<p>Sorry for the confusion - I think I phrased things poorly, I actually agree with the above, and the basis for my claims is different from what you probably gathered I meant.</p>
<p>I’ve been observing the trends for several years, and consistently have seen [as have others] that a super high GPA (where relevant, also test scores) is one of the most helpful things to get into Berkeley, either as a frosh or a transfer. I am using actual examples where I can contrast applicants fully. I would in fact be one of the few data points in favor of my view, if you go back a few years :)</p>
<p>My “generalizations are bad” statement was actually in agreement with what I think you’re saying. I.e. I would not look at how a few transfers are handling the school and conclude that all transfers are bad. I’m not concerned with transfers here.</p>
<p>I am concerned with the trend which both explicit public school admissions policy [which heavily weights numerical data in a certain fashion] and actual samples strongly suggest, which is that high numbers are valued without adequately assessing rigor and talent. This is why I always am in favor of bettered standardized measures than what are in play. </p>
<p>I think one can make meaningful statements about a student by analyzing how they’re doing in Berkeley itself, but that’s not the basis of my claims about admissions. Rather, the basis of my claims is exactly what you say is a sound basis.</p>
<p>While phatnols doesn’t see many things, it appears I’ve highlighted one thing (s)he DOES see, and the concerns I’ve written about are reflected in data (s)he considers worthy. Hopefully there isn’t any more to say on this matter.</p>
<p>I feel that most CAL undergrad students are a tacobell mild sauce version of evil, which really did crush me as a wide eyed bushy tailed freshmen. People like lerock123 are a dime a dozen at UCB…</p>
<p>So I transferred to Westmont my sophmore year and have never been happier! </p>
<p>To all potential UCB transfer students, if you have the grades to get in Berkeley, you can get scholarships to private colleges that will actually build you as a person, college is supposed to be a place you fundamentally grow as a person, the year I spent at Cal I just felt alienated.</p>
<p>No one in the real world cares/gives a $h!t whether you’re a transfer or not. I know several transfers that even got positions at the Big Four accounting firms and some that got positions at big banks. How did they do this? They made the right connections when they got to Cal. They were able to make the right friends–which is something that “grossly subpar” people can do quite well. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Life isn’t all about your academic discipline and the rigorous academic standards that you’ve gone through. A lot of people here actually end up doing bad in life (and thus they complain too much) because they’re emotionally ■■■■■■■■–they are unproductive with their emotions and literally cannot get along with anyone else. That’s no one else’s fault!</p>
<p>A high IQ and an elitist mindset isn’t going to get you anywhere professionally or in life. Some of you guys should look up the concept of EQ by the way. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>If you made it past the weeders, that is. What if you didn’t? It’s a legitimate question to then ask why those transfer students shouldn’t also be forced to prove themselves through the same weeders. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As far as I’m concerned, the question on the table is why the transfer students should be allowed to skip weeder courses that the freshman-admits are forced to take. If the freshman admits are forced to take those courses, then the transfer students should as well. Otherwise, the freshman-admits should not be forced to take those courses. What’s fair is fair. </p>
<p>Keep in mind that transfer students are coming to Berkeley, so they should be expected to abide by the same rules as the other students at Berkeley, just as if I was invited to your house, I should be expected to follow the same rules as everybody else in your house. By being allowed to skip weeders, transfer students are being provided special treatment.</p>
<p>To argue that, on the one hand, transfer students are qualified to be at Berkeley, but then on the other hand, still insist that transfers should not have to take Berkeley weeders are forced to take to be bizarrely contradictory. If transfer students are indeed truly qualified, then they should easily pass the weeders, right? Heck, they would actually benefit by taking those courses by racking up a string of easy A’s. So what’s the problem?</p>
<p>Sakky, I agree with your original solution of letting everyone pass out of weeders equally. </p>
<p>However, I don’t think this bit you stated is true, and I think you know that too. Being qualified means being able to handle rigors. Handling weeders can involve doing more annoying, inane work, which is a bother to anyone, including intelligent students. Both frosh admits and others who take the classes can find them frustrating [e.g. some people find Chem 4A frustrating]. </p>
<p>Personally, I think it would be UNFAIR to subject transfers to weeders when they are admitted. Why? They have 2 years to finish their requirements and graduate, and figure out what they want to do. Frosh have 4. Further, both frosh and transfers can transfer credits for weeders that they had prior to entering Berkeley. One of them just enters Berkeley earlier. </p>
<p>In effect, a transfer student is in a different category entirely from a Berkeley frosh admit in terms of their academic plan at Berkeley. They need to be enforced to the same standards of academics, not the exact same program. Having them take an exam that doesn’t let subpar students in is a good thing. In fact, as we both have agreed in the past, such a thing must exist for frosh too, if we are to aim for a good system of frosh admissions as well.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is pretty, but it has nothing to do with how to do admissions. Nobody cares if you’re a transfer, true, but admitting subpar people into a university, transfer or frosh, is just dumb.</p>
<p>But you’ve just said it before that those weeder classes are hard–even for most freshman admits. The engineering student you knew, who got kicked out because of his 1.9 GPA, was surely a qualified Berkeley student, right? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Because those freshman admits have to unfairly take the weeder courses, you think it’s only fair that transfers students take some of those unfair weeder courses?</p>
<p>That just isn’t the correct attitude in life. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>You said you have no problem with transfer students per se, but rather with the system. It is the system that’s creating these weeder courses, and I think you and I know both know these weeder courses exist because of the limited resources and space that the university has. Even if EVERYONE had to transfer into Berkeley, youd still have these weeders in fact. You said the weeders are unfair. In fact, it seems that even Berkeley qualified students (by your standards) cant handle them! You should be glad that transfers don’t have to take these courses, no? You said you have no problem with them.</p>
<p>I dont see how the system that reserves 1/3 of university seats for transfers or how transfers themselves create these unfair weeder courses. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>If you got into a better institution with bigger brand name but ended up choosing Berkeley for one of its program rankings, that is a great misfortune because Berkeley does have some problems. If Berkeley is the best school you got into and chose it for its name, well you cant complain about the fact that it reserves 1/3 of its seats for transfers because that decision is made on behalf of public interest. Im sure everyone is glad that Berkeley is ranked highly and that it is the best public school in the world. As a public school, it is doing the best it can if it is ahead of all the other public schools. The public interest however isnt all about US News Rankings and elitist jobs like I Banking. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Do you want Berkeley to be turned into a private institution so that it will go up in rankings? Thats one of the most selfish things Ive heard. If Berkeley became a private institution it would probably be up there with HYPS and I would bet that that majority of people here that hate on transfers wouldn’t even be at Berkeley if that were the case. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Actually the point they have been trying to make is that freshman should be able to use CC credit to pass out of weeders if they so choose, at this point they do not have this option.</p>
<p>I’ve been deliberately using the rhetorical tactic of the ‘armor-piercing question’, that is, a question for which nobody seems to have a good answer and that highlights an inherent contradiction of the school: transfer students are claimed to be highly qualified, but nobody seems willing to test that claim by actually having them take the same weeders as the frosh. In fact nobody has ever put forth a credible reason why transfer students deserve to skip those weeders, the only reasons being purely logistical, e.g. that they simply wouldn’t graduate on time, but that has nothing to do with whether they actually deserve to skip those weeders. {Heck, by that argument, frosh shouldn’t be forced to take the weeders either, as those weeders surely delays the graduations for some of them too.} </p>
<p>Therefore, given the logistical constraints, I have always agreed that having nobody should have to take the weeders. But the armor-piercing question is far more incisive when couched in terms of transfers skipping weeders. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh - why not? When you see something that is unfair, you should say so. See below. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am afraid I have to diametrically disagree with this philosophy of life, particularly given Berkeley’s storied history social protest movements starting with the fabled Free Speech movement. It seems to me that you’re saying that if students disagree with a certain school policy, they should not say anything, but rather should keep their mouths shut and just be happy to be at Berkeley. Is that what you’re advocating? Come on, I think we can all agree that no social reforms of any kind have ever happened until people pointed out a problem and agitated for change. </p>
<p>I agree that Berkeley is making decisions on behalf of the public interest. But what is that ‘public interest’? The frosh are part of the public too. When a certain part of the public feels as if their interests are not being fairly met, it is entirely appropriate for them to say so. </p>
<p>So, again, I ask, why is it fair that transfers be allowed to skip the weeders that the frosh are required to take. If we can all agree that that isn’t fair, then we can move to the next step which is how we can improve the system. But the first step towards any reform is to agree that a problem exists.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh, why would I be glad about that? Some frosh can’t handle weeder courses, and surely some transfers can’t either. Both should be expelled, if the system was fair. To do otherwise is to accord special treatment to one group of students. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know if that comment was directed at me - for I haven’t advocated privatizing Berkeley - but to your point regarding a shrunken student population, I hardly see that as a bad thing. As an example, Berkeley’s graduate student population is relatively small and highly ranked, and nobody seems to have a problem with that. I don’t see anybody seriously clamoring for Berkeley to expand the number of PhD slots in the name of the ‘public interest’, and I certainly don’t see anybody advocating that 1/3 of the PhD seats should be reserved for students transferring in from other PhD programs. {The number of students transferring from other PhD programs into Berkeley’s is negligible.}</p>
<p>True, well I guess there are those like me who don’t believe anyone is qualified until put to a test. Logistical reasons [i.e. having just 2 years at Berkeley] suggest taking the weeders is probably not the best way to put them to a test, but certainly I agree having no test is a big flaw.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I totally agree here with sakky - I cannot imagine why someone wouldn’t. What people need to realize is by being unfair, you are being harsh to <em>someone</em>. The question should be - do those complaining have a problem with frosh? This is the old scenario where in advocating one side, you become so brainwashed that you forget there’s another side which needs fair treatment.</p>
<p>The best solution is always to admit only the most qualified transfers and the most qualified frosh. Be fair to both. The university’s role is to serve the public - part of that entails being fair, and ensuring everyone graduating with a certain degree is held to the same standards of rigor.</p>
<p>You’re right. I haven’t met a single non-foreign transfer that had a right to be there. I mean, you’re telling me that I pulled all nighters throughout highschool to get to UC Berkeley and some underachiever coasting by a C got into community college and just waltzed into this school? All the ones I met just TALK like they care about school but spend their time fooling around instead. Here are some of the phrases I’ve heard coming out of their mouths: “Yeah, I get high four or five times a day.” “Sorry I was an hour late meeting you for this project, now what did we have to do again?” And my favorite: “I applied into grad school but didn’t get into any. So I’m going back home to live with my mom.” I’m not saying the freshmen are much better here at Berkeley, but at least most of them seem to take life a lot more seriously.</p>
<p>It is a well known fact that freshman admissions is more competetive than transfer admissions. Simply look at the statistics of average gpa’s for admitees and you will know this; however, people can argue that getting straight A’s is easier in high school then at a community college, or that they weren’t mature enough in high school to motivate themselves , ect; this holds true for many people as there is tons of smart people in the world that simply did not care in high school. Obviously there are going to be unmotivated people at all universities, transfer or freshmen. </p>
<p>Berkeley’s standards are not affected if they give admission to someone who managed to ease their way through community college getting good grades, or high school for that matter. If Berkeleys reputation of high standards and rigorous courses is true then the unmotivated people will not be able to survive on the campus.</p>