On Sunday, we lamented the fact that Nevada regents last week got cold feet over raising admission standards at the state's two major, four-year universities, UNLV and UNR.

The regents -- cowed by defenders of mediocrity who claim higher requirements would be elitist or even racist -- put off for at least another month a decision on demanding that incoming freshman earn at least a 3.0 GPA in high school in order to enroll at either institution. (The GPA standard would be waived for those who achieved a reasonable score on either the ACT or SAT.)

Also last week, Nevada higher education officials revealed that the state was near the bottom when it came to college graduation rates in the West.

The state's community college students were dead last out of 15 states in terms of graduation rates, while just 45 percent of Nevada freshman students enrolled at UNLV or UNR in 1998 had earned a diploma by 2004. (UNR was at 49 percent, UNLV was at 42 percent.) That was fourth from the bottom in the West.

Do you suppose the lax admission standards and the poor graduation rates are related?

In fact, it's been an embarrassment for the past few years that a significant percentage of freshman who earn the state's coveted Millennium Scholarship -- essentially free tuition at a state college for those who achieve a 3.0 GPA at a Nevada high school -- have had to take either remedial math or English upon enrolling at UNLV or UNR.

Yes, graduation rates can be deceptive -- especially at community colleges. People change plans, they transfer to different schools, they may enter the work force planning to return years later to finish their course work.

But if entrance requirements at UNLV and UNR remain unchallenging, the schools will inevitably continue to attract too many students who simply aren't prepared for the work required at a four-year institution. Graduation rates will remain low.

That doesn't do the students -- or taxpayers and the community -- a bit of good.