I get that the UC system has fans, and it has detractors who have a legitimate beef about its admissions policies and practices. But why, now, the snobbery? Thirty-six pages in, and the new complaint is a variation on Mean Girls, “but you’ll never be as good as us (private schools).”
I don’t get why anyone would go out of their way to poo-poo a public education, especially since it’s the only option some American students have. Most people can’t get into an Ivy, and some who do get in, don’t want to be full-pay if they get into Cal or UCLA, or maybe they just like being around non-snobby people. Public schools may be second rate to you, but for many, it’s the best their money can buy and we’re quite proud of it.
The success of a public school system should be one most democracies encourage and support. Why are some so quick hate on a system that is among the best in the world, even with its flaws.
so Berkeley is academically stronger has more Nobel Laureates and is higher ranked on the world college list than UCLA. It will always be on top of the heap. UCLA gets more applicants because GPA is usu lower to get in and more students think they have a better shot therefore at UCLA over Berkeley so with the denominator of applicants larger, UCLA will look more selective. Both are good schools, but Berkeley has more of an “ivy” reputation in CA, in the US and on the world stage. I have no horse in the race. Hubby is a bruin and daughter is a golden bear. I also have a Sagehen.
Sorry @preppedparent, but UCLA ties with or beats out Berkeley in a number of watershed international and national rankings right now. Also, UCLA’s 2018 acceptance rate was 14%, compared to Berkeley’s 16%. And if you want to look at GPAs and SAT/ACT scores, they are essentially identical.
The days of flippantly saying that Berkeley is just obviously better are over. UCLA has caught up. (Also, when over 6,000 colleges are being considered, and two schools are ranked within 10-15 spots of each other, can we all agree that that is essentially a tie?)
I think I addressed the disparity in acceptance rates. Because stats are generally lower at UCLA, more kids apply hoping for a shot; hence the denominator of applicants is bigger while the numerator of acceptances is the same. I don’t know if selectivity necessarily correlates with “better school.” I think other indicators like Nobel Laureates and national and international rankings are good indicator. Berkeley has years on UCLA in the national rankings, international too.
sorry, to you.
“The success of a public school system should be one most democracies encourage and support. Why are some so quick hate on a system that is among the best in the world, even with its flaws.”
Public Universities are underfunded by the states (state legislatures also hold down in-state tuition, which is very popular for state residents, but causes problems for the university)
Public Universities are oversubscribed (trying to make up for this underfunding, and many states limit the ability of publics to take OOS full pay students further exacerbating the problem.
This is especially prevalent in California where the number of quality universities compared to the population is out of balance. You see the effect of this through the number of denials to fully qualified (many over qualified) students in California.
I have nothing against public universities but they have many more issues to deal with that privates do not. There use to be a number of public universities in the top 20 and now there are none, even if you don’t like rankings that should tell you something.
Sticking your head in the sand and saying these will always be great universities while underfunding them is just waiting for that bridge to collapse due to lack of maintenance.
Berkeley and UCLA are on the top of the heap because they are a lot older and for a long time, until about 20 years ago were much bigger and have more time to add to their legacies. San Diego, Santa Barbara, Irvine and Davis are rising fast and are adding to their credits yearly and are now roughly similar in size. Riverside, Santa Cruz are farther behind but also rising. Merced is so young it is just getting started, but in 50 years will also hold its own. When I read comments CC I often think to myself that people don’t realize the campuses aren’t interchangeable. Just because you get in to Berkeley doesn’t mean you are an auto in for San Diego or Irvine or should you be. Even if they are in part of one system with a simple mission of teaching, research and public service, they have different personalities and focuses. Yes the campuses are rank crazy, but they each have very different focuses. If you want to go into marine biology, then Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, or San Diego might be the best choice. Looking for the latest in agriculture research, don’t look to Los Angeles, you need to be at Davis. Arguments on whether UCLA is better then Berkeley are like asking if Harvard is better then Princeton, just silly IMHO.
@PragmaticMom Um, not sure what the “mean girls” comment is about. I am a proud UCLA grad (as is my brother) and the reason this thread is so long is because there are legitimate gripes regarding the current UC system.
As I stated much earlier in this thread, my son got in to UCB and chose USC. I wish, when he did the overnight admitted students event at UCB, he had come away loving it because of its reputation, and so I could have saved some money, but he did not. The competitive environment on some UC campuses has already been discussed at length on this thread, so I won’t rehash that, but the impression my son got was that he would be miserable at UCB. Even the student support staff sounded overworked and miserable.
Many in my circle of parents are also proud UCLA and UCB grads, with fond memories, but none of us are now sending our children to the schools that served us so well. Some have completely written off the UCs as an option. Instead, our children are going to USC, Pepperdine, Santa Clara U and Ivies. If a family doesn’t have money they chase merit aid at privates rather than consider UCs. That is the reality at my son’s diverse high school.
The UC system is bursting at the scenes and admissions is flawed. It makes me sad that other Californians won’t have the same UC experience I once had (diverse campus, getting the classes I needed when needed), but that kind of experience is now offered by many privates and out-of-state schools. The reality is that the UC system has dramatically changed and those who can are exploring other options.
“Arguments on whether UCLA is better then Berkeley are like asking if Harvard is better then Princeton, just silly IMHO.”
Asking whether Harvard is better than Princeton and vice versa is a common pastime over on the Ivy League boards, especially when the results come out and the cross-admits have to make a choice.
@Scipio – just because it’s a common pastime doesn’t mean it’s not silly.
@stardustmom – Just about ALL elite schools are intense and competitive, and complaining about Berkeley’s culture… while simultaneously wanting your child to go there… seems hypocritical. MIT is competitive. Stanford is competitive. Why shouldn’t Berkeley be just as competitive?
@katliamom I think the uniquely competitive nature of Berkeley was debated long ago in this thread, as well as the reasons many believe it is atypical.
@stardustmom Being biased toward your child’s school (USC) is not uncommon even if the parent is from the rival school (UCLA)!
The order is reverse in my case! I am a graduate of USC and now am an advocate of UCLA (my DD goes there!). Even my username in this site reflects that! We all have our biases whether we acknowledge them or not!
See- this is what is so confusing to the non-Californian’s on this thread.
We get that Berkeley is more competitive than say- Southern Connecticut State. And for sure- in the history of cross admits- I doubt there have been more than three HS kids total who have had to debate “do I accept my Berkeley admissions offer or do I attend SCSU”. Maybe two.
But why do tens of thousands of kids want to attend Berkeley in the first place? Well- because of it’s national and global stature, for one. So do you really think a university can maintain global stature and NOT be competitive? It’s this circular logic that is so confounding.
I can give you a list of public U’s across the country which are not competitive- either to get in, or to stay in. And I’m pretty sure that the kids in California who are targeting Berkeley would not be interested in these colleges-- not because they aren’t in California, but because they don’t have the academic rigor and experience they are looking for.
@blossom I don’t hear complaining about Berkeley being too competitive as much as it being cutthroat vs collaborative. My observation when we walked around campus a few years (as an alum) was that the students in general didn’t seem like they smiled very much or were interacting with each other. Our family got much different impressions of the students at other schools such as Cal Poly, UCLA, and UCSB. Maybe it was just a dreary day, but that’s the vibe we picked up. That said, my son has several friends at Berkeley who enjoy it, so take our observations with a huge grain of salt.
Right, but I just provided links to rankings from THIS year that show, on an INTERNATIONAL level, UCLA has something of a better reputation than Berkeley. The World ranking is LITERALLY a reputation-based ranking. They don’t even consider acceptance rates or GPA or SAT scores…
CA schools are understandably confusing to people who do not live here. I will share one observation I made when touring Berkeley, and that was the lack of diversity. Ideally UCs should be representative of CA’s population, but walking around on UCB’s campus, it looked nothing like most of CA. Of course, this is a result of doing away with AA, but I found it disturbing that I saw only one tiny group of African American students hanging out in a far corner of the university - and that was it. And the campus was full of people. The fact that there were so few, and they seemed so isolated struck me, especially when my own experience at UCLA was very diverse. Some are happy with the campus as it is now, that’s fine, I’m sure they will be well served by going there.
Regarding competitiveness - UCB has always had the reputation of being cut-throat. When I was in high school, you would hear about students taking books from the library that were required for certain classes so the competition couldn’t access them. Currently there are stories of STEM TAs holding office hours in a foreign language so English speakers are left out of much of the discussion. Of course, these are only stories I have heard, so people should do their own research. My son prefers a more collaborative environment and so, did not choose to go to UCB. You can have competitiveness and collaboration.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
May we please get back to the original question: “Californian parents justified feeling bitter their kids are shutout of the UC System?”
The question of whether UCB or UCLA is “better” is one for another thread. Thank you.
Cal does have a rep for being a bit above and beyond when it comes to competitiveness of the student body (versus each other). I’m not saying it’s truth, just that it’s the reputation.
I don’t necessarily agree that students need to compete against each other solely because they’ve self-selected into a school with competitive admissions. For example, kids in the same class can help each other with homework, studying, etc, in the general principle of helping out your friends because you’re a friendly person surrounded by friendly people. Or they could wall themselves off and focus solely on their own studies in the general principle that helping your classmates hurts you.
Again, not saying the latter example is how Cal is. Just answering a post about why competitive schools don’t necessarily mean the student body competes with each other.