<p>UC to cut fewer freshmen from fall 2010 enrollment </p>
<p>University</a> of California - UC Newsroom | UC to cut fewer freshmen from fall 2010 enrollment</p>
<p>Good news? The lower the acceptance rate, the higher the exclusivity. The higher the acceptance rate, the more impacted the classrooms.</p>
<p>How is this good news for current UC students?</p>
<p>There will certainly be more money going to higher education, but why would the lowering of freshman cuts (yielding more freshman admits than 2009) be something desirable for current students? I’d think most currents students would want less crowded campuses.</p>
<p>I mean, I can understand it would be good news if they decided to lower the junior transfer admission spaces, but this? This is hardly good news for current students.</p>
<p>I agree with what was said above.
Cutting around 2k students would help Cal out a lot. Plus it would make sure we’re not some school that anyone can get into.</p>
<p>this is somewhat of an omen for prospective UC students lol</p>
<p>FYI to incoming freshmen, remember to take all your AP tests this May. You are going to need all the units you can get, so that you can actually get into your prereqs.</p>
<p>Wouldn’t it be great if Berkeley had a 15% acceptance rate :)</p>
<p>Not quite, the goal of a public university is to serve the public. It wouldn’t be effectively serving the public with that low admission levels.</p>
<p>There is not an inherent problem with higher admission rates, the problem is that the university is currently overfilled and underfunded. They might be promising more funds (which will definitely help), but I doubt that they are going to give the UC the necessary funding boosts to make up for the UC being overfilled. </p>
<p>Holding admission levels constant (until we get through the recession) is a much better idea than rising them.</p>
<p>The ****. Do not do this. Abort action!</p>
<p>My god, stop with this obnoxious public/open/free university fetishization. It’s just so incredibly naive and childish it embarrasses me.</p>
<p>The goal of a public university is the same as the goal of any other university: to educate the people who are enrolled in it. Educating 20,000 of the public well is much preferable to educating 25,000 of the public badly.</p>
<p>^I guess you were one of the 25,000 that was educated quite POORLY (not badly).</p>
<p>Pedantic much?</p>
<p>Dude, this isn’t a college essay. Relax.</p>
<p>sigh</p>
<p>quality of edu > quantity of education</p>
<p>with ginormous and overenrolled classes, you’re not getting the optimal education</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Were. WERE educated. If you’re going to be a grammar nazi, you have to at least conjugate your verbs correctly.</p>
<p>^
not to be a d**k but lakerforever24 was grammatically correct. “one of the 25,000” makes the subject singular, therefore “was educated” would naturally follow. nice try though; i like the effort.</p>
<p>Looks like hes qualified to be a grammar nazi now</p>
<p>I think we can all agree the transfer students ruin Berkeley in every way imaginable.</p>
<p>Junior transfers are what screws up Berkeley. Freshmen are actually worthy of being here, transfers are not. The classes there are cake and most easily are guaranteed to get a 4.0. Transfers basically suck…seriously.</p>
<p>I can’t believe i worked my ass off to get into a university like this.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Let’s rearrange the sentences and see which one makes sense.</p>
<p>This is the sentence that you are proposing:
I guess you were one of the 25,000 that was educated quite poorly.</p>
<p>Rearrange that:
Of the 25000 that was educated quite poorly, I guess you were one of them.</p>
<p>Does that sound grammatically correct? No, because the subordinate clause (educated quite poorly) is clearly directed at the plural subject of the phrase (the 25000, not the one).</p>
<p>This is the sentence in contention:
I guess you were one of the 25,000 that were educated quite poorly.</p>
<p>Rearrange that:
Of the 25000 that were educated quite poorly, I guess you were one of them.</p>
<p>Does that sound grammatically correct? Yes. Good, now you don’t have a compelling reason to remove yourself from the gene pool.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The average high school applicant needs a ~4.15 high school GPA, ~2000 on the SAT, and some moderate amount of extracurricular activities to get into Berkeley. Yet, the average junior transfer applicant needs a ~3.6 community college GPA and no standardized test scores to get into Berkeley. Unfair? Extremely.</p>