<p>Is it true that once you transfer, you basically start all over again. Like your GPA goes back to zero, and that there won't be record of you attending community college?</p>
<p>like if it were the first time attending.</p>
<p>You will have 2 GPA’s. One at CC and one at UC. They stay with you for life.</p>
<p>from what i’ve heard, you get to start your GPA over again. I think the new GPA you get from the UC is the one that you’d end up keeping.</p>
<p>@ beyphy - yeah that’s what I was told when I first started CC</p>
<p>Both xcaliberse and beyphy are right, in a sense. </p>
<p>When you start at UC, from the UC’s perspective, you start from scratch, for things like graduating cum laude, honors programs, scholarships, graduation requirements, etc. On a resume, you could justifiably say you “Graduated from UCLA with a 3.9 GPA,” even if your CCC GPA would bring it down.</p>
<p>However, when you’re applying to graduate programs, law school, etc., every college class you’ve ever taken is factored into your GPA. This can actually benefit you–After you graduate from UC, go back to a CCC and take a ton of easy community college classes to boost your GPA for grad school.</p>
<p>@ nick - that’s a smart move :)</p>
<p>Well, what my point is is that what you took at a community college doesn’t leave you. Yes, if you were asked your ucla gpa or something then it starts from when you transferred. On a resume I would put both the community college and UC because questions might arise such as the gap from high school to university and how you graduated in 2 years.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t put my CCC GPA. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If they question why I graduated from college 6 years after I graduated from high school… I tell the truth. I spent some time working before deciding to complete my education.</p>
<p>On a resume, you most likely put the years you attended the uni for example, 2011 - 2013. They’ll wonder how you completed it in 2 years, unless they don’t even look at the years.</p>
<p>Good question. You start from scratch when you transfer. There’s additional information here: [UC</a> Transfer FAQ | Real Transfer Advice](<a href=“http://uctransferfaq.com/]UC”>http://uctransferfaq.com/)</p>
<p>Its pointless to list your CC on your resume. You are listing your qualifications…specifically your bachelors degree which is awarded to you by whatever university you attend. </p>
<p>Xcaliber…I disagree with putting the years you attended (ie 2007-2011) on your resume. I dont think it looks professional…every professional resume I have seen simply lists the year of graduation.</p>
<p>Im not embarrassed of my CC record, but I do not think it adds anything to my resume and all it does is take attention away from my degree I plan to earn from a UC school. Therefore I have absolutely no intention of keeping it on my resume once I transfer.</p>
<p>If you earned a degree from your CC you may want to add that to your resume.</p>
<p>I disagree. If you have both an A.A. and a B.A. listed, it proves you were a CCC transfer. If you just list the year of graduation and your B.A., the employer will likely take that at face value.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So what’s the issue?</p>
<p>Speaking as a CCC transfer, there’s still a stigma against it in some circles, as though we’ve cut in line or something. If nothing else, it means we spent just 2 years at Berkeley or UCLA rather than the 4 that freshman admits spend.</p>
<p>Go check out the Berkeley forum here. Some of the comments about transfers are almost nasty.</p>
<p>I guess my point is, people who know know that it doesn’t really matter. But it won’t hurt you to only list your B.A., and if your resume is read by the one out of ten people who would respond negatively, not listing your A.A. could help.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Your claim is purely anecdotal. While I am not dismissing your claim outright, often those that are based on experiential evidence warrants more attention than is rightly deserved. Thus, without any empirical evidence from say a representative survey of recruiters, I’m a bit skeptical of the CC A.A. bogeyman. </p>
<p>With that said, if you can display the requisite proficiency required for for the job during an interview, then you shouldn’t have any issues. </p>
<p>Furthermore, if you can spin your experience at a CC as a cost-saving, value motivated decision, it would show potential employers that you have foresight and maturity. Two qualities that employers place a premium on. </p>
<p>Finally, I haven’t read the comments that you speak of. But if they are from non-Community College students at Cal, then chalk it up to transfer-phobic twats with sexual inadequacies. They don’t merit any discussion.</p>
<p>Are you for real? Of course my assessment is anecdotal. The bottom line is, I can’t imagine any scenario where listing both an A.A. and a B.A. on a resume would help you, versus listing just the B.A. If it won’t help you, why take the chance?</p>
<p>You bring up the “spin” angle. Have you tried applying for jobs lately? If you have, you know it’s absolutely brutal, even for college graduates from great schools. As I mentioned in another thread, I do a little work for a criminal defense attorney–a one-attorney law firm. He recently posted an ad looking for a paralegal, or summer associate type. He offered $12/hour. The person he ended up hiring graduated from Stanford with a B.A. in history and a 3.49 GPA. He went to UCLA for law school, graduated, and was recently admitted to the Bar. He beat out several similarly overqualified applicants. </p>
<p>Employers are getting so many resumes that you won’t have a chance to “spin” in an interview, and if you tried to include something on your resume about your time at CCC being a value motivating decision, it will come off as defensive. The attorney I mentioned received nearly a hundred resumes in response to a single Craigslist posting, and he only really reviewed the ten most qualified resumes, and interviewed the three best–and they were far, far more qualified than he was expecting. Employers have the freedom to reject an applicant for the slightest blemish on their resume, and they do–why shouldn’t they?</p>
<p>Oh, and about those transfer-phobic twats… Some of them will be making hiring decisions, and they’ll still be bitter about us “cutting in line.” They existed 10 and 20 years ago, too, I’m sure. Why let them know unnecessarily?</p>
<p>Yes, I realize that much of this post was also anecdotal. If you want some statistics, check out the unemployment rate for recent college graduates. Some reports I’ve seen have 50% or more of recent college graduates either unemployed, or working in jobs that don’t require a college degree (e.g., a job at Starbucks). This is not an environment that allows you to take chances just because you’re proud of your A.A.</p>
<p>Wow long (but good) post. Pretty much hit the nail on the head. In today’s job market, you need to make the employer think you are the smartest/best person for the job. Why even bother with a applicant who has to “spin” their education, when you have 20 other applicants with perfect resumes? They are just gonna cut anyone without a perfect resume, and then go from there.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As I have already mentioned, I did not wholly dismiss your claim. But I don’t care if the subject we are discussing pertains to A.A. degrees or something else. I am wary of ANYONE that peddles fear from their Internet soapbox without empirical proof. Maybe it’s because I’m a Statistics tutor or because I’m a debate coach, but I refuse to completely buy into anyone’s claims when they rely primarily on experiential evidence. </p>
<p>Furthermore, your example concerning the paralegal that was hired by your boss is mistakenly presupposed. The reason is because we don’t know whether or not your boss would have made the same hire had the person earned an A.A. degree and noted it on their resume. </p>
<p>Additionally, a lot of people are choosing the CC option because it makes financial sense for them. That isn’t defensive, that’s the truth. As I adequately alluded to in my previous post, an applicant must display the requisite proficiency necessary for the position. Thus, A.A. or not, you’ve got to know how to do your job. </p>
<p>Also, the statistic concerning, “50% of recent college graduates are either unemployed or working jobs that don’t require a college” is UNEQUIVOCALLY fallacious. It is a red herring. To draw a conclusion from a statistic that has numerous hidden variables is a leap of faith even the most zealous adherent of Xenu would have problems with! Consequently, I am well aware of “malemployment” but that’s a consequence of frictional unemployment, which is a function of economic troughs. This happens during distressed economic conditions. </p>
<p>Finally, here are some more legitimate reports vis-a-vis employment and recent college graduates:
<ol>
<li>[url=<a href=“http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm]Table”>http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm]Table</a> A-4. Employment status of the civilian population 25 years and over by educational attainment](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/25/business/economy/25gradjobs.html"]http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/25/business/economy/25gradjobs.html[/URL”>Job Prospects Improve Slightly for Graduates - The New York Times)</li>
</ol>
<p>The last link is from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics. Also do keep in mind that employment statistics are lagging indicators.</p>
<p>As you’ll notice, the labor participation rate is over 70% and with unemployment rates holding steady around between 4.2 - 5.1.</p>
<p>Again, are you serious? I’ll address your points in order:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This isn’t a debate competition. This isn’t a statistical analysis or a formal essay. This is an argument centering on logic, not an attempt to score points with a high school debate judge. You’re so centered on the methodology of our exchange that you’re missing the big picture. There is one question here: why take the chance? This is the core of my argument, and you haven’t addressed it. </p>
<p>All you say is, “I won’t accept your argument without proof!” Let’s try this: Prove to me with empirical evidence that it would help a job applicant to list an A.A. If you do not know empirically that it will, then neither of us wins that argument, and we assume that it could either harm or help to list it.</p>
<p>Now consider a Freshman admit. Would any employer review a resume, see only a B.A., and say to himself, “Well, if only the student had been a community college transfer I’d hire him. Unfortunately he had the grades and the financial resources to attend Berkeley for all four years right out of high school. In the trash he goes.”</p>
<p>I’m sorry, but logically, I don’t see that happening. There are not any statistics on this, and this would likely be a very difficult subject to measure accurately. Relying on reason alone, I cannot see a scenario where a UC graduate who was a Freshman admit would be harmed because he or she did not have an A.A. to list on a resume. There are scenarios where an applicant could be harmed for being a transfer student–like with those twits you suggest we simply ignore. Therefore, I believe the safe route is to list only the B.A.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’ve missed my point. That example was to show how difficult today’s job market is, not to somehow show that my boss had rejected an A.A.-holding applicant for that reason. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, you’ve missed my point. I agree that CC makes financial sense for a lot of people–me included–and CC students who transfer to top UCs tend to do as well academically as Freshman admits. I agree that transfer students are generally just as able to do the jobs they apply to as Freshman admits.</p>
<p>The problem is, you can really only convey those things well during an interview. If you write on your resume, “Note: I attended community college just because it made financial sense,” it comes off as defensive. If you list your A.A. but no explanation, it gives the reader questions about why the applicant attended. If this was an “applicant’s market,” if you will, that would be fine–the applicant would have a chance to discuss his education during an interview. Right now, that’s frequently not an option.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow. I realize this is the third time I’ve said this, but, come on. Are you serious? “Adherent of Xenu?” While I appreciate the implication that I bear similarities to Tom Cruise, I can assure you that I am not nearly as good looking (and I’ve been called glib on occasion).</p>
<p>First, can you please stop talking about fallacies? I get that you’re a debate coach and you think that calling something I say a red herring is supposed to automatically invalidate it, but it’s really starting to get annoying. If I make a point you don’t like, just say so, and say why, but don’t pull out your forensics handbook. It’s like we’re in a street fight, and you keep looking for a referee to award points after each strike. </p>
<p>That said, I think you’re again mistaken as to my intent. It’s as if you think I’m attempting to connect that example to students who earned A.A. degrees. As with much of the rest of my post, it was intended to emphasize how bad the current job market is. </p>
<p>Based on your red herring accusation, I think you believe my argument to be, “Listing an A.A. degree on a resume hurts the applicant’s chances with employers–just look at how many recent graduates are unemployed!” </p>
<p>What I’m really saying is, “There isn’t a scenario where an applicant would be penalized for listing only a B.A. degree. With recent college graduate unemployment so high, applicants shouldn’t take the risk of listing their A.A. degree.” That is, my point on unemployment is intended to support a particular course of action, not to prove an unrelated topic.</p>
<p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>The BLS chart you link to shows data for people *over[/] 25, excluding many of the most recent college graduates. (Interestingly, I cannot find BLS data for college graduates under 25–I found a few places that say that BLS doesn’t produce such data.) Furthermore, as you acknowledge, that BLS chart does not take into account malemployment.</p>
<p>I think you’re attempting to invalidate my point on malemployment by saying “it’s just the result of distressed economic conditions.” Well, exactly. The economy does stink, that’s my point. Since the economy stinks, applicants need to be as strong as possible, and not take chances for the sake of vanity (e.g., “I’m proud of my Rio Hondo College A.A., so I’m gonna list it, darn it!”).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Consider these remarks from economist Andrew Sum of Northeastern University:
[url=<a href=“http://www.dailyiowan.com/2010/12/06/Opinions/20348.html]Youth”>http://www.dailyiowan.com/2010/12/06/Opinions/20348.html]Youth</a> in the Great Recession - The Daily Iowan<a href=“I%20realize%20this%20is%20primarily%20an%20opinion%20piece;%20it%20provides%20a%20transcription%20of%20comments%20given%20orally%20by%20Mr.%20Sum”>/url</a> </p>
<p>This is what I’m talking about when I say that as many as 50% of recent college graduates are unemployed or working in jobs that don’t require a college degree. That’s a far cry from that five percent figure you cite.</p>
<p>Again, I think you may have misunderstood why I mention this. I’m not implying that fifty percent of recent graduates were CCC transfers who list A.A. degrees on their resumes, and are rejected for that reason. I’m showing the larger environment, an environment where any blemish on a resume will likely lead to rejection–not just rejection, but not even a call back or an interview. There are simply too many blemish-less applicants.</p>
<p>As for the NYTimes article, what I think it says is, “Unemployment for recent graduates is lower than last year, but still pretty high.” I think that’s a fair assessment, and I don’t think it detracts from my argument.</p>
<p>Let me sum up my argument again, simply, so there’s no ambiguity. I happen to believe that a small, but real, number of employers will respond negatively to transfer students. I do not believe that any applicant will be rejected because he only has a B.A. listed. There is no empirical evidence on this, and it would likely be difficult to produce any accurate empirical evidence. In the absence of empirical evidence, we must rely on reason, and it’s reasonable to assume that listing only a B.A. will not harm an applicant. On that basis, I advice applicants to not reference their time at CC unnecessarily, because I consider it to be a risk. In a poor economy with high levels of unemployment, underemployment and malemployment, applicants cannot afford to take unnecessary risks when applying for jobs.</p>