My kid would so go for UC Tahoe. But would she ever make it to class during ski season?
Can’t really build a new campus in any coastal location – there’s no space and land costs are exorbitant. And really, the population growth in the state is happening in inland locations, so it make sense to site campuses there. The central valley was woefully underserved until UCM was built.
I do think the UC system should try to shoehorn some more kids in the existing campuses. They’ve got lots of 2 and 3 story dorms in places like UCI and UCSD, though they’ve added a couple of towers to one of UCI’s dorms recently. The long term plan should be to grow up, not out.
I don’t see how anyone other than prestige-obsessed parents would benefit from an approach of shoehorning more kids into existing campuses – it would only increase crowding and make it that much more difficult for students to get desired classes with the professors they want. The schools are still limited by existing facilities for classes and labs.
I think that the problem is with attitudes of students and parents - from a forward-looking public policy perspective, Merced made a lot of sense, precisely because there is plenty of space to grow and expand facilities over the years. (I’m talking about general central valley location, not specific – because I really don’t know what went into selection of the Merced site as opposed to other possible options along the I5 corridor)
That is also true for prospective faculty members. Much, much easier for a faculty spouse to get a job in/near a big city than in Merced.
Well obviously you’d need to add more of everything to the campuses. Grow up, not out. More classrooms, buildings that aren’t just 2 and 3 stories high, etc. Frankly that’s true of everything in the state, not just college campuses.
Not everyone wants California to look like Manhattan.
If students are prioritizing location over academics, then they should apply to CSU’s in their desired area.
The CSUs are full too.
Although most CSUs are now impacted for frosh applicants, most of the impacted ones are not heavily impacted, and they may give local area preference to local area applicants.
But then CSU impaction may be more of an issue for those targeting the most popular campuses like CPSLO or SDSU (or CSULB for non-local applicants), or popular majors that are impacted (e.g. nursing everywhere, CS and related majors at SJSU). There does not seem to be a lot of complaining about difficulty getting into CSUC, CSUEB, CSULA, SSU, etc.).
We visited UC Merced when we were looking at colleges. Unlike Davis, there is no surrounding college community. I assume it is because the UC Regents own the land. It has been 10 years. You would think they would build pizza places, coffee houses, movie theaters, drugstores, etc. close to campus.
One cool thing about Merced is that they have a shuttle to Yosemite. 
I’m seeing lots of announcements from relatively wealthy families about their kids going to Arizona, Oregon and Colorado. These are middle of the road kids who could get into CSUs or UCR/UCM but not UCI/UCSB and are not getting big merit aid OOS.
Seems like many of these decisions are a prestige-oriented statement that “we can afford an OOS flagship with big school spirit”. It appears acceptable to say that your kid is going to U of O, not so much to say they are going to UCR (though SDSU seems like something of an exception). A significant part of that must be PAC-12 sports related (though no-one except us is choosing Utah!)
@Twoin18 Yes that’s fairly normal.
@Twoin18: "Seems like many of these decisions are a prestige-oriented statement that “we can afford an OOS flagship with big school spirit”
Bingo.
This type of attitude is common in urban/suburban areas in the Northeast (north of VA), Chicagoland, and the West Coast (maybe well-off areas in other big metros as well. Being able to send your kid away to college (OOS) is seen as a bit of a status symbol.
1 Like
"The other 3 UCs are less desirable UCR, UCMerced, and UCSC, Let’s look at these 3 schools:
UCMerced - #490 ranking (Niche), isolated campus; too new, lower academics of peers/faculty compared to other UCs;
UCSC - #288 ranking, right or wrong has a reputation as counter-culture (hippie, care-free, pot smoking), campus (some like it, some don’t);
UCR - #282 ranking, reputation as a commuter school, not ideal location in the inland empire (IE) with traffic,smog,and can get very hot (does’nt have the benefit of being along the coast like other state schools which are cheaper (e.g. CSULB, SDSU, and even CPSLO)."
@socaldad2002 …The “holy grail” for those “ranking obsessed” people seems to be US News and not Niche.
2018 US News (Overall) and (Public School) Rankings are…1.) UCSC #81 (overall), and #33 (public)
2.) UCR #124(overall), and #58 (public)
3.) UC Merced #165 (overall) and #87 (public)
Rapidly becoming more desirable at all 3 above UC campuses! Not sure about Santa Cruz which may have peaked in population, however, UC Riverside is the fastest growing UC projected at 40,000 students in the future, and Merced being the newest UC will be growing by leaps and bounds! The “hard” admissions numbers have been consistently increasing and that should reflect in the future ranks as well.
@goatofgoats99 I understand that there were fewer applicants to UC schools 20 years ago, but that is universally true of ALL colleges. Yes, more students are applying to college now than 20 years ago, sure, but more importantly the internet and the universal application has mushroomed the numbers of schools each student applies to.
20 years ago students applied to 4-6 schools. Today, students are applying to 10-15 schools. This increased applicant numbers. Also, the ability to get 4.0+ GPAs has slowly risen over the decades. In the 80s it wasn’t possible to get above a 4.0. In the 90s is wasn’t possible to get above a 4.2. Now 4.5s are possible AND fairly common.
Bottom line: Whether its the 90s or 2018 - if your GPA and SAT score are both in the top 5%-8%, your’e getting into top UCs. That has always been true.
CA parent here. My child wasn’t interested in the UCs or other large universities, so no I’m not bitter about this. I will say that, at least in my community, I know many more kids going to private colleges (top ones), mid-ranked ones, and also OOS flagships (like U Michigan). I only know a small handful at the UCs or CPSLO. This isn’t because they couldn’t get in. This is mainly because the UCs are perceived as overcrowded, underfunded, and hard to graduate from in 4 years. And yes, there is a brain drain here, since most of these kids are great students and very strong applicants. And many didn’t even bother to apply. Some thought that this was a great chance to see another part of the US, live in an area with snow, etc. And some were concerned about huge class sizes and having trouble getting into the classes they might need. (This seems to be supported by the fact that the kids we know who stayed at UCs or CSUs seem to need to take classes over their summers in order to keep to a 4-year plan).
Also, I haven’t heard complaints about Asian Americans taking seats at the UCs (heck, CA has many Asian American kids so of course the % will be high at any school here). The complaints I hear is about UCs selling seats to OOS kids and International ones (and this is where Asia comes into the conversation). It’s not about race, it’s about keeping seats for those kids in CA whose families have paid taxes.
“Bottom line: Whether its the 90s or 2018 - if your GPA and SAT score are both in the top 5%-8%, your’e getting into top UCs. That has always been true.”
Not true for Berkeley and UCLA, especially for CS/Eng. None of the four NMFs at my kids school got into UCB this year. 1 of 4 got into UCLA. Great ECs are critically important in addition to grades and scores.
“Seems like many of these decisions are a prestige-oriented statement that “we can afford an OOS flagship with big school spirit”. It appears acceptable to say that your kid is going to U of O, not so much to say they are going to UCR”
Double Bingo!!
Funny that my father attended USC (where I was accepted but didn’t want to financially burden him since no scholarship) but he preferred I attended UC Riverside lol! The definite aberration in my neck of the woods!
Completely true about “what you can afford” and chasing that “prestige” and “status”…see it everyday for sure in South Orange County California. A few of my neighbors that are not that strong academically are also out of state at University of Arizona as well lol!
Of course many of these parents went to Berkeley or UCLA 30 years ago so they are simultaneously moaning over a glass of wine about how their kids are being “shut out” of the UCs and they “have to” pay so much more in OOS tuition fees…
Perhaps your father thinks of USC as the one he attended, when it had unflattering reputations back then.
I’m slightly late in the GPA discussion. I find it hard to believe that the UC GPA is the only GPA that matters. The 8 semester cap unfairly limits those people who take the most challenging courses offered. My kid got into UCB with his pedestrian 4.05 UC GPA, but he had a total of 11 out of 13 semesters of Honors/AP/College courses as a sophomore and 18 out of 20 semesters of Honors/AP/College semesters as a junior. That means there were 21 (29 minus 8) semesters that essentially didn’t count, from a UC perspective. And yes, he had 5 Bs and a C out of those 33 semesters (most kids would normally take 24 semesters as a sophomore and junior). But then again, the fact that he got waitlisted by UCI and UCSD possibly meant that there were some AOs out there who probably didn’t take this into account.