<p>While that sucks for all you freshman admits that are oddly overly bitter about having to take “weeder classes”, as a transfer I can adamantly state that we didn’t go to community college with an evil plan to skip over certain classes because we knew that our “sub-par” intelligence couldn’t handle them. Unlike most of you (yes I’m about to make a generalized claim), a lot of transfer students went to community colleges for mostly socio-economic reasons, or because we started a family early, or because we went to terrible high schools that barely even prepared us for community college nonetheless a four year university. Perhaps you’re right and those classes are “unfair” but to me that would give you an advantage over transfers. Why? Here’s a list of just five below:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>You were able to go to a four year right out of highschool while most transfers (due to life circumstances) take a number of years to get through cc and aren’t able to experience “college life” until they are in their mid-20’s or later</p></li>
<li><p>You are more prepared for upper-division courses, as well as any future grad schools that you may or may not plan to attend</p></li>
<li><p>You get four years to establish yourself at a university, get to know the area, and really get into your educational groove giving you more time to do research programs, on campus activities, and studying abroad. While transfer students can do all these things as well, with our 5 semester time limit it is very difficult to fit it all in!</p></li>
<li><p>You probably don’t have a crying baby next to you while you’re trying to do your statistics homework. You probably have two parents waiting for you by the phone. You probably have extra income to do fun activities, and you probably came from a decent nurturing family. In other words, there is a reason you went as a freshman…and while not always the case, most of the time, there is an equal reason on the other side of the spectrum why transfer students needed the extra time</p></li>
<li><p>Friends…You have so much time to make friends and to get to know people. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>It’s not like you couldn’t have gone to cc right out of high school! You made your own bed. Half of life is just showing up and the other half is figuring out how to work the system. I’m sorry if you didn’t realize the advantages until after you completed those difficult courses…however I’ll let you in on a secret, neither did we transfers! While you were drinking coffee at starbucks across from your ivy-league style campus at 19, we were bottle feeding and slapping subway sandwiches together 40 hours a week while doing our “sub-par” cc math homework at the same time. So get over yourselves and see that we all had it hard in our own ways…</p>
<p>^her point was that “generally” transfers had to go though things in life that freshmen admits don’t. I mean, to think that anybody admitted to Berkeley as a freshmen would have a single moment of unhappiness or discomfort is absurd, right? We’re too busy drinking coffee at Starbucks to think about our own problems or, dare I say it, the problems of other people in our lives. //sarcasm</p>
<p>I would say that Physics 7C is much more difficult than 7B (fairly easy and straightforward), so a Freshman taking 7C would have more difficult of a time than in 7B, and I don’t know why that wouldn’t be considered a weeder. </p>
<p>I consider it a weeder, because this class is probably weeded me away from a physics minor to focus on EECS courses.</p>
<p>I never said that freshman admits have perfect little lives where nothing bad ever happens to them. I don’t think that at all! No one has a perfect life, I was just saying that the struggles of most freshman admits at that time in their lives generally don’t compare to those “life struggles” of transfers during the same period. This is all based off personal experience and observation of course. I’ve heard many faculty members at both Cal and my CC make the same claims as well. Like I said, we all have our problems…if I had the same opportunities as many freshman admits than I can tell you right now that I wouldn’t be whining over the prospect of “weeder” classes.</p>
<p>^ that’s fair, but like you said, it’s a generalization, and an overreaching one at that. To assume “most” transfers have had those “life struggles” is absurd. That’s like assuming that there are very many transfers who got admitted to Berkeley, rejected admission as freshmen, and chose CC. I’m pretty sure the number of those who don’t matriculate to Berkeley is less than the number of those rejected. Personally, I haven’t met any with such circumstances; many of the transfers I know graduated a year before me at my high school and went to CC because they didn’t get in as freshmen. So based on my “personal experience and observation” your claim doesn’t ring true.</p>
<p>I am still wondering which classes are weeders and how many a freshman has to take. I think the whole topic is blown out of proportion.</p>
<p>Let’s just say some of the Math, Physics, Chem classes are weeders, so maybe a typical freshman will take 5 weeders, or around 20 units. Now, you need at least 120 units to graduate, how badly do these 20 units really affect you?</p>
<p>Yes, you might do worse in the weeders, let’s say typical straight A student may receive a B while a typical B student may receive a C. Also I would argue if you are receiving anything below a B- in any (weeder or not) class at Cal you are doing something wrong. Either you are partying too much, playing too many videogames, not doing your homework, not going to lecture, not studying enough for your midterms or you have very poor time management skills. It’s unreasonable to assume that a straight A student would receive a C or lower in a weeder class.</p>
<p>To come back to the simple calculation above, a straight-A student receiving B’s only in his weeder classes will still end up with a GPA of 3.85+. They could even boost their GPA further by taking a few easy humanities or summer classes. I would argue that this will suffice for basically anything. Also, when applying for jobs or graduate schools freshman will, despite their lower GPA, almost always have advantages over transfer students which are looked down upon in general. The truth is that most people don’t have such a great GPA when they graduate, but this is hardly the result of weeder classes, rather it’s the result of some of the things mentioned above.</p>
<p>Oh, and sakky, I do agree with you that the system is unfair in that freshman should be allowed to take courses at CC, but I totally support the administrations policy of not allowing them to do so. If the option was available to freshman, almost everyone would take it. We all know that CC courses are much easier than classes at Cal, no question. Why would I let my students learn less and thus have less preparation for upper division courses? Simply for the sake of a few GPA points? Not being prepared enough for upper divs might as well result in an equivalent drop in GPA.</p>
<p>Now you might say “Well, then CC courses should not be seen as equivalent.” Yes, they are not exactly equivalent, but roughly equivalent. And like someone mentioned before, it would be a waste of time and money to have someone take a class of which he or she already knows 80%.</p>
<p>by straight A student he obviously meant straight A’s in college</p>
<p>Thomas_ makes a good point. How much can weeder classes really affect someoned? Actually, if you’re a strong straight A student, then chances are you’re at the top of your class and you’ll get an A in the weeder class too. If you’re the average student getting straight B’s, then you’ll be an average student in the weeder class too, and that means you’ll get a B/B- (I don’t know which classes are considered “weeder” so I’m just guessing here). </p>
<p>One interesting thing to notice is that in Computer Science, transfer students usually have to retake many of the lower division classes. Very few community colleges offer equivalents to CS61A and CS61C. My local CC doesn’t even offer CS61B or EE42. Only math would be able to be taken in community college.</p>
Like JBeak said, by straight A student I meant straight A student in college, not High School. HS GPA and UC Berkeley GPA have basically nothing to do with each other ;)</p>
<p>I actually know very few transfers (at berkeley or any UC and I went to CC and talked to hundreds over my time) that went to a CC because they couldn’t get into a UC out of high school. I believe a good 50% of transfers are in their situation because of finances 20% perhaps because they couldn’t get in prior and took CC instead, and 30% because of life circumstances (which aren’t always bad…things like starting a family sooner, taking care of other family members, having to work full-time, etc)…Seriously, actually talk to transfers and they will tell you that there was more to it then they “couldn’t get in before”. Besides, did you ever think as to why they couldn’t get in before and yet they can hack it out now, years later? It’s obviously not an “intelligence” problem, its more of a personal or maturity situation. Perhaps there were circumstances in hs that prevented them from getting the grades then. Perhaps they went to a ****ty hs. Perhaps they had to emotionally mature more before heading off to a uni. There’s more to it then you seem to realize…either way I think your complaints hold no merit simply because we all have struggles in our education and in our personal lives, and also because of what the posters above said…weeder classes can’t affect your GPA that much! Besides, its not like all transfers come in with a 4.0 GPA because of their “easy courses at CC”…I came in with a 3.1 and I’m sure thats worse than half of you complaining.</p>
<p>Weeding actually has relatively little to do with the difficulty of the material itself, but rather with the grading. Any course - even that with the easiest material - can be a weeder by implementing sufficiently harsh curves. </p>
<p>What I remember is that Physics 7B was where a large percentage of students were deterred from becoming science/engineering majors because of poor grades. Those who were good enough to survive to 7C experienced (relatively) easier grading. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Be that as it may, the inescapable truth is that many students receive C’s or worse in weeder courses. True, perhaps those students are not managing their time properly or are not particularly talented. But that doesn’t take away from the fact that, for whatever reason, many students are receiving poor weeder grades. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They can be ruinous because GPA is calculated sequentially, and weeder units are taken early in the sequence.</p>
<p>This is best illustrated by an example. Take a freshman-admit into an engineering major and starts with 4 difficult technical weeders in his first semester. He performs terribly, receiving a 0.5 GPA in his first semester: 2 D’s and 2 F’s. He’s immediately put on academic probation, as is anybody who has less than a 2.0 cumulative GPA, which he clearly has nowhere near. Not only that, but the stipulations of academic probation state that you must then raise your cumulative GPA above a 2.0 by the end of your following semester to avoid being expelled completely. But since he already has a 0.5 GPA, he needs to earn a whopping 3.5 GPA in his next semester to bring his cumulative GPA above 2.0. He is unable to do so, so he is expelled after his second semester. Note, he isn’t just expelled from the College of Engineering - he’s expelled from Berkeley entirely. </p>
<p>Note, lest anybody think that is a contrived example: I actually know this person. I actually witnessed that guy receive a 0.5 GPA in his first semester, and then unsuccessfully attempt to avoid expulsion in his second semester. This actually happened. </p>
<p>Now, granted, he is an extreme case. Nevertheless, the basic problem is that weeders come sequentially early in the process. Sure, maybe if that guy had been allowed to hang around Berkeley for more semester, he perhaps could have ultimately floated his GPA above 2.0. But he was never given the time. The early weeders had already effectively expelled him before he even had the chance to stabilize his GPA. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You say that so flippantly, as if just anybody at Berkeley can earn that sort of GPA. Yet, pray tell, how many such students with 3.85+ GPA’s are there, really? Such a GPA would be good enough to graduate easily within the top 10% of the College of Letters and Science (probably more like top 7%), which would merit graduating with ‘high distinction’, and would occupy even more rarefied air in the College of Engineering. </p>
<p>Now, certainly, I agree with you that anybody who is indeed good enough to graduate in the top 10% of the student body and who will graduate with high distinction are indeed doing very well for themselves and have little to fear from weeders, even if they only earn B’s in them. However, by definition, only 10% of the students will occupy such a desirable position. But if you happen to be one of those students, then that’s great for you. You will clearly have a stellar experience at Berkeley. </p>
<p>But now that we’ve discussed the bright futures of the top 10% of the students at Berkeley, it’s only fair that we now talk about the bottom 10% of the students. What happens to them? I think we can all agree that these are precisely the students who have the most to fear from weeders. They’re the ones under constant threat of academic probation and expulsion. They’re the ones who, even if they do manage to graduate, are going to do so with terrible grades that effectively sunder any chances of them being admitted to any decent graduate school (or, heck, any graduate school at all), or landing any decent job. </p>
<p>If these students have to be weeded, then it’s fair for the transfer students to be weeded also. Otherwise, nobody should be weeded. What’s fair is fair. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And therein lies your paradox. You now admit that the transfer students are not taking equivalently difficult weeder coursework…yet they’re being allowed to skip weeders anyway. The freshman-admits therefore have a legitimate complaint in wondering why they are being forced to learn material - on pain of being weeded out if they don’t learn it - that the transfer students are not being forced to learn. </p>
<p>Besides, I have always floated the proposal that transfer students don’t necessarily have to take the entire weeder course. They could simply pass the weeder final exam. If it really is true that they’ve learned 80% of the material, then they could surely learn the remaining 20% on their own time (if it is indeed only 20% that they are missing).</p>
<p>Hi.
Do you guys not remember that some transfers (like myself) did basically all their general classes at a 4 year schoolllll!? (with the exception of a few at community to save money?) Sheeeeeeshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.</p>
<p>I may have been inclined to believe this myself, but I suspect you might be a strong student. Reality says that weeders actually are often terrible (and certainly in the biology department). If you’re in math or something, it gets harder to do well as you go on, whereas I’ve heard people say it’s the opposite in other departments. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“Average” means very different things in very different classes, and can vary across major and weeder vs non-weeder course status.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then get them to test out of the respective course. Or hold them responsible for this stuff when they are admitted to the major they want to pursue. Either that or don’t require anyone to do it – frankly taking a hard weeder isn’t just a matter of learning stuff well, because sometimes the grading will be harder than it has to be to make you learn it well, and at times in a way that makes it counterproductive for you to spend so much time on it. Harder doesn’t mean better.</p>
<p>Unfairness is everywhere; you cannot blame those who are sensible enough to make it work out for them. Tell the upcoming freshmen who get accepted to Berkeley to decline the offer and go to their local community colleges or go to another 4-year. No one is stopping them.</p>
<p>Unfairness is indeed everywhere, but that doesn’t mean that we should not be trying to eliminate unfairness when we see it. The world would never improve if everybody always simply accepted unfairness without ever trying to change it. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That attitude is even more pernicious and cynical than the one expressed above. It’s bad enough to simply and perennially shrug one’s shoulders and accept an unfair system. What’s far worse is to then recommend people to * exploit* an unfair system. </p>
<p>I have to say, this line of thought has made me appalled and, honestly, frightened for the future. You guys attend one of the most famous schools in the world, and many of you are destined to become leaders of society. The fact that so many of you seem to have adopted such a nihilistic worldview in which unfair systems should not only not be corrected, but should actually be ruthlessly manipulated for one’s own personal advantage bodes tremendously ill for the future. If that truly is the attitude you have, then frankly speaking, I don’t want you guys to become influential leaders in society, for that would only serve to propagate the dystopic vision to which you subscribe.</p>
<p>Suddenly it’s a crime to do what’s in one’s own best interest, even when it means leveling the playing field for a change. The reality of the matter is that you had no interest, and probably never will, in “eliminating the unfairness” when some of those same kids had to put up with the overwhelming amount of crap in their family lives during high school. And guess what? You participated in a system which placed you in an advantageous position. Did you complain then? No. Did you attempt to correct it? Probably not. If you were trying to get into more exclusive schools, my guess is that you were doing quite the opposite: you sat on your ass and *****ed about affirmative action on college confidential.</p>
<p>Why did you start caring now? Oh right, because it’s interfering with your own goals and your own sense of what “should be.” The system wasn’t perfectly meritocratic when you applied for college, and it isn’t one now that the school has decided to allow community college transfers to skip classes. Maybe you should grant them the same benefit that the system initially granted you? </p>
<p>Yes, I know, I know… you overcame hardship and earned every single thing about your current position. It sure is a pleasant mentality to have…</p>
<p>“nihilistic worldview”
“for that would only serve to propagate the dystopic vision to which you subscribe”</p>
<p>How does having AA or benefits for hardship (especially considering they already write about it in their application essays) make a system merit-based?</p>
<p>When you’re advancing your personal interests by exploiting a loophole in the system, damn right it’s a crime, or ought to be. Are you saying that every time I find an opportunity to ruthless exploit a weakness in a system, I should always do so? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Completely wrong - in fact, I have great personal interest in reforming K-12 systems to help poor students who I am well aware do not obtain equitable educational opportunities. I am also involved in a number of charities that directly aid the underprivileged. But you didn’t bother to ask, did you? Seems to me that you weren’t particularly interested in finding out, but instead would rather, as you say, sit on your ass and ***** about other people’s motivations without evidence. </p>
<p>I also categorically reject the implication that only transfer students have to, as you say, “put up with the overwhelming amount of crap in their family lives during high school”. Are you asserting that no freshman-admits ever had to do the same? I can assure you that plenty did, yet they still made it to Berkeley as freshmen. But not only that - they still had to take the weeders.</p>
<p>Now, if you were to assert that every Berkeley student - whether freshman or transfer - who had to suffer through poor personal circumstances deserves to be allowed to skip over weeders, then your argument would at least have a mildly consistent philosophical structure. I would still disagree, but at least your argument would be somewhat consistent. </p>
<p>Heck, even that system would still be patently unfair. Like I said, some students with terrible life circumstances nevertheless were still able to perform well enough in high school to win admission to Berkeley as freshman anyway. If any group of students could be said to be ‘deserving’ to skip weeders, it is that group of students, rather than the transfer students. </p>
<p>But none of that is what you’re proposing in the least. Instead, you’re asserting that all transfers, regardless of personal circumstances - and, let’s face it, there are some that are privileged - deserve to skip weeders, and all freshman-admits, again, regardless of personal circumstances, do not. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>On the contrary. While I didn’t want to bring my own personal background into the discussion, suffice it to say that I’ve been gone from Berkeley for quite awhile now. Hence, whatever reforms Berkeley hopefully chooses to implement will have absolutely no impact on me personally. </p>
<p>But, unfortunately, the same cannot be said for you. Seems to me that you’re taking your stance simply as a self-serving mechanism to defend the (weeder-skipping) privileges that you have, should you choose to transfer to Berkeley. I didn’t want to have to point that out, but hey, you’re the one who brought up personal motivations - a move that seems to have backfired rather spectacularly for you. Facepalm indeed.</p>
<p>please write me a 1000 word response disproving my generic response’s genericness.</p>
<p>you should really make a separate thread for this debate you are having with people in here. the op’s topic explains how transfer students are grossly subpar, yet your argument revolves almost entirely about how butt hurt you are about not being able to skip weeders like the malicious transfer students did. it has almost nothing to do with the op’s claim in the subject.</p>
![http://i297.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■/albums/mm232/mintkiller/facepalm.jpg]......[/url](http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm232/mintkiller/facepalm.jpg%5D......%5B/url){kind=link}
