer recommendations are “uni-dimensional.” Athletic ability is evidently important enough to the school’s academic mission to trump these “uni-dimensional” considerations and open the door for an otherwise unqualified candidate. Yet no one has been able to explain with a straight face how athletic skills contribute in any way to a university’s academic excellence. That is because college sports have everything to do with entertainment and nothing to do with learning.

The reality is that few college athletes ever make it to the professional ranks. It is bad enough that those among them who did not meet minimum admission standards took the place of more deserving applicants. It is worse when they squander the unfair advantage bestowed upon them and fail to graduate. Graduation rates are 13 percent lower for athletes admitted at UC Berkeley and 21 percent lower for those accepted at UCLA. Many of those who do not deserve admission but somehow manage to graduate do so on the basis of watered-down curriculum in majors that will offer them little chance for employment.

Don’t get us wrong. We like watching college sports as much as anyone. But we also want to take pride in our tax-supported institutions of higher learning. We want to believe that they are meritocracies that reward high academic achievers and those who study hard.

How does one explain to a hard-working high school senior with superb academic qualifications that he or she cannot attend their public college of choice because an academically-ineligible athlete needed their spot?

Go ahead, UC administrators, explain.