<p>Graduated with honors, published 1st author paper while in undergrad. Proud bear here. I’ll be at the game this Saturday too.</p>
<p>If you are, then great. I’m happy that a fellow bear did well here and I jumped to the wrong conclusion. But would you mind explaining this? the prereq for 104 has been in place since spring 09 any student who’s taken the class would’ve had to take it.</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-california-berkeley/1003081-mcb-102-mcb-104-suicidal.html#post1065739131[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-california-berkeley/1003081-mcb-102-mcb-104-suicidal.html#post1065739131</a></p>
<p>I don’t remember what the specific pre-reqs are, if your trying to test me. I took C100A, I do know a friend that took them concurrently though. There’s no real overlap in information. She probably just spoke to a professor to waive the pre-req.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What your “friend” did was insignificant b/c it is allowable to concurrently take them. C100A has never been a prereq for 104.</p>
<p><a href=“http://mcb.berkeley.edu/undergrad/images/stories/forms/faq.pdf[/url]”>http://mcb.berkeley.edu/undergrad/images/stories/forms/faq.pdf</a></p>
<p>[General</a> Catalog - Course Search - Results](<a href=“http://osoc.berkeley.edu/catalog/gcc_search_sends_request?p_dept_name=MOLECULAR+AND+CELL+BIOLOGY&p_dept_cd=MCELLBI&p_title=&p_number=104]General”>http://osoc.berkeley.edu/catalog/gcc_search_sends_request?p_dept_name=MOLECULAR+AND+CELL+BIOLOGY&p_dept_cd=MCELLBI&p_title=&p_number=104)</p>
<p>The fact that you made an account on here for the sole purpose of arguing about transfers in addition to this leads me to believe that you are not a graduate of this institution. My opinion about your credentials is irrelevant to you but this is my belief and it is why I am skeptical of your posts.</p>
<p>Haha.</p>
<p>How about you meet me on campus on Saturday and we can talk about it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree that my detractors probably are ignoring my argument.</p>
<p>But I hope there are other, more thoughtful readers out there who may not have been posting here, but who are considering what I have to say, and I’d like to think that I can convince some of them. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I disagree: the very first step towards any reform is first convincing people that a problem exists. I’d like to think that I am doing that via this thread, at least, in a small way.</p>
<p>Now, again, I agree with a prior poster that most likely nothing will happen. Probably no reforms will be passed. But if nobody ever says anything, then it is surely guaranteed that nothing will happen. To paraphrase Wayne Gretzky, while you may miss most of the shots on goal that you do take, you miss all of the shots that you never take.</p>
<p>Talking about change on college confidential is hardly a shot.</p>
<p>I don’t think this is going anywhere.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why make a website when this one is probably more widely read anyway?</p>
<p>Also, frankly a ton of the discussion that goes on in CC is hypothetical, but the scope of discussion is never limited to current change anyway…it can happen later. Discussion is there to keep people thinking, which is really better than not thinking at all.</p>
<p>Sakky-
Go to assist.org. UC Berkeley has a system that decides which classes are transferable to their university. This means that you may take them at a community college and they are deemed equivalent to Berkeley’s lower division coursework. Transfer students take the same classes for major prerequisites and general education that Berkeley freshman and sophomores take. Transfer students must have a high GPA along with extracurricular activities to be accepted to UC Berkeley. If transfer students that are accepted to the university on these terms have already proven themselves to Berkeley admissions and the school’s standards–why should they have to prove themselves to you…?</p>
<p>Devil’s advocate: Math 1B != Calc II at my local CC. </p>
<p>I believe the point is that by transferring, people can avoid weeder classes, which is true. A transfer student wouldn’t be admitted into the CoE without taking Calc I/II/III I believe, so they’d never have to take 1A,1B, or 53 which are notoriously difficult classes for many. </p>
<p>It’s true that they are credit equivalent, but it doesn’t mean the experience is the same.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m curious – who does Berkeley admissions for transfers? If it is professors of the intended major and they judge these people to be at the preparation level of Berkeley incoming juniors, then sure, I have no problem with that.</p>
<p>The sentiment I have heard both from frosh and transfers themselves is that this may not be the case.</p>
<p>Basically the point is, if you’re admitting someone “midway” into a major, you need people who really know the field of concern to assess the credentials. Or, do what Sakky said and impose a test, i.e. to see if their lower coursework was up to speed.</p>
<p>If this is already happening, why would it be the case that AFTER admission, transfers here have had to retake coursework that “should have been equivalent” on the assessment of the department and its qualified judges? Indeed, I know examples of this.</p>
<p>I would have thought that it was obvious college professors have better things to do than look over college applications. Also, Berkeley undergrads have NEVER had to retake a class–they are way too intelligent and too hard of workers to ever ever have that happen. Whoever decides what classes Berkeley undergrads have to take the first two years also decide which community college classes are equivalent and whoever they are, their opinion is held in higher regard than that of a college student.</p>
<p>Look, the point of this is you had to take some hard classes and I’m sorry–I really am. But don’t let that take the pleasure out of your college experience and please don’t think that gives you any authority in the matter of deciding who is allowed into a college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And then freshman admits should be allowed to use the exact same system so that they can avoid weeders also. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then I could argue that freshman admits have already proven themselves to the admissions office…so why do they have to take weeders, which essentially means that they have to prove themselves again? </p>
<p>But if they do, then it’s only fair that transfer admissions should have to do the same. Either that, or nobody should have to take the weeders. But what is inequitable is that some students have to take the weeders, but not others. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which then only reinforces the point that if these community college courses are indeed equivalent, then freshman-admits should be allowed to avoid weeders by taking those same community college courses, right? So why doesn’t Berkeley (easily) allow such an option? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, if you were really sorry, then perhaps you could join me in helping to reform the system to one that is equitable to all. I give you credit for admitting that a problem exists; the next step is then figuring out how to solve it. </p>
<p>But allow me to say that I don’t think these proposals have necessarily anything to do with who is admitted to Berkeley. Transfer students who can’t pass the weeder placement exam wouldn’t necessarily be ‘un-admitted’. They would simply be forced to take those weeder courses, just as the freshman-admits were forced. {Granted, if they can’t pass the weeders, then they would be expelled, just like freshman-admits who can’t pass the weeders are expelled.} The system would then be fair. No group of students would enjoy special treatment simply based on admissions pathway, which is exactly the way it ought to be.</p>
<p>I’m actually not saying there is a problem. If there is one, it’s that apparently some Berkeley underclassmen are having too difficult a time with these “weeder” classes and are taking out their resentment on transfer students. Also, you say it’s unfair but really–look around. Life isn’t fair, and anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Firstly, I’m not a kid. Chances are, I’m older than you. </p>
<p>Moving on, I don’t know how to infer statements like these other than being filled with jealousy. And if not jealousy, then at the VERY least, there has to be some bitterness in the situation. You, or anyone can claim that it is nothing more than “transfer students are inferior”, but I believe it stems from a childish case of “its not fair” syndrome.
Allow me to explain (again, because I have already posted almost the same thing earlier in this thread). Freshman work excruciatingly hard; there is no doubt about it. I sympathize greatly with those of you who struggled all throughout high school to get the best grades on top of doing several extracurricular activites. My hat goes off to you. </p>
<p>However, I think in the back of everyone’s minds, they know that going to a community college would’ve probably been a better idea (unless of course you got scholarships). I don’t know about anyone else, but I learned so much in my community college. For those of us who are not particularly talented, going to a CC was an excellent stepping stone for transitioning to a 4 year school. It allowed me to slow down and really get used to some of the college lifestyle rather than going in head first. I remember the vice chancellor making that same point during the transfer seminar he held in May. He said he preferred transfer students because they actually had experience and had their heads on straight; as opposed to freshman who he said “acted how freshman THINK they should act”. Of course he could have just been saying these things because the room was filled with transfer students, but the idea is still the same one I am trying to convey.</p>
<p>“Community colleges are not that difficult” is a phrase I hear tossed around A LOT. There is no sure way to prove this. However, I believe If they were not vigorous, there would not be articulation agreements and IGETC. Each of the courses within these education plans is catered to satisfy both the UC and CSU levels of difficulty. If that is not enough, I knew several teachers who were also teachers at CSU schools. My English professor specifically said that she preferred reading essays from community college students because those she read at SJSU were subpar and oozing with plagiarism. </p>
<p>Finances also play a big part in this. I assume some of those who have been at Cal since freshman year have had to take out loans (unless of course you have scholarships or receive financial aid). A community college is substianlly cheaper than a 4 year university. For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone would want to pay more for relatively the same education that they would receive at a community college. To get “the college experience” seems to be the ONLY reason that I can seem to grasp. But what is the college experience? Getting drunk at parties? Being on your own? You’re really going to pay extra for that? One can easily make friends as a transfer student; joining clubs, forming study groups and not being awkwardly social almost guarantees that you will have some sort of social life and create networks. I believe that herein lies some bitterness: freshman admits/those who have been at Cal since freshman year realize that the college experience was only good for about one year and that they are paying extra for classes easily done (if they are as smart as they claim to be) within 1 year and a half at a community college (my brother’s AP scores allowed him to bypass many GE requirements). </p>
<p>One last point I want to make is the idea of belittling ALL transfer students. I am sure there are transfer students (and some freshman) who do not deserve to be here, but dismissing them all is silly and shows nothing but ignorance. As I have said, many cannot afford a 4 year school and, despite being smart enough, opt to go to a CC because of their financial situation. There are also those who have outstanding circumstances which do not allow them to attend as freshman. Are you going to dismiss those students as well? To whoever wants to put down all transfer students, please think before you spout nonsense.
Instead of getting being bitter at transfers, you should get angry at some of the athletes. I remember hearing in one of my psych classes that an athlete with an ABYSMAL SAT score and late application was admitted to Cal. </p>
<p>Sometimes I wonder where all the “open minded” people at Cal are.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then to continue to (possibly overwrought) metaphor that somebody else had invoked, blacks in the Jim Crow South were subjected to shocking levels of unfairness. Thank God we as society were not simply willing to consign them to that station simply because “life isn’t fair”. </p>
<p>I agree that life isn’t fair, but that doesn’t mean that you should allow unfairness to persist once identified. If transfer students are allowed to skip weeders, then so should the freshman admits. Seems to me that that would solve the problems: they wouldn’t have to worry about performing poorly, and consequently, they wouldn’t resent the transfer students. So why not enact this reform? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There it is again, to which I repeat: if those classes are truly equivalent, then freshmen should be able to use them to bypass Berkeley weeders. After all, they are equivalent courses, right?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a different problem, as athletes are admitted via both pathways. For example, some of you may remember J.J. Arrington, who wasn’t exactly an academic superstar. He was a juco transfer. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, the fact remains that juco athletes are allowed to skip weeders that even the freshman-admit athletes are forced to take. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then allow me to challenge your open-mindedness. Will you join me in advocating equality for all students, regardless of admissions pathway, with respect to weeders?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with you. I know many students from SJSU were sent to my CC to take all the “weeder” classes because there was just no room for them. I think the same thing can and should be done at Cal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What exactly do you mean by equality? I admit I am interested because I feel the same way you do, but what is your plan?</p>
<p>Allow all freshman-admits to skip Berkeley weeders by simultaneously enrolling in community colleges to take the (supposedly) equivalent coursework. They should never require any administrative approval to do so; nor would they even have to tell Berkeley that they are simultaneously enrolling. </p>
<p>Right now, they’re not allowed to do so without taking drastic measures such as either obtaining that administrative permission (which has no guarantee of being granted), or the even more drastic measure of actually formally withdrawing from Berkeley and then later attempting to re-enroll, again, with no guarantee of readmission. </p>
<p>As I said before, why should Berkeley care so much about what students do in their free time? It’s their free time; they should be allowed to whatever they want with it. If they want to use their free time to take courses at a community college, they should be allowed to do so without interference. Plenty of students waste their free time by playing WoW or partying all day long, and that doesn’t seem to concern the administration. But if students want to use their free time to take courses at another school, apparently that’s a problem. Why?</p>
<p>I’m laughing hard at all the transfers writing huge essays. No one is going to read that garbage, learn to be concise.</p>
<p>I think the argument can be made that if they really wanted to do that, they could hold out on applying to Berkeley until they’ve completed their GE at a CC. What benefits are there of going to Cal while going to a CC at the same time to do your GE classes?</p>
<p>I agree that Berkeley students should definitely be allowed to do their breadth at a CC, but that would lead to other problems like adding to already overly populated community colleges and taking away funds from Cal.</p>