BY DENNIS ARGUELLES

The 10th anniversary of the 1992 civil unrest in Los Angeles should be cause for the examination of many issues: the endemic corruption and abuses of the LAPD, the continued devastation of our inner cities by economic globalization and capital flight, the Draconian public policies that have failed to address societal poverty and inequality, and the competition for scarce resources that often manifests itself as racial and ethnic conflict.

But equally important questions for UCLA are: Where are we 10 years later? What has the UCLA community done to address the issues that led to the unrest? What grade do we deserve for being an institution engaged, involved and relevant to the issues facing our community? After working on campus for two years, my simple answer is that there's still so much we can do.

Of course, there is also much for which the university should be proud. In the area of research, institutes such as the Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies, the Center for the Study of Urban Poverty and the Center for Healthier Children, Families and Communities, just to name a few, have done much to inform the public and help develop more progressive and forward-thinking public policy. Grade: A-.

As for access to the university, the admit rate of underrepresented students has declined from its high in the late '80s and early '90s, but the university announced a slight increase for next fall. While it has not been a national leader on the issue, the campus has tried to maintain diversity against the onslaught of attacks on affirmative action, immigrant rights and other issues that marked the '90s. Placing less weight on biased tests such as the SAT is a positive step, but we have yet to see what impact this will have on the makeup of our student population. Grade: B.

At the risk of sounding trite, I believe the most important part of my undergraduate and graduate education at UCLA was what I learned off campus. Combining community service with learning may sound like the domain of only applied or professional teaching programs, but I've seen examples of other disciplines that need to be expanded. More initiative is needed from individual departments, rather than relying on such programs as the Center for Experiential Education and Service Learning. It seems only two courses this quarter attempt to deal with the 1992 civil unrest: a service-learning course in Asian-American studies and a one-unit seminar in women's studies. Grade: C+.

Chancellor Albert Carnesale's "UCLA in LA" initiative is an important step toward strengthening the often-discussed but seldom implemented third mission of the UC: service. While numerous faculty members apply their research and participate directly in efforts to improve the community, this continues to receive little recognition from the academy. Service by faculty is often defined as participation on departmental committees, rather than engagement in the local community. No wonder the "ivory tower" image remains so persistent. Grade: C.

I hope the 10th anniversary of one of the most devastating episodes of civil unrest in our city's and nation's history gives us pause and encourages us to examine how UCLA is making L.A. a better place. To borrow the words of César Chávez: "The end of all education should surely be service to others."

Arguelles is assistant director of the Asian American Studies Center. Last quarter, he taught a service-learning course titled "Ten Years After the 1992 Civil Unrest: Race Relations and Community Building in Los Angeles."