@InfoQuestMom, I think that for the most competitive majors (like CS) at both high-end and mid-level UC’s now, all the applicants who have a shot will have tippy-top stats, and then it becomes holistic, and when it’s holistic, the results may seem random (like at Ivies/equivalents).
@PurpleTitan, absolutely this, although I’d say it extends to a fair number of majors from what I’ve seen this year. I know a student who got into Berkeley, but was waitlisted at UCSD and not even waitlisted at UCLA. And another denied at UCSD and Berkeley and accepted at UCLA. And so many other examples this year–denied at Davis but accepted in CS at UCSD and SLO. It’s clear with this many high achieving applicants that they can’t go just by stats, but the determinations can seem random, though they must make sense from the individual campus’s perspective.
@knowledgegood : “California in particular has a huge issue with desirable people leaving the state, due to excessive taxation.”
This is not true. Although California has a net out-migration, it continues to have one of the highest retention rates in the country, on a per capita basis. Excerpted from the article linked here: https://www.ocregister.com/2017/11/16/census-142932-more-people-left-california-than-moved-here-in-2016/
“Conversely — and surprising to many California critics — the state does relatively well at keeping its residents. Yes, there is no mass exodus from California. Overall departures to other states did rise by 2.2 percent last year, or 13,980, to 657,690 exits. That’s a national high just ahead of New York and Texas. But on per-capita basis, California’s exits equaled 1.66 percent of the population. And only two states — Michigan and Texas — had a better retention rate.”
It would be interesting to know whether the yield for in-state UC applicants has dropped - perhaps as they “flee” to OOS alternatives. If this actually is a thing, then maybe the UCs can move more merit money into the campuses with the lowest yields to stem the tide.
Ain’t gonna happen. The powers-that-be in this (egalitarian) state do not believe in merit money in the belief that it primarily advantages the advantaged. Plus, making say, Merced heavily discounted or even free, would devalue its brand even further.
Sure, the UC’s do offer a handful of Regent’s scholarships, but those are only a few dollars at the big two campuses.
attached is a great merit program at LB State for example, but it has many many critics, and the Prez was pilloried when he started it.
https://www.csulb.edu/university-honors/presidents-scholarships
@bluebayou, however, UCSD offers full-tuition/full-ride merit scholarships.
In addition to those UCSD full-ride scholarships, which I think there are 10, Davis and UCSB have significantly better Regents scholarships than other UCs. Davis offers $7500 per year and in our son’s case they kicked in another $1500 as a Regents stipend or something like that. It was in addition to a bit of FA. That makes tuition there cheaper than a CSU. UCSB offers $6000/year which puts it on par cost-wise with it’s neighbor and rival Cal Poly. The UCSB money is like getting a free year there which is not too bad and Davis is even better. I think those scholarships are more successful in pulling their share of top kids away from the other mid-tier UCs and Cal Poly than they are from UCLA or Cal.
As an example of how the Regents can really help financially, at UCSB with a Regents, tuition plus living in university-owned apartments can come to about $18k per year (including food costs) which is a pretty good value these days.
MODERATOR’S NOTE;
There is a way to make one’s point without resorting to ad hominem attacks. Several posts deleted.
yeah, a friend’s kid got one, but they are only a handful (or two), which just makes my point: so few as to essentially be non-existent. In contrast, other public Unis may offer some serious merit $ to 10% of entering Frosh.
But for those recommending that UC increase Merit – just ain’t gonna happen. No way, no how, and it ain’t a budgetary issue.
@bluebayou If disappointed kids are leaving to go to other OOS flagships in sufficient numbers, perhaps the UC will reconsider its position. I haven’t seen evidence that is not anecdotal to support this. Let’s assume that a downward trend does exists for a certain subset of kids (high GPA, high test scores), what is the best way to make the mid-tier UCs attractive enough to keep those kids in state? Up-thread, a parent lamented that he had to send his kid to New Mexico (I think) because the UCs did not provide competitive financial aid. Better financial enticement at the mid-tiers doesn’t solve all the issues raised here, but it will address the issue of kids who prefer to attend a UC, but can’t or won’t because they have a sweeter deal elsewhere.
There are way more than two UCSD Regent’s Scholars. My D and her roommates were all Regent’s Scholars (4) in one dorm room at one of their six colleges. There are likely dozens or even a hundred at UCSD. You may be confusing Regent’s Scholars with UCSD’s program offering admittance to their medical school. There are 10 of those Medical Scholars. If they do the requirements and keep up the GPA, they are admitted to UCSD’s medical school, no MCAT required.
California is overpopulated and has imported a class of people who don’t view academics as a creative endeavor, but as an endless (and meaningless) rote grind to improve scores and grades by a hair. I taught English in S. Korea for a year after undergrad and how California is described now is just like what I saw there.
lol @midwestsahm racist much? We are in California and that “class” of people of whom you speak are some of the hardest working, economy driving folks around.
The fact that UCSD and UCSB offer Regents Scholarships is kind of rubbing salt in the wound of parents who are feeling disappointed that their high stats kid didn’t get in to UCSB or UCSD.
The truth isn’t racist. My children are biracial, Korean/Caucasian, so I’m even sure what you’re getting at – you know, besides a desperate attempt to gaslight this thread. The class and culture of the people California has imported have altered the pre-college landscape in a substantial way. Have UCLA Berkeley UCSD UCSB become better with this frenzy? No. Are teens in California happier than they were 30 years ago? No. Are matriculated students IQs higher? No. It’s all a pointless and damaging misuse of teenage life. Berkeley used to be known as the most creative campus in the world, now faculty I know there tell me it’s all excellent sheep rote robots. @astute12
It seems to me the state of California is pushing most of its best, most creative, most charismatic students to USC, Washington, Arizona, Colorado, Oregon, the Big10…
I am with @midwestsahm whether I agree with him or not.
Can we have any intelligent discussion without everyone yelling out accusations of racism. Are we really that scared of an honest discussion ?
And, the nail has been hit on the head with the question about happiness vs 30 years ago.
Thanks for the perspective @midwestsahm.
@knowledgegood Her*, SAHM stay at home mom
That’s a logical point, but the folks in charge of UC… just…don’t…care. As far as the Regents/politicos are concerned, attending Merced is just as good an education as attending Cal or UCLA, so they have done their job by ensuring that UC options are available to every resident in the top ~12%.
Lots of speculation without an iota of evidence, @midwestahm.
Go on VisaJourney and see just how many legal immigrants – who are accomplished, have sought-after skills – are heading to California once they get their visas.
California got to be the world’s sixth biggest economy because it attracts TALENT. Yes, along with that comes competition for the tippy-top schools.
Frankly, that’s not a bad tradeoff considering the wealth of very good options available for the good, but not tippy-top students.