<p>“yeah I get that too, but not relevant, since I was asking about cross-admits”</p>
<p>and perhaps that what you meant, but you said</p>
<p>“Perhaps not relevant to the discussion, but I’d love to know why anyone smart enough to get into S would not pick it”</p>
<p>which gives the impression that you weren’t just referring to cross-admits but anyone who is, well, smart enough to get into Stanford. Which would include a bunch of people who didn’t apply to Stanford for various reasons but could have gotten in if they had applied.</p>
<p>Transferable CC courses tend to be much better accepted than AP scores for subject credit, indicating that the universities see them as better lower division courses than high school AP courses. Note also that many high school AP courses take a year to cover what a college course would cover (often in greater rigor or depth) in a semester or less. Additionally, even when the content is broadly the same, the way college courses are run requires the student to have greater self-motivation and time management skills, with less hand holding and progress monitoring that high school courses (including AP courses) tend to have.</p>
<p>Did you go to an academically elite high school? If so, that may not be representative of high schools overall with respect to how rigorous the courses are. You have elsewhere expressed disdain about AP courses and tests; you should know that most high schools’ most rigorous or advanced courses are AP courses, some of which are of poor quality even by AP test standards (i.e. where A students in the AP courses most commonly get 1 scores on the AP tests).</p>
<p>The list of popular majors of CC transfers to Berkeley looks very similar to the list of popular majors overall. A few majors do appear overrepresented (architecture, L&S CS, philosophy), while a few others do appear underrepresented (integrative biology, molecular and cell biology). But most popular majors among CC transfers (English, economics, political science, EECS, business, sociology, history) are popular overall.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes. The 3.3 referred to above is the CC transfers’ average Berkeley GPA, not including their pre-transfer CC GPA (which was 3.6).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While those CC students living at home and attending right after high school may have less in the way of frosh jitters, they are more likely to have transfer jitters when they transfer. Of course, a larger percentage of CC transfers are non-traditional students, who may have had frosh jitters transitioning from some other activity (work or military service, possibly still working while attending CC) to starting CC.</p>
<p>Freshman jitters? What kind of dumb excuse is that for poor performance at college?</p>
<p>Kids who don’t have the maturity and self-discipline to cope with dorm living their first semester are not enhancing the quality of the school in any way, no matter what their SAT scores.</p>
<p>I’d add that a significant number of Berkeley freshmen are commuters, not dorm dwellers.</p>
<p>In support of UCB’s thoughts, the UC has done research on how CC Transfers perform compared to “Native” juniors. They did find that transfers and native juniors differ somewhat in their selection of academic majors, but the magnitude of difference is small (such as 9% of native students select Engineering/computer sciences vs. 7% of transfers) and that transfer and native students earn similar GPAs and complete their degrees in about the same amount of time.</p>
<p>Admit rate only one factor in the selectivity formula, xiggi (which you know better than I). And a very small part at that! (10% of 12.5%, or 1.25%, for that math challenged).</p>
<p>In contrast, SAT/ACT scores are 65% of 12.5%, or 6 times more valuable than admit rate. And, as you also know, test scores are only counted for those who matriculate and are enrolled community members during October. The test scores of the spring admits are not counted for this factor of ‘student selectivity’.</p>
<p>Heck, even top decile is more important than Admit rate. (And yes, that is one factor that UC just makes up; err’, ‘estimates’, since the data does not exist as many/most California high schools do not rank.)</p>
<p>my bad purple titan: when I said smart enough to get into S, I meant actually getting into S. (Sure, there are a lot of smart kids smart enough to get into S that don’t apply. Instead, they may attend the Ancient Eight, or Pomona, or Caltech, or MIT, or other highly selective school. And yes, some even may choose a UC or Michigan or UVa instead.) </p>
<p>it really doesn’t matter what they are doing, ucbalum, because what they are doing is guaranteed to be incorrect; the data – actual class rank – does not exist. (btw: UC GPA is only half a high school record – 4 semesters out of 8.)</p>
<p>@Purple Titan, you’ve got it. If we start off with the assumption that what makes USN happy, also makes students’ experiences and outcome better, then it’s all good, and there is no need to use the word “cheat” or “gaming” to describe what is going on here. </p>
<p>@Gator88NE that article (and the comments) are pretty disturbing to me as the parent of a current student. I intend to discuss this with him and see what is going on from the students point of view here.</p>
<p>I wonder if “Northeastern fixation on improving it’s rankings” is becoming everyone’s favorite raison d’etre for any unpopular (with that person) decision made by NU.</p>
<p>“NU is spending money on new housing (instead of my pet project) because it wants to improve it’s rankings!”</p>
<p>“NU is forcing me to graduate in 6 years, because it wants to improve it’s rankings!”</p>
<p>"NU is plotting with “little green men from mars"™, because it wants to improve it’s rankings!” </p>
<p>BTW: New US News rankings come out on Tuesday (9/9), so lets see if Northeastern improves it’s ranking (from 49). </p>
<p>“I wonder if “Northeastern fixation on improving it’s rankings” is becoming everyone’s favorite raison d’etre for any unpopular (with that person) decision made by NU.”</p>
<p>Agreed.</p>
<p>“Some of the aggrieved professors and their supporters say that a new, unclear standard about publication impact, designed to improve the university’s research standing…”</p>
<p>Are “university research standings” the same as/part of US News college rankings? If not, then although faculty tenure is certainly a topic worthy of discussion, it should not necessarily be part of THIS particular thread…</p>
<p>You can make that assumption if you want, but I still don’t see how chatting up university presidents and excluding foreign test scores improves student experiences.</p>
<p>If NU rises in the rankings it will be further “proof” that they are “gaming/cheating” the metrics. If NU falls it will “serve them right” in the minds of many here on CC. They cannot have upstart schools, be it Northeastern, USC, WUStL, Alabama etc. challenge the hegemony of the schools that know they are the best.</p>
<p>BTW, the black box of tenure decisions has been a topic of discussion at most universities for decades. Any TT faculty member who is denied tenure, especially in the humanities and social sciences, will rally his/her supporters to denounce the school. </p>
<p>@TomSrOfBoston , just to clarify, Alabama isn’t an “upstart” school. It was founded in 1830–one of the older state uni’s. Also, someone recently posted a “tiered ranking” from 1906, I believe, that put UA in the second of four tiers, with many other highly regarded schools. So, just because it isn’t located in one of the colonial states doesn’t necessarily make it either an “upstart” or a new entry in the rankings game. Having said that, I do appreciate your sentiment, and agree with your accurate assessment of the insanity that will take over CC on 9/9. I can’t imagine being a newcomer to CC, peering in for the first time Tuesday.</p>
<p>@happykidsmom: No offense was intended. By “upstart” I mean schools that were good local or regional schools attempting to recruit a national student body and increase their standing in the increasingly competitive world of higher education.</p>
Having said that, I do appreciate your sentiment, and agree with your accurate assessment of the insanity that will take over CC on 9/9. I can’t imagine being a newcomer to CC, peering in for the first time Tuesday.</p>