Does anyone else find Haas decisions ridiculous?

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Berkeley
41

<p>"Do you think the admissions people really don't look back at graduation rates/grades to make sure the transfers perform well enough to justify the number of admissions?'</p>

<p>Yes, I do believe that. Plenty of freshman admits don't do well when they get to Berkeley and end up dropping out. If admissions don't bother looking into these students, what makes you think they would do things differently for transfer students?</p>

<p>"Just curious, what are the similar numbers for Berkeley students applying to Haas?"</p>

<p>Applications Received 489
Offers of Admission 260</p>

<p>Keep in mind that these are students who were accepted into Berkeley as freshman. So, these statistics represent the second selection process.</p>

<p>"In short, the general problem regarding all transfer admissions, and not just regarding Haas specifically, is that transfer students get to skip over weeders that Berkeley students have to take. That's the root source of unfairness."</p>

<p>Right. Also, their admission process does not require SAT/ACT. To apply as a continuing student, one must get into Berkeley first. Getting into Berkeley first requires these standardized tests.</p>

42

<p>All of this brings up an interesting thought; Berkeley undergrads could similarly take their pre-reqs at a JC and transfer it over,hence bypassing the weeders. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Right. Also, their admission process does not require SAT/ACT. To apply as a continuing student, one must get into Berkeley first. Getting into Berkeley first requires these standardized tests.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I don't think it really matters at this point. There has been studies that show that SAT scores only correlate to freshmen year grades. Also, its not like its going to be any harder for the transfer students to get in when faced with the SAT as a obstacle. The idea is simple. The number of seats reserved for transfers remain constant. Therefore the admission rates remain the same. </p>

<p>To truly present the SAT as a challenge, Cal has to compare SAT scores, in addition to grades, to current Cal students, all the while removing the reserved seats for transfers. This way, CC students compete with Cal students.</p>

43

<p>Soooo unfair!! I despised my first two years at Berkeley (academics wise). All the classes were so irrelevant, but once upper division classes for my major it's a whole new story :)</p>

44

<p>unlimited: is your major business?</p>

45

<p>ieor, but some ieor professors teach for haas and some courses do overlap</p>

46

<p>Sorry but what does that stand for?</p>

47

<p>Ok, as a graduating Haas major who transferred in from a community college, I feel like I gotta say something. </p>

<p>First of all, Haas is MANDATED by the University of California sytem to open 33% of its spots to transfer students. The reason for that is that it is the only undergraduate business program in the UC system Riverside notwithstanding, which means that it has got to open a lot of spots for community college students and inter-UC transfers (which also happen quite frequently). So this is a unique situation where Haas is both a premier undergrad program AND a school open to diversity. This is how the system has been set up.</p>

<p>Second of all, I agree in principle that community college classes are much easier than Berkeley in terms of rigor. The most important factor here is obviously the competition. Interestingly, Haas itself is not that hard, but after taking some classes in the Econ department, I really felt the difference. This actually leads to one undesirable externality - community college kids oftentimes bring over their study habits from community college (i.e. cramming), and these don't always work. In addition, many of them have the "my life is set!" mentality and don't try hard. However, the same affects continuing Berkeley students, as well. Also, Haas is generally not too challenging, so these effects are muddled.</p>

<p>I sympathize greatly with those continuing students who feel underpriviliged, but there's a strong BUT. First of all, continuing students (not only from Haas, but also from Econ) completely take the cake when it comes to recruiting for jobs. Not because transfers are lesser-able (though some are possibly less-ambitious), but because transfers are oftentimes poorly informed about jobs. Many continuing students are able to plan ahead better, thus packing their resumes with relevant work experience and internships. Transfer students, however, 1) can't "plan" to get into Haas, 2) VERY often have to work long hours to support themselves while in CC, and 3) are confined to non-resume boosting jobs b/c of not having "Berkeley" on their resume. </p>

<p>Interestingly, many Econ majors at Berkeley are better informed recruiting-wise than incoming Haas students, I've noticed. They may have been rejected from Haas or opted for more theory-driven coursework like Econ, but many firms like Goldman Sachs will not discriminate against Econ majors if GPAs and other credentials are equal. So an Econ major who planned job-search early (i.e. freshman/sophomore years) and got some relevant stuff on her resume will be preferred over an incoming 4.0 transfer student. Transfers aren't very much liked by the top firms also because the recruiters (being mostly non-transfers) KNOW of this issue and take into consideration the transfers' lack of preparation for job training. This explains why many transfers opt for Big 4 accounting, and why investment banking and consulting (especially top-level) are usually off-limit. Exceptions happen, no doubt though.</p>

<p>So for me, a transfer student, Haas has been an amazing deal - relatively cheap education, decent coursework, some decent professors, great administration, outstanding recruiting possibilities. But for an Econ major, this should not a reason for despair. You can still take those business classes if you really want to and oftentimes (unless your GPA is being dragged down) you'll be able to find a decent job if you try. </p>

<p>We have this issue coming up this summer - the admins want to prevent students from deferring their mandatory Summer semester in lieu of internships. A friend of mine who got into Haas (and got an internship at JP Morgan) is facing a conundrum - go to Haas and lose the internship or go to JP Morgan and lose Haas. He'll probably pick the latter and set himself up for life in terms of recruiting - at the point where many newly-accepted transfer students would go "JP what??"</p>

48

<p>
[quote]
All of this brings up an interesting thought; Berkeley undergrads could similarly take their pre-reqs at a JC and transfer it over,hence bypassing the weeders.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There are two reasons why this isn’t feasible 99% of the time. One, some majors simply don’t allow this. For example, Haas requires all interested continuing Berkeley students to take the 5 pre-requisites at Berkeley. The second is the timing of the courses. If a continuing Berkeley student were trying to get out of the chemistry weeders (1A, 3A, 3B) by taking them at a community college, it would take at least 3 summers to finish the sequence. And what is this student going to do? Declare his major in the beginning of his/her 4th year? It just doesn’t work well for continuing students to take weeder courses at community colleges.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Well, I don't think it really matters at this point. There has been studies that show that SAT scores only correlate to freshmen year grades. Also, its not like its going to be any harder for the transfer students to get in when faced with the SAT as a obstacle.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>To neglect the importance of the SAT for transfers, you’d have to contend that your freshman year grades at a CC are comparable to those of a Berkeley freshman. This is obviously not true. In addition to predicting first year college performance, the SAT also acts as an equalizer. Almost like a standard curve, if you will. What it does for freshman admissions is standardize the discrepancies between high GPA’s from low-performing high schools and high GPA’s high-performing ones. The SAT can also do this for transfer admissions. It would serve to evaluate a 4.0 from a CC when compared a 4.0 from Berkeley.</p>

<p>In your last statement, I don’t know if you mean that transfer students will score as high on the SAT as Berkeley freshman admits do. But if that’s what you meant, then it’s highly questionable. Most CC students did not score as high on the SAT as freshman admits. For the few at CC that did, then it would pose no problem for them if the SAT was implemented for transfer admissions.</p>

<p>
[quote]
To truly present the SAT as a challenge, Cal has to compare SAT scores, in addition to grades, to current Cal students, all the while removing the reserved seats for transfers. This way, CC students compete with Cal students.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>While this will be more work for the university (as it should, since you are paying some ridiculous amount of money for application fees), isn’t this only fair? Haas continuing students have to jump through 2 hoops, while CC students only have to jump through one.</p>

<p>
[quote]
This is how the system has been set up.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The system is set up like this, but it doesn’t mean that it’s fair.</p>

<p>
[quote]
First of all, continuing students (not only from Haas, but also from Econ) completely take the cake when it comes to recruiting for jobs. Not because transfers are lesser-able (though some are possibly less-ambitious), but because transfers are oftentimes poorly informed about jobs. Many continuing students are able to plan ahead better, thus packing their resumes with relevant work experience and internships.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is a rather strange point. Continuing students plan better, get better internships, and get into Haas with strong resumes. Transfer applicants don’t plan as well, don’t get internships, and have a hard time getting into Haas. I don’t see what’s wrong with this. Planning and looking for opportunities is something that you do on your own. And trust me, Berkeley does not hold your hand and help you with your planning. There may be more opportunities here, but the competition for them is fierce. Furthermore, opportunities at CC’s exist as well.</p>

49

<p>
[quote]
There are two reasons why this isn’t feasible 99% of the time. One, some majors simply don’t allow this. For example, Haas requires all interested continuing Berkeley students to take the 5 pre-requisites at Berkeley.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, then the answer is to then simply allow this to happen. My philosophy has always been that what's fair is fair. If transfer students get to use CC credit to skip over certain weeders, then continuing students should also be allowed take CC courses to skip over those same weeders. Otherwise, those transfer students should not be allowed to skip over those particular weeders. </p>

<p>You can use the same criterion for determining whether credit should be granted. For example, is transfers who got into a particular major got an average of a 3.5 GPA in weeder courses at community college, then continuing students could similarly be required to get a 3.5 GPA in community college weeder courses they take in order to be allowed to skip over the corresponding weeders at Berkeley. </p>

<p>
[quote]
If a continuing Berkeley student were trying to get out of the chemistry weeders (1A, 3A, 3B) by taking them at a community college, it would take at least 3 summers to finish the sequence.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, your example is something I don't understand, for several reasons. Why would he necessarily have to take all those Chem courses during the summer? Why not during the regular semester? Vista Community College is right there, just a few blocks away from UCBerkeley. There are also other community colleges in the local area. I see it as entirely feasible for somebody to be going to Berkeley yet also be attending community college at the same time. It's not that different from how some people take courses at Harvard and MIT at the same time. </p>

<p>Secondly, to your specific example, trust me, the Chem 3 series barely uses any knowledge from the Chem 1 series, and what little it does can be obtained through just maybe a solid day of reading the Chem1 textbook. Furthermore, frankly, this is community college we're talking about. Nobody is going to be checking to see whether you actually fulfilled your prereqs properly at a community college. {Heck, only a few Berkeley classes will actually check to see whether you actually fulfilled the prereqs before allowing you to register.} </p>

<p>However, regarding your other points, I do agree.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Transfer students, however, 1) can't "plan" to get into Haas,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, I think that's precisely the point: nobody can "plan" to get into Haas. Not continuing students, and not transfer students. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Interestingly, many Econ majors at Berkeley are better informed recruiting-wise than incoming Haas students, I've noticed. They may have been rejected from Haas or opted for more theory-driven coursework like Econ, but many firms like Goldman Sachs will not discriminate against Econ majors if GPAs and other credentials are equal. So an Econ major who planned job-search early (i.e. freshman/sophomore years) and got some relevant stuff on her resume will be preferred over an incoming 4.0 transfer student.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
But for an Econ major, this should not a reason for despair.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I'm not sure how relevant this point is, for the fact is, Economics is also impacted. True, it isn't as impacted as Haas, but it is still impacted. Hence, Berkeley students can't count on getting into Econ either. </p>

<p>Hence, imagine how you would feel if you're a continuing Berkeley student who can get into neither Haas nor Econ, then sees some transfer students getting into Haas without having to take the Berkeley weeders? That's the inequity right there.</p>

<p>Personally, I would argue that an even more fair (although more labor-intensive) way for Haas to run admissions is to not even use prereq grades at all. Instead, just have an admissions exam, drawing upon all of the material that was taught in those prereqs. Then combine the test score with the other admissions criteria (i.e. essay, etc.) to get an overall score, and then just admit the top X scorers, whoever they may be (continuing students or transfers). That would be fair because everybody would take the same test. Lest anybody think this is outrageous, I would point out that this is precisely how US college admissions used to be run. For example, in the past, if you wanted to get admitted to MIT, you just took the entrance exam, and if you got one of the highest scores, you got in. And in fact, this is how admissions are still run today in many other countries (i.e. India's IIT's, much of the university system of Japan, etc.)</p>

50

<p>
[quote]
In your last statement, I don’t know if you mean that transfer students will score as high on the SAT as Berkeley freshman admits do. But if that’s what you meant, then it’s highly questionable. Most CC students did not score as high on the SAT as freshman admits. For the few at CC that did, then it would pose no problem for them if the SAT was implemented for transfer admissions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>@tastybeef. What I meant is that if we use the SAT in a system where we admit transfer students based on a quota in which the transfer students compete among themselves, its unlikely to make admissions any harder. A 7%acceptance rate will still be a 7% acceptance rate. There might be some displacement, but overall, the transfer student body would be roughly the same as it would have been without the SAT.</p>

51

<p>
[quote]
If transfer students get to use CC credit to skip over certain weeders, then continuing students should also be allowed take CC courses to skip over those same weeders.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I agree. Unfortunately, that's not how some departments are run.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Actually, your example is something I don't understand, for several reasons. Why would he necessarily have to take all those Chem courses during the summer? Why not during the regular semester? Vista Community College is right there, just a few blocks away from UCBerkeley. There are also other community colleges in the local area. I see it as entirely feasible for somebody to be going to Berkeley yet also be attending community college at the same time. It's not that different from how some people take courses at Harvard and MIT at the same time.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Taking those courses at CC's during the semester would be considered concurrent enrollment.

[quote]

Approval for concurrent enrollment is granted only in exceptional circumstances (typically in relation to availability of courses and hardship). Students should document such circumstances in preparing for the dean's appointment.</p>

<h1>Students are allowed to attend a community college and Cal simultaneously in the summer without permission of the dean.

[/quote]
</h1>

<p>According the L&S' website, permission for concurrent enrollment is not common. I'm almost certain 'hardship' does not refer to the difficulty of the class at Berkeley, but personal conflicts that make taking the course at Berkeley difficult.
What</a> is Concurrent Enrollment? | College of Letters & Science</p>

<p>I guess the chemistry series was not a great example, but the same concept can be applied to the calculus sequence. For someone who has no background in calculus and plans to take them in the summer at CC's, it would take him/her a fairly long time to finish 1A, 1B, and 53. While 1A isn't exactly a weeder, the point is that it would be time-consuming to finish these 3 classes in sequence (since later courses require extensive understanding of material in previous courses).</p>

<p>
[quote]
@tastybeef. What I meant is that if we use the SAT in a system where we admit transfer students based on a quota in which the transfer students compete among themselves, its unlikely to make admissions any harder. A 7%acceptance rate will still be a 7% acceptance rate. There might be some displacement, but overall, the transfer student body would be roughly the same as it would have been without the SAT.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh, I see your point. Then maybe the quote should be removed. It has always irked me that almost a third of the entering class of Haas is reserved for CC transfers.</p>

52

<p>
[quote]
Taking those courses at CC's during the semester would be considered concurrent enrollment.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Then the answer would be to get rid of this concurrency rule. I don't particularly understand what this rule is for anyway. If a student wants to take community college courses during the regular semester, during his own time, why the heck does Berkeley care about it? It's his time, he should be allowed to do what he wants with it.</p>

53

<p>Actually, it is MORE difficult for a transfer student to get into Haas because they DO have to apply to CAL first, and then Haas. There are 2 applications. Second, the acceptance rate of transfers into Haas is 7% compared to 50% if you are already at CAL. Third, you almost have to have a 4.0 plus extracurricular activities/jobs/community service/better essays than anyone applying from CAL because 7% is not a lot… So to answer your comment, it is just as difficult if not more difficult to get into Haas as a transfer. Also, it is a misconception that cc classes are easy. I actually went to Haas as a transfer and had some cc classes that were harder than many Haas classes. Hope this helps! You can prove this by looking at the grades of transfers throughout the years. Most transfers do just as well as continuing students.</p>

54

<p>You’re misquoting statistics here. CC acceptance rate is about 24%. Sadly, 70% of the applicants fail to understand the entrance requirements.
It’s quite obvious which way is harder. How many of the 400 or so transfer applicants will get in Cal as freshmen? How many Cal pre-Haas students are competitive enough that they actually apply?
Do you believe that it’s harder to get a 3.87 gpa at a CC than a 3.70 at Cal? It’s true that Haas upper division classes are not particularly difficult and transfers can do well. But then 75% of the students at Cal can probably do well in Haas too. Why don’t we accept all of them?</p>

55

<p>

</p>

<p>Yeah, well, that’s not saying much, as sunfish pointed out. Haas (upper division) classes are relatively easy. The catch is, can you get into Haas in the first place?</p>

56

<p>Haas and EECS professors are paid much more highly than most other professors, because they could do out into the private industry and make a lot of money. As a result, the UC has to ‘pay them off’ so that they do not leave. This obviously reduces the budget for Haas and EECS. I am assuming that tunnels down to reducing the number of admits.</p>

<p>Second of all, I do not understand why you are blasting Haas transfers for no reason
<a href=“http://trsp.berkeley.edu/Transfer%20Admissions%20Flyer.pdf[/url]”>http://trsp.berkeley.edu/Transfer%20Admissions%20Flyer.pdf&lt;/a&gt;
They get in at a 6% admissions rate. That is ****ing low.</p>

<p>24% is the overall rate, 6% is the Haas rate.</p>

<p>I really do not understand Tastybeef’s rant. They really need to get their numbers right.</p>

<p>Also, think about.
The Haas prereqs are pretty much breadth, FL, and R&C + Econ 1, BA 10.</p>

<p>Find easy breadth and R&C courses are not a problem, so on that end there is not all that much “inequality”</p>

<p>Also, I went on ASSIST.org and looked at the equivalence of UGBA 10 at a random sample of community colleges (this included Mt. SAC, one of the largest CCs in the state), most of them did not have an equivalent, meaning they cannot even take the class.</p>

57

<p>Lefty, in the 2008/2009 admission cycle, of the 1465 transfer applications, 1063 were deemed ineligible because they “did not show planned completion of the admission requirements.” 94 were admitted out an eligible pool of 402. This is akin to getting rejected by UC’s becasue you forgot to take the SAT or complete the a-g course requirements. In such cases, your application is not even evaluated.</p>

<p>Let’s assume that the rate is truly 6%, which everyone agrees is low. What exactly does this mean? This means if you’re a transfer student, you’ll have to beat 94% of your fellow Haas transfer applicants to get in, something difficult indeed. It’s a fallacy, however, to compare this rate with something else and conclude that it’s harder because the number is smaller.</p>

58

<p>^I never said it is harder</p>

<p>I am just making the clear point that getting into Haas as a transfer is not easy</p>

59

<p>

</p>

<p>Nah, I don’t buy that logic, especially in the case of Haas. Sure, Haas professors are paid more. On the other hand, Haas generates (or should be able to generate )significantly more revenue. MBA programs, for example, are giant profit centers at any university school, and thousands of Haas MBA students (full-time and evening/weekend program) feed millions of dollars into Haas every year, with relatively little paid out in the form of financial aid. Furthermore, Haas, just like any top B-school, benefits from numerous corporate sponsorship opportunities. For example, the main lounge/arcade in the main Haas building is known as the Bank of America Forum not because Haas likes BoA, but because BoA is paying for the naming rights privilege. Again, these are not overall building naming rights which are generally awarded to individual donors, but naming rights of individual internal sections within the buildings. </p>

<p>And then of course is the endowment itself. Haas actually has its own endowment - and one of the largest ones of any business school, especially given its small size (Haas has one of the smallest full-time MBA programs of the top schools). This is Haas’s own endowment; it does not have to share any of it with the rest of Berkeley. I don’t even know if any of the other colleges at Berkeley such as the CoE even have their own endowment, and I’m quite sure that none of the individual majors do. Furthermore, Haas has great potential to vastly expand its endowment by tapping its rich alumni base, for the MBA alumni are usually among the richest of any of the alumni of any particular university. {That is why B-schools such as HBS, MIT Sloan and Stanford GSB have significantly larger endowments per capita than do their corresponding universities proper.} It’s hard for me to envision the Berkeley MCB major - the largest major on campus - embarking on its own endowment funding campaign. </p>

<p>[Haas</a> School: 10-10-20](<a href=“http://10-10-20.haas.berkeley.edu/endowment.html]Haas”>http://10-10-20.haas.berkeley.edu/endowment.html)</p>

<p>Hence, Haas should have plenty of incoming revenue to easily offset whatever extra pay they have to provide to their professors. If they do not, then that’s a problem of financial mismanagement and/or failure to extract revenue from potential sources. </p>

<p>In the case of EECS, I doubt that the reason for limiting the number of admits is a problem with funding. The online Schedule of Classes indicates that there are practically no EECS course lecture sections that are completely filled. {Note, some individual discussion and lab sections are filled, but the lectures are hardly ever completely filled.} That indicates that EECS could take in more students. </p>

<p>Even if EECS teaching resources were constrained, I don’t understand why the department couldn’t respond by offloading some of the program to other departments. For example, a lot of EECS - especially CS - is basically just math, and at MIT, many of the advanced CS courses are math courses in that they are cross-listed in both departments. The Berkeley math department has plenty of resources, as very few students actually major in math. Only about 60 undergrads will graduate with math degrees every year<em>, compared to about 300 who graduate with EECS degrees and another 100 who will graduate from the pure CS program. That should indicate that the EECS faculty should be 5-7x larger than the math department, which it is clearly not. The math department has 55 full-time faculty, which is almost the same as the number of graduating math undergrads every year. What exactly are all these faculty members doing? They’re certainly not teaching undergrads.</em>* </p>

<p>*Note, the applied math program draws from numerous different departments, including math and EECS, as well as statistics, economics, and other departments and hence I think it’s fair to exclude it from the regular math program.</p>

<p>**Granted, the math department does run the large ‘utility’ math courses of 16AB/1AB/53/54/55 that are taken by many undergrads who do not intend to major in math, but rather are required for other majors. But the same could be said for many other departments. For example, the chemistry department has to teach 1A/3AB for many students who are premeds and have no intention of actually majoring in chemistry. The physics department runs 8AB/7ABC, and the humanities departments have to run RxAB for the hordes of students who are trying to fulfill their RC requirements. Heck, the EECS department has to run EE100 which is a utility course specifically required by many of the non-EECS engineering majors.</p>

60

<p>

</p>

<p>One of my professors gives us a lecture in both of his class about how the university hierarchy and how things work and what the university needs to do to keep its professors from leaving, one of those things involves paying Haas and EECS professors substantially more than professors from other departments.</p>