I’ve seen so much animosity on social media, on various forums, and even liberal friends in California feeling it’s basically impossible for native multi-gen Californians to get their smart kids into Berkeley, UCLA, San Diego, UCSB, UC-Irvine. I believe all campuses are now majority Asian, many first-gen and recent arrivals.
A globally dominating state system built up and paid for over the last 150 years, which their kids are excluded from. Millions of parents paid into the system for generations and now confront out-of-state tuition costs to send their smart accomplished kids to decent colleges.
From what I gather, parents think the one-dimensional “merit” frenzy very common in CA of grinding out perfect A’s, overloading APs, eking out an additional 50-100 points on the SAT, test banks, cram shops, tutoring, rampant cheating due to high-pressure, etc. has nothing to do with IQ.
The way you describes these complaints make them look like barely veiled racism against Asian American students, with all of the usual stereotypes. Note that Asian American students are not the majority at any UC.
The thing about generations makes it seem like they feel entitled to some sort of legacy preference (which UC does not use) or inheritance entitlement. And claims of entitlement via tax payments are less credible after decades of defunding to pay for Proposition 13 and prison space for three strike lifers.
It is frustrating no doubt. My d17 was a fairly ordinary, good, white female student. 4.07 UC GPA, 1390 sat (only took it once), 2 sports, full-time job 3 summers, lots of volunteer tutoring hours, 4 years of leadership andservice in her Girl Scout troop. Stretched herself with full IB and did not get straight As.
Rejected at UCSB and UCSD didn’t even try for LA or Berkeley. At St. Andrews where she made truly excellent grades in her first semester. I have no doubt she would have done equally well at a UC.
I mean, how are they worse off than residents in OR who don’t even have a slim shot at in-state rates at Cal/UCLA/UCSD/UCSB because the top publics there aren’t even at that level?
There are other states where the top publics are roughly at the level of the CalStates.
At least in CA, there is a well-worn CC path to UC’s.
I thought that this issue had more to do with preferential treatment of OOS and international applicants for the coveted slots in engineering and the sciences – in order to bring in more money to the UC system. I believe that a couple of years ago it was shown that the stats for admitted OOS and international students at the UC flagships were significantly lower than those for admitted CA students.
I don’t think its a “one dimensional merit frenzy” at all. I have no problem with the smartest kids in the class getting into the top schools. That’s much better than admissions being determined by legacy, race, etc. Plenty of those smart kids being admitted to Berkeley and UCLA aren’t getting into Ivy League schools because they don’t have the right hooks. I see less resentment over the Berkeley/UCLA results from my kids school than over the top private school outcomes where there are far more disparities between who got in and who is the smartest.
What the statement above doesn’t mention is that the competition is so fierce that the tiebreaker is now in ECs. The NMFs at my kids school were denied at Berkeley and/or UCLA because they didn’t have enough ECs and leadership to add to their 4.0 GPAs and multiple APs (and they were mostly CS/Eng applicants). Ironically the “native multi-gen Californians” ought to have an advantage in identifying good EC opportunities if they have deep roots in the local community.
24,000/30,000 UCLA Undergrads are from California.
African American / Black 5.2%
American Indian / Alaska Native 0.5%
Asian / Pacific Islander 31.6%
Hispanic 21.3%
White 26.1%
domestic, race/ethnicity unknown 3.5%
international 11%
49.8% Hispanic or Latino of any race (other categories are for those who are not Hispanic or Latino)
13.4% Asian (including Filipino listed separately in the above table)
05.8% Black
27.3% White
Looks like Latino students are very underrepresented at UCLA while Asian students are very overrepresented, but black and white students are not all that different in their percentages at UCLA versus California HS graduates.
As a CA resident, I do understand the frustrations with qualified kids not getting into the UC system. It’s incredibly hard to even guess which ones you will actually be accepted into. The kids see a lot of inequality… not in regards to race but grade and test scores.
Example, my son was waitlisted at UCI, a school he was well positioned to get into while the boy he tutors in HS was accepted with lower GPA and 400 points lower on his SAT. Only one student at his school was accepted into Berkeley this year and she has very low stats. Now, I’m sure these kids are deserving in other ways and We don’t begrudge them their opportunity. It’s just frustrating that a strong and motivated student really can’t count on the UC’s today and they should be able to.
My son is one of the lucky ones with a Mom that does her homework and enough resources to have some great and even more affordable private options out of state. Perhaps the UC’s can sense that… I don’t know. Who I really feel for is the bright and capable kids who have to stay home for financial reasons or need to stay close due to ailments or family situations. It totally sucks to get shut out of the system that allows you to do that. I suppose the winners are the lower ranked CSU’s who will snatch up many of these kids who see them as a last resort.
When it’s said that these kids are “shut out of the UC system” are they talking about the entire UC system, including Merced? Or is it that they were not admitted to the UC that they preferred?
“Under the policy, the first of its kind at UC, nonresident enrollment will be capped at 18 percent at five UC campuses. At the other four campuses where the proportion of nonresidents exceeds 18 percent — UC Berkeley, UC Irvine, UCLA and UC San Diego — nonresident enrollment will be capped at the proportion that each campus enrolls in the 2017–18 academic year.”
So, it seems that the legislation simply prevented things from getting worse, rather than to turn the tide.
Well, I do think our public schools should do less holistic admissions and more inclusion. If you have an ACT score and GPA of a certain level, you should have an affordable public option with a meaningful peer group. And by less holistic admission, I don’t mean having some level of understanding about quirks in a GPA or those kind of things. It’s more like deciding the kid with the lower GPA that had a compelling story in their essay is more worthy of a higher quality education and more meaningful peer group than the kid with the higher stats that maybe doesn’t write as strong of an essay.
If there are high stat kids literally being left in the dust and not having options through the public system, programming should expand for those higher levels. Since our public schools are state driven, they should be serving the needs of their residents first. I do wish there were more options for reciprocity. I’m glad to live in a state that does have some reciprocity.
“Well, I do think our public schools should do less holistic admissions and more inclusion.”
Less holistic than what? What does “more inclusion” mean in this context @MusakParent? Does anyone think that the UCs are more “holistic” (i.e. less stats driven) than comparable private schools? For a start neither race nor demonstrated interest are factors in UC admission decisions.
But I don’t think public schools should treat applications like private schools. I think they are probably similarly holistic now. I think private schools have the luxury of hand picking their student body in terms of diversity in terms of interests, potential major, race, geographical origin, etc. I don’t think state schools should be hand picking like this. I do think it is unfair if a taxpayer’s high stat kid ends up in a community college. I am not a California resident, so I’m really thinking of this in pretty abstract terms. Not every family has the resources to even explore private schools.
@MusakParent:
“I do think it is unfair if a taxpayer’s high stat kid ends up in a community college.”
The top 9% in CA are guaranteed a UC. Is it the UC’s fault if CA kids turn their nose up on Merced (even though it is as good as the top public in some other states)?