<p>It seems like the vast majority of users here are transferring from CCCs or UCs, so is there anyone else out there who applied to transfer from a 4 year private?</p>
<p>My results were abysmal: despite having a 3.6 from a top 30 university (out of state, but I'm a CA resident), I got rejected from UCSB, UCSD, UCLA and UCB. Only admitted to Davis, my ultra safety. </p>
<p>This is simply absurd. I know the system is set up to give preference to community college transfers, so I didn't really expect to be accepted to Berkeley or LA...but Santa Barbara??</p>
<p>haha well I already left my previous college (I’m taking kind of a gap year right now), so I don’t have anywhere to go back to. Ridiculously bitter about all of this…</p>
<p>Bingo did you finish all the prereqs or make sure the classes you’ve taken account for the specific requirements of the UC system? I applied to UCSC and UCSD for winter transfer after thinking I had satisfied all of the requirements (specifically the second English class), but they would not count the second English class I had taken at a 4 yr and I was denied. However, I reapplied for Fall 2010 after having taken that English class and I was admitted to UCSD, UCSC, and UCSB. It’s such a bust being lower priority to them just because you did not attend a CC. Sorry to hear about the situation, I was livid when it happened as well.</p>
<p>I understand your frustration, and in that position, I would feel as though the situation is daunting, but you should put yourself in other peoples’ shoes:</p>
<p>1) Davis isn’t by any means some “joke” of the UC’s. It’s very comparable and has very good programs. I was accepted to UCSD, and rejected by Davis and it was a little heart breaking that it happened just because I was missing a couple of pre-requisites, despite my really competitive GPA (3.84)</p>
<p>2) You actually got INTO a UC. This puts you leagues ahead of many other applicants, even some UC-UC applicants and even some CCC applicants. There are people here confused about what to do because they got rejected by every UC they applied to and they’re at a junior college. Next year means part time units for them to complete their pre-requisites.</p>
<p>3) You’re actually AT a four year college. Worst case scenario, you graduate with a little debt, but you still get your four year degree. </p>
<p>The reason the priority was put in place was because CCC students have no other choice. It’s either, transfer or get an associate’s. Again, I understand your frustration, but you got into a UC that a lot of people got rejected from, a lot of CCC students and UC-UC transfers were denied by Davis.</p>
<p>nden: I called about whether I satisfied the pre-reqs, and the admissions reps told me I did. I wasn’t planning on transferring though, so I hadn’t been taking my classes with UC pre-reqs in mind. Nonetheless, that doesn’t appear to be the issue. </p>
<p>Essenar: I do get what you’re saying and I don’t want to come off as sounding like I have major entitlement issues, but…</p>
<p>Yes, Davis is a good school, but not a peer of the school that I was previously attending. Settling kind of sucks…say I was making $10/hr. If my manager changed my wage to $20/hr, I’d be pretty psyched. Not so much if I started off making $30/hr. haha maybe a bad analogy but what I’m trying to say is that some facts can be useless without reference points. </p>
<p>And I realize that the CC preference is there since CC students can only get a 4 year degree if they transfer. But what I’m saying is that there shouldn’t be such a dramatic double standard in admission standards. There are at least a dozen CSU schools that are available for transfer students who aren’t at the top of the academic heap. If Santa Barbara or the other UC’s applied the same standards to CC and non-CC transfer students, the rejected CC students would still have a number of affordable four year schools to choose from that matched their given academic qualifications. </p>
<p>Don’t want to offend anyone with this…I’m probably just being extra combative today b/c I’m still a tad bitter…</p>
<p>The main problem you are facing is that California community colleges have a special relationship with the UC and CSU systems. We have recruiters constantly coming to campus who represent the two systems. Basically, the community colleges were set up to provide two-year undergrad education to transfer into the UC and CSU systems. All are paid for by taxes from California residents. I’m not sure what the order of priority is after community college for transfers, but I <em>think</em> CSU–>UC and UC–>UC (not sure the order) may be considered before oos.</p>
<p>I think if one really wants to get into a top UC one should get rid of his or her pride and attend a CC. If one has financial need, attending one is basically free (BOG, FAFSA,EOPS, etc.)</p>
<p>However, graduating from a cc is harder than others (those who haven’t attended one) think, maybe not academically, but consider this:</p>
<p>1.) living close to home means living by friends; social pressure.</p>
<p>2.) working can cut into time spent on studying or attending class. Some students don’t get lucky and their parents throw them out when they turn 18. no joke. Graduating from the cc becomes an ordeal as going to school competes with food and shelter.</p>
<p>3.) Alot of students who are going to cc are doing everything on their own without their parents paying for everything/supporting them. They are basically trying to be successful without their parents holding their hands.</p>
<p>So why shouldn’t cc students get priority? I for one didn’t have my parents paying for ANYTHING. I was self-motivated and went to school because I wanted to. </p>
<p>If you are already at a 4 year institution that is in the top 30, why complain?<br>
Are you trying to save money?</p>
<p>What makes you think you’re gpa of 3.6 is any better than some of those who attended CC? Just because you’re from a top 30 college doesnt mean ****. Numerous colleges in the top 30 are easier to get into than like Cal/LA/SD. Plus what incentive do they have to accept you over CC kids?</p>
<p>well im in the same situation as bingo, as a CA resident and stuck at a 4-year that i dont want to be at but i’d have to agree with flwrgrl as to why cc students are deserving of a chance at a UC, but at the same time i dont think the “double standard” mentioned by bingo is entirely fair for us out of state transfers either…</p>
<p>i mean for ucsd at least, they made their GPA cutoff this year at 3.8 for oos students so understandably it is frustrating for us to see students that scrape by with TAGS and 3.0 gpa’s and sometimes even 2.8’s in a CC curriculum, whereas there are oos students that have 3.6./3.7 gpa’s that get rejected with no consideration taken that they are faced with a much harder curriculum.</p>
<p>thats just my thoughts behind it, but i dont want to take anything away from the cc students here, because you guys still got your stuff done and in a way sacrificed two years to get here, so you all deserve the opportunity.</p>
<p>I earned my spot. 3.9 overall, with a 4.0 for the major. I was also paying CA taxes (basically funding the ccc, csu, and uc systems) while doing it. I think too many seniors in high school are scared of the “stigma” attached to attending a cc. When you get to be around 23 that stigma disappears lol. I guess I am trying to give advice to seniors who got rejected by the UC of their but who got into/settled into a OOS college. Don’t give up the dream :)</p>
<p>At the end of the day, attending a cc to get into a UC won’t cheapen the UC degree at all. Think of it as earning life points.</p>
<p>*What makes you think you’re gpa of 3.6 is any better than some of those who attended CC? Just because you’re from a top 30 college doesnt mean ***.</p>
<p>Because someone at a community college can TAG at UCSB and they’d only need a 3.0 GPA to get in. I think one of the issues that TAG minimums haven’t been increased proportionally with the increase in applications. UCSB has gotten many more applications the last few years, TAG requirements have been fairly stagnant over that same time period. Since UCSB is required to take all TAG applicants, that leaves less space for higher qualified non-TAG applicants.</p>
<p>I had a 4.0 at my 4-year and I was so determined to get into Cal and UCLA that I left my 4-year and went to a CCC for a year. It even saved me money!</p>
<p>I’m not trying to imply that CC transfers aren’t all qualified. All you guys with 3.9’s or whatever deserve to get in. What I’m saying is that accepting a 2.9 over a 3.6 just because they went to a community college is absurd. I realize that there is a special relationship between the UCs, CSUs and CCCs, but facilitating entry from CCCs by providing advising and transferable courses and such is VERY different than discriminating against applicants through different admissions standards because they AREN’T from a CCC. </p>
<p>I’m paying the taxes in CA to fund the UC’s just like all you are and I deserve the same chance as everyone else does to have a shot at public universities that I’m qualified for. </p>
<p>Also I dunno why the “stigma” of CC is relevant here. Without getting too much into the “is going to CC a cop-out” debate, CC->UC is a valid option…however, CC–>UC isn’t the right path for everyone, just like going straight to a UC isn’t the right path for everyone. (For what it’s worth, I’m transferring for a number of reasons, the most important being financial considerations as well as fit…I’m a CA kid at heart, and the east coast kinda sucked haha).</p>
<p>Also…arrowhead…dunno what you’re smoking, but there are very few people who would agree that a 3.6 at a top 30 college is the same as a 3.6 at a CC, especially in the humanities.</p>
<p>I am sorry that the East Coast didn’t work out well.
I can only imagine it being a nightmare being at a place that doesn’t feel right. Have you thought of maybe coming back to cali and taking a few CCC classes? Then your chances may change </p>
<p>Yes. And you could even write about how you realized that after having lived on the East Coast you felt that you could contribute more to the community where you were raised . . .or something like that.</p>
<p>Huh? The priority that CCC students get is the entire premise of my argument. Of course they get priority; what I’m saying is that this priority takes place at the exclusion of equally qualified candidates and is unfair/frustrating.</p>
<p>flwgrl: Yeah, I’m actually back in CA now taking a couple CC classes (can’t take any more or I’ll go over the unit cap for transfer). And that’s actually kinda what I wrote one of my essays on…ya know…how I took a risk and explored something different, but it wasn’t for me.</p>
<p>Oh well, what’s done is done. I just like arguing about stuff (haha studying for the LSATs and need some practice), so I thought I’d see what other people thought about the subject.</p>
hence the word some. I didnt mean to say that your gpa of 3.6 is equal to those at a CC. Because its a CC, the range in terms of level of kids getting a 3.6 is huge. There are those who take easyass classes and get a 3.6 and those who take extensive prereqs. I didnt mean to offend you personally i’m just saying you make it sound as if you should have priority with a 3.6 from a 4 year college over all CC kids with a 3.6</p>
<p>@rc, i dont really have an opinion on TAG cuz i didnt tag and got rejected by SB. but yea your perspective makes sense, I just dont like the generalizations</p>
<p>I’m having trouble following your logic. If CCC’s receive priority then a natural side effect in the outcome of acceptances is the apparent deflation of 4-year transfers’ credentials.</p>
<p>Equally qualified 4-year transfers are not being excluded; 4-year transfers are simply facing a lower priority for an insufficient amount of spots.</p>
<p>And, by the way, my friend, I understand your anger and I am very sorry things didn’t work out for you. I am simply defending the system but I am not trying to endorse the denial of people like you, who are very well qualified for Cal and UCLA. It is a shame that anyone who is qualified should be denied. My belief in the system (as it is) is based on sociological reasons and takes into account the unfortunately limited amount of available spots at the top UCs.</p>
</p>