Extremely Let Down By UCLA

Transfer Students UC Transfers
81

<p>Not what I’m saying. If one can’t come up with whatever way of creative financing or merit or jobs needed to make up the difference, then yes, he/she shouldn’t attend. (Read: At least get a paying job during summer to make up some of the difference if not all the $3,000.)</p>

<p>A lot of the protesters, were probably from poorer backgrounds, which meant taht the increases didn’t apply to them (or any tution fees at all). So in that regard, casualty’s right, I do have something against a lot of them because they didn’t have the wherewithal to realize the income caps placed them below this threshold. (Read: A lot of protesters weren’t very smart.)</p>

<p>I genuinely feel for the middle class which is being pushed out of the system, but then where are fees wrt other publics? Not too bad really… </p>

<p>I do have something against complainers. Especially since CA has the best public higher educational system in the world that allows someone to attend a two-year college at extremely nominal cost, one practically in every community at decent to good quality, and transfer to great universities like UCLA and Berkeley and Irvine and San Diego and Santa Barbara and Davis and Riverside and on and on… (Read: Be grateful for what one has in CA wrt the three-college system, and that UCLA would allow one in after attending a cc – UCLA takes in less at high school standing than, say, Berkeley, but makes up the difference from other four-years and mostly from ccs.)</p>

<p>Do I like fee increases? Of course not. I’d like to see UC back to prior times when people from out of state move to CA to get their kids into CA’s great public-educational system because fees for UC were probably at one time $100/quarter or maybe less. A lot of UCLA alumni from the 50’s-80’s were from places like NY, a lot of them Jews, who saw the greatness of CA’s public higher educational system and became o/s professionals without having owed anything, though $100/quarter was probably a lot of money back then. </p>

<p>UC to its credit is working on rolling back tuition; hopefully someone in the governor’s chair will be amenable to this.</p>

82

<p>UCLA of all the UCs gets most of all private contributions and top-10 in the country, year by year. But yet, what is the school’s endowment? ~ $1B, if that? This is one of the reasons why I believe UCLA’s administration is highly incompetent. If the university (administration) were smart, it would be building up an endowment to become less dependent on state funds for undergrad education.</p>

83

<p>^1.8B according to Wiki, behind Berkeley’s 2.3B endowment.</p>

84

<p>drax–i’m assuming you work. i understand where you’re coming from and that it probably bugs you that some people expect to get things handed to them. However, getting a job is easier said then done in these times, and even with a job, many have other things to take care of such as bills or supporting ones family. You don’t know where these protesters come from, and even if the fee’s didn’t apply to them that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t speak up. Nothing personal against you, but I’m annoyed by the notion that because someone gets help, others will have something taken away when that is so clearly not the case. Just because some students can attend without having to work, doesn’t mean you have to work harder to get that same education… I’m not sure if I’m clearly articulating my point…but that’s just my 2 cents.</p>

85

<p>

</p>

<p>Good assumption…</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You know me pretty well now. :wink: </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Understood…</p>

<p>I also understand, poorer people have a much larger burden in obtaining a college degree. With this in mind, attending any UC wasn’t meant for those who have to be fully or even partly employed during the academic year. The motto, “one cannot have two masters,” applies to attending school at UC.</p>

<p>Some people choose (or have) to work during the school year, to the detriment of their grades, health, whatever. I congratulate them for their dedication for doing so. Family does come first.</p>

<p>But with this in mind, they should consider Cal State, which understands that there are many who attend the system that do work and have to do so, and as a consequence there are many more night classes, etc, at CSU to cater to this crowd.</p>

<p>And if they want to attend grad professional school, there are lots of them that take CSU grads and have part-time schedules as well as night classes: Loyola, Whittier, Southwestern Law; various management schools, etc. But UC and specifically UCLA, again, wouldn’t be very good for concurrent work and law & management studies.</p>

<p>It’s a fact of life, poorer people who have to work should really consider foregoing a UC education for a CSU, the latter with more vocations. Maybe their next generation, would be primed to attend UC or even Harvard once their first generation is established. </p>

<p>Ward Connerly, former Regent, even proposed taht UCLA and Berk should be semi-private like Uva, and leave the rest of the Ucs as state-supported entities. Either way, unless there are some good creative ways to roll back tuitions at UC, then we can’t expect them to go down anytime soon. The state would have to re-infuse itself with cash flow to be able to roll back tutions.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>My post isn’t meant to be invective against the poor. I do, though, appreciate appreciation by those who understand the good things this state does to educate its residents (and even those who aren’t), including among which is its higher educational system, the best public college system in the world. </p>

<p>Thanks for responding, but lest we be accused of hijacking this thread, let’s think about putting our chat to rest. Take care…</p>

86

<p>@organicgreentea</p>

<p>if you’re willing to mini-commute, culver, westchester, and playa are cheaper options to live, but if your classes clash with the downtown commute, expect not to take the fwy</p>

87

<p>just one last thing-- you’re saying if you have to work you shouldn’t even attend a UC? That doesn’t even make sense to me. If you work your school work will suffer regardless of what school you go to. To say that UCLA should be limited to those who can pay for it without having to work or rely on assistance seems elitist and again, makes no sense to me. Good thing this isn’t the case and we have a system where a student can attend whichever school they got into, and not whichever school they could go to without having to work.</p>

88

<p>@the above argument</p>

<p>I understand that UCLA is an awesome school, but that doesn’t mean we need to be blindly content with everything policy-wise that goes on. personally, my frustration stems from the lack of viable information and poor transfer setup we are getting from the school. UCSD outlines EXACTLY what the transition will be like, and put together a very organized and convincing program. I feel like we’re getting scraps and because it’s UCLA, we should just accept it. I’ll probably end up SIRing to LA, but I feel like I’m making an uniformed decision that I may not be happy with the coming year.</p>

89

<p>

</p>

<p>No, rather, a person who has to work during the academic year, should consider a CSU instead (I’m not limiting UCLA’s access). He/she could work, say, in accounting at a firm during the day and take night classes, etc.</p>

<p>Sure, grades will probably suffer anywhere, but CSU’s tend to be less competitive, so academic performance may not suffer as much. The motivation of the working student may be more geared and motivated towards taking his/her degree in something for which he or she is involved at work.</p>

<p>And I am saying is the more elite (bad word) a school is the more they want you to work less. These schools will also try to make things easier on a poorer student with financial aid to make sure the student doesn’t have to work, offering tuition breaks for someone under a certain family income, etc, or in the case of UCLA (UC in general) and Stanford, entire breaks.</p>

<p>Also UCLA is geared more towards a non-professional undergrad education (engineering, and a few others notwithstanding), which means the student will probably want (need) to attend med, law, b school, unless he or she is headed towards a sales career: commercial or residential real estate, other general bus careers, etc. </p>

<p>UCLA wants students to major in, say, history and attend law school; major, say, in chem and attend mgmt school; major in, say, music and attend med school. This is one of the reasons why the school doesn’t want to bring back bus-ad, but instead caved just a bit and made a bus econ degree (sadly).</p>

90

<p>mkckman: I hope someone here can give you directions to help you in your information quest. I don’t think UCLA devalues xfers; the school values them (you) highly. The school is winding down this academic year, and I hope for your sake it gears up for xfers duirng the summer in transition concerns. Can you take a class (classes) this summer? They’re easier…</p>

91

<p>drax, I kind of got what you were saying until your last post. my dad had to work full time through ucla, I will probably have to work substantially through my time there. I can name a dozen other people who work pretty heavy hours to help pay for their education at UC and are getting by just fine academically. I don’t feel as though I or they should be excluded from UC because of economic status/how much we have to work. that’s not what a public university is about. I pay my taxes and worked my *** off to get into the UC system, and I’ll continue to do the same now as always.</p>

92

<p>Very noble, mkcman…</p>

<p>And they do have services jobs at both UCLA and UCSD, to meet your demands, unless you have something lined up at both outside of campus. I don’t know if both restrict employment hours at these jobs, but one will obviously see students staffing jobs at Carl’s, Taco Bell, and in the dorms, student stores.</p>

<p>Only thing, though, I’m not trying to limit access to UC by those who have to work during the school year, just trying to say UC isn’t geared towards teh working student: not as many vocational majors for concurrent work/study (per my example of CSU student majoring in acct and working at a firm, though is possible at UCLA), not night-school oriented as CSU and other schools are - work days and classes at night, etc. Most professional jobs are obviously day-time employment.</p>

93

<p>got it. well fortunately for me i’ve already done my major internships while at JC and now i’ll be working just to help myself come somewhat closer to even when it’s all said and done. i see what you’re getting at though…just the way you wrote it made it seem like UCLA was a smidge elitist and posh haha.</p>

94

<p>@ UCCasualty
It’s something I just did.</p>

<p>I’ll be starting my enrollment into Cal fall 2010.</p>

<p>In fact, I just came back from their Bridges Transfer Weekend for the past three days.</p>

<p>Sending that SIR in was the BEST DECISION OF MY LIFE.
Hands down : ]</p>