“It seems wrong to me that the lower two thirds of California’s population has only 2 year Community Colleges as their public option. There should be some 4 year state colleges with the capacity to educate the majority of its population. That’s a lot of taxpayers who are paying into the state education system for decades, only to have their kids denied an affordable 4 year option.”
They do have have a public option. That’s what the transfer pipeline from community colleges to CSU and UC is for. Kids with lower academic performance get two years of very inexpensive education in a community college in which to get started and acclimated to college level work, take remedial classes if needed, and then if they get decent grades the transfer gates are open to them.
Perhaps one of the least expensive options of a public education for students coming out of high school without sparkling stats in California would be to live at home and attend the local community college, work hard, then transfer to the local CSU, apply for merit and need-based aid, and continue to live at home.
It’s not perfect, but California provides a path to a college degree for pretty much every one of its residents who has a desire to get an education and a willingness to work hard to achieve it.
Many people pay taxes and never get the full benefit out of those taxes. Couples without kids, for example. They would never benefit directly from a UC education because they have no kids to send to a UC or any school for that matter. Yet they pay CA taxes like everyone else. I suppose those couples should complain about being shafted by the system as well. However they indirectly benefit by having an educated populace as neighbors. They may one day need the services of a doctor who was educated at UCLA. The idea of taxation is not so much that you get an exact 1:1 return for every dollar you paid in taxes.
It seems to me that everyone in every state is in the same situation as CA. Lots of kids, not a lot of places at the state flagship, even for families that have paid taxes, students who have worked hard, legacies, friends of the President.
This year many Floridians were denied from UF. These are top preforming kids. Some will be happy attending UCF or FSU, but others are leaving. Not every ACT 30 kid gets to go to U of Wisconsin, but they can go to one of the other campuses, to community college, even to some Minn schools.
I’m not bitter, but I’m concerned about a brain drain from California too. My NMF daughter is getting a full ride to a private university out of state, so is thrilled with her results. Who knows if she’ll ever return to live here?
I’m not sure those outside of California really understand how intense the competition is in-state and just how brutal it was this year for extremely high achieving kids, including ones with amazing extracurricular achievements. D’s stats were 4.0 UW GPA, 1580 SAT. Accepted to UCSD, UCSB, SLO and waitlisted at UCLA. In previous years, Naviance shows she would have been accepted to UCLA. This year, many top kids at her school were either waitlisted or rejected at UCLA and UCB, many more so than in previous years. It reflects the record number of applications each school had–113,000 freshman applications to UCLA alone!
It’s accurate that the top 9 percent aren’t “shut out” of the UC system. But it’s going to be a long time before Merced or Riverside are going to be considered truly desirable places to go to school, based on their locations and the general perceptions about them, whether fair or not. I also don’t have an issue with OOS students helping fund the UCs. Our taxes are already way too high, and clearly the legislature has other funding priorities (Board of Regents–getting rid of some of the administrative bloat sure would be nice! But I live in the real world and that’s not going to happen anytime soon.) What I do think many Californians feel is a sense of unease that the landscape has shifted so much–that even being one of the very top students in your class, with stellar credentials all around, isn’t enough anymore if you want to go to UCLA, UCB, UCSD, UCB, or many majors at SLO. And the belief that OOS students–possibly with lesser credentials–take those coveted spots surely is something that creates rancor.
And this year’s results will just fuel the frenzy–kids applying to more and more places and doing more and more and more and more, of everything, to try to get in places. And so the college rat-race grows even crazier.
It is hard to believe that it is as bad in other states when I see so many posts on c.c suggesting that high-achieving kids who didn’t get into private schools “just go to yiur state flag ship Honors College”
That is not an option for many here.
As far as Asian vs White advantage in admissions there is none. What I am saying is a middle class high achieving kid who is not first gen, of any race since UC has eschewed race, has to compete in a crazy playing field they leaves little room for fun or exploration in high school. On the ground I see white parents on average less willing to play that game than Asian parents. And so, in our high school that is 20 percent Asian, 80 out of 95 Berkely and Ucla admits were Asian. Those are the hard number off the UC site.
@AboutTheSame There is a difference between a reasonable disappointment in not getting exactly what you want and stating that nothing ever goes well for you in your life. Clearly, you have tremendous blessings. When so many people are struggling, I find it a little tone deaf for someone with a brilliant daughter in Dartmouth to state that nothing goes well for you.
@HRSMom Honestly, I wouldn’t trade the SUNY system for the CA system. Instead of a couple of crazy elite schools that none of our kids can actually attend, we have tons of solid universities with enough capacity for the students that want to go. You can get a fabulous education at any one of dozens of Suny schools, but we are not so “shiny” that we are overrun by prestige seekers. We also have the exelsior scholarship to make things more affordable.
@bluebayou – Not knowing what all goes into COA at each school, it would be difficult to make an apples-to-apples comparison as your mileage may vary depending on travel costs and housing/meal choices.
Based on in-state tuition alone, UCLA is lower priced than the two schools you looked up randomly.
Today, UCLA in-state tuition is $13,260.
Current Rutgers in-state tuition is $14,638
Current UMass in-state tuition is $15,596
The Urban Institute report is about all public universities in each state. For California, that means including both the UCs and the (larger with lower tuition) CSUs, presumably a blended average.
The disparity may be larger if in-state FA is taken into account, since some of the states at the top of the tuition price list like Pennsylvania have rather poor in-state FA.
The difference is that other state’s flagships are not highly prestigious and thus, highly sought after. Here in NY we have Binghamton as the flagship and SUNY Stonybrook known for excellence in science. We have many other fine state colleges where you can get an excellent education but no one grows up dreaming of spending four years in Binghamton NY, or Buffalo or Long Island. Many NYers complain that we don’t have an elite instate option, but I’m fine with it. I would rather have it this way, then have the situation in CA.
How prestigious is the state flagship for Washington DC? Maine? New Hampshire? Arkansas?
Must every state provide-- not just a college education for its citizens who want one, and are qualified to attend- but a PRESTIGIOUS college education??? Is that actually an argument that someone can make with a straight face?
The transfer pathway from the community colleges to UCs and CSUs is well developed in California. The higher education system is designed to target having about a third of UC and CSU graduates starting at the community colleges.
Examples of minimum CSU eligible stats (impacted campuses and programs may require higher stats):
3.00 HS GPA, SAT not required if campus/program is not impacted
2.75 HS GPA, 700 SAT
2.50 HS GPA, 900 SAT
2.25 HS GPA, 1100 SAT
2.00 HS GPA, 1300 SAT
Note: HS GPA has +1 weighting for honors/AP courses, up to 8 semesters’ worth where C or higher grades were earned.
Community college then transferring into a mid or high tier UC an option for those entitled, crushed, fragile egos that erroneously won’t even consider “crappy” inland locations or “lower tier” UC’s with their major where you will receive an amazing education like Santa Cruz, Riverside, Davis, or Merced. Many happy top performing kids at these schools with similar and higher stats than yours! They are getting tougher to get in each and every year! Riverside is growing faster than ANY OTHER UC for a reason (Riverside county third fastest growing county IN THE NATION projected through 2065!) and even Merced will continue to grow and rapidly improve since a brand new location. The parity gap between “lower tier” UC’s and the others quickly declining. The University of California System is the best in the world where you will receive a top notch education at ALL LOCATIONS!! However, if you still want to send your kid out of state and pay at least DOUBLE THE COST for an education that won’t be better than ANY UC, then be my guest!!
Here’s a recent LA Times article on plans to increase OOS tuition. It also touches on several other issues, from efforts to lobby for additional funds (some to be spent on OOS aid) to the possibility of increasing the use of online classes (at the UCs).
I grew up in California back when conventional wisdom said a high-stats kid could use UCLA and Berkeley as a back-up plan to their HYPSM dreams. It was a perk of being a Californian. It’s been 30 years, and this is obviously not true anymore. The privilege of going to a top tier UCs is not a given for high-stats kids. It doesn’t matter if you’re in-state or out-of-country. The silver lining is Californians still have better options than most of us who do not live in California – second tier schools that are on par with flagships elsewhere. Plus, your in-state costs are average, and often lower than other big name flagships.
They are top notch universities where you will receive an amazing education vineyardview. By “crappy” I’m only referring to “inland location” which still scares some away. I’ve always respected those chasing superior academics in “non ideal” locations and appreciate the sacrifices made that not everyone is willing to do!!
I read many comments on CC about how students should go to the schools where their academic peers are. The problem with telling “entitled” students to just go to the lower-tier UC is that it is much harder to find ones academic peers. Having visited a few of the lower-tier UCs, yes, there are some bright students, but there are also many who leave you scratching your head over how they even got in. I loved UCSC’s campus, but when we toured the academics and research were barely touched upon. It was all about hanging out with the trees and it did not come off as a serious university, although I know there are some top-notch programs there. My focused son (who was offered regents there) was totally turned off. Of course, bright students can make it work, but some of these campuses are far from ideal.
Also, I don’t think people from other states have any idea what it is really like in CA. Most lower schools are struggling with a very diverse population (many English learners) and many kids graduate not ready for college. A CC is the best option for them to get up to to speed for a 4 year university.