Have we forgotten about the Cal State system?

Applying to College
1

<p>Posts have been popping up about the UC system (in particular, Cal and UCLA) about how the UC is bogging down because it has to admit less-qualified applicants because that is the nature of its system - to serve the educational needs for Californians (such as here: <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=199269)%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=199269)&lt;/a>. So, my question is: What's wrong with bettering the UC system as an elite research institution?</p>

<p>Some people respond by saying, "The UC system is there to support students of California." Well, what about the California State University system? California should continue to develop the Cal State system as the main way for Californians to get their Bacholor's. It has about 414,000 enrolled students. I'll quote some things from the Wikipedia page (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal_State)%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal_State)&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
The CSU prepares about 60 percent of the teachers in the state, 40 percent of the engineering graduates, and more graduates in business, agriculture, communications, health, education and public administration than all other California universities and colleges combined. Altogether, about half the bachelors degrees and a third of the master's degrees awarded annually in California are from the CSU.</p>

<p>In an effort to maintain a 60/40 ratio of upper division students to lower division students and to encourage students to attend a California community college first, both university systems give priority to California community college transfer students. The state, which funds all three institutions, encourages this because the cost of educating a student through a community college is less.</p>

<p>...the CSU system has been commonly referred to by California residents as "The People's University."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So, my question is: Why should the UC continue to bog itself down? It is [notoriously] easy to get into any UC. Cal and UCLA undergrad won't be able to compete with the best of the best unless it improves itself. People say it's not the mission of the UC campuses to become elite universities but do admit that Cal and UCLA should be able to compete with the top privates. The top of Cal undergraduates can 'best' (or at least, run with) the top of Harvard undergraduates, but the bottom of Cal can't even hold a candle to the bottom of Harvard. The cross-admit numbers for Cal and Harvard/Stanford/Yale/etc. are not that high, and how many actually choose Cal? </p>

<p>What's wrong with making the UC system more prestigious? What's wrong with making UC the very best of the best (because honestly, Cal and UCLA undergrad isn't right now)? The Cal State system is there. Yes, UCs will bred elite graduates, and they'd be just that: elite Californians. Set the bar as high as HYS does, but for Californians. UC doesn't have to forget its commitment to California when it demands more of its applicants/admitted undergrads.</p>

2

<p>Oh, and I'll quote sakky, who said it better than I:</p>

<p>
[quote]
However, there is a certain notion of fairness that has to be interjected into this discussion. I agree that community college students ought to have an opportunity to earn a 4-year degree. But my question is, why does it necessarily have to be at Berkeley or UCLA? In fact, why does it have to be at a UC at all? There is an entire school system, the California State University system, that offers 4-year degrees.</p>

<p>Hence, the point is, to say that community college students need an opportunity to get a 4-year degree and therefore have to go to Berkeley or UCLA is a strong non-sequitur. After all, you don't hear community college students saying that just because their school doesn't offer 4-year degrees, that they automatically 'deserve' the right to go to Harvard or Stanford. So why demand the right to go to Berkeley or UCLA? The 'public' status only goes so far. After all, transfer students can't simply demand the right to go to, say, West Point or the Naval Academy, yet those are clearly public schools.</p>

<p>Now, don't get me wrong. I am not saying that Berkeley or UCLA should not accept any transfer students. Far from it.</p>

<p>The question really comes down to a matter of fairness. I have no problem with transfer students trying to get into Berkeley or UCLA. But it should be no easier to get in that way than it is through the regular freshman admissions procedure.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I realize the post is about transfer admits, but the concept is the same: What about the Cal State system when it comes to admissions, and why does Cal and UCLA have it hold itself back by admitting less-qualified applicants on a lower standard?</p>

3

<p>Does anyone have any numbers on how easy it is to go from CC to UCLA/Berkeley?</p>

<p>I think the UC system has it good compared to Umich and UVA. Umich is seen as a safety for even out of staters and I know several people with 3.2's and 1300s on M/V who get in without much problem. </p>

<p>UVA has another problem where Southern Virginians can get in with much lower stats than their Northern Virginian counterparts.</p>