The article says what I suspected. UC spots are sold to the highest bidder. UC schools go fishing for OOS students with money who can pay their own way and lower their standards to do so. Then they try to convince the Californians that a spot at UC Merced is just as valuable as UCLA and they help to finance it. The current admissions favors OOS with money and in-state with a hook (URM and/or first generation for example). The OOS without money are just a pawn in the game of the California political system and don’t know it.
For those who think the UC system is going downhill, you are in a dream world. UCLA is the most applied to college in the country. UCI had about a 20% increase in applications this year. International enrollment is at an all time high. The UC system’s reputation is going up and shows no sign of slowing down. The state is using their reputation to help spend money elsewhere. Breaks my heart as a parent to see this. If OOS are waiting for FA in the near future, make plans to go somewhere else or find yourself your own personal wealthy donor.
@CMUmechEalumna I think you are wrong on multiple counts:
- UCLA has arranged and offered OOS FA from private non UC non state of CA funds. They need the OOS kids. Check out the UCLA threads for proof. UCLA would rather have a drive for funds for OOS needy kids than lose the segment.
- The lack of funding is well known - just because hordes of unaware kids keep applying does not mean the infrastructure is not being strained. Application numbers are a lagging indicator of a university's financial health. Please speak with current faculty, admin or students at the UCs before making any conclusions. I did.
- The article you are citing does not mention the fact that UC holistic score calculation is skewed toward instate students - they award zero weightage to OOS honors classes but 1 point extra for instate honors classes so the measuring stick is longer for OOS applicants. Also allow me to quote something from the article. You are an engineer yourself - if you do not catch the error in the logic, then it will be to your loss.
“The university admitted nearly 16,000 nonresidents whose scores fell below the median scores for admitted residents,” the report said.
End of discussion - that statement is logically inconsistent. You compare median score of non resident applicants to median score of resident applicants, not just focus on the ones below the median. By definition a median is an average so you will always have data points above and below the median observations so the statement above is faulty math.
Someone did a statistical analysis that was written about by a news agency. I admit that I have not seen the analysis but it is based on real UC applications and admissions and published by the UC system but you don’t like this analysis. You have better information.
You know someone at UCLA and/or Berkeley that said that they want more money for OOS students and they are mad that they lost funding for them. All schools get mad when they lose any funding because they spend a lot of money. Doesn’t matter where the money is from or what it is for! This is your proof? You know people who have opinions about the funding cut? Ok.
"UC holistic score calculation is skewed toward instate students "
well yeah, duh! Its SUPPOSED to be that way .
The UC system was not set up to be an" equal opportunity system".
It was set up the educate the best students of Calif.
Not submedian students from other states.
Your assertion that the above statement that you quoted is “logically inconsistent” shows that you do not understand - A what was said and B- that OOS applicants who were accepted WERE supposed to be held to a higher standard than instate residents. That was supposed to be THE reason they were admitted.
the fact that they werent above par, but instead replaced MORE QUALIFIED Calif students is what has Calif residents and taxpayers up in arms.
The cheese was moved without us knowing.
I’m not sure why you are still posting here-
Didnt your DD get accepted at an elite private college outside of Calif?
"Check out the UCLA threads for proof. "
khaman
The analysis was done by the State Auditor of California. I would really like to know how a Florida resident thinks he has more accurate information regarding UC admissions policies or the stats of admitted OOS students than she does.
If the measuring yardstick is different then the 2 populations are not comparable until you use the same measure. Simple statistics. Do you honestly believe this mumbo jumbo that a random bureaucrat might throw off after being influenced by politically motivated groups? The score for OOS students is calculated differently than that of instate students because of the measurement methodology. So no, that report has zero merit.
There is a lot I would rather not bother discussing since it is a waste of everyone’s time. I actually do worry about institutions of higher learning not having independence and being slaves to politicians. That has always led to a mess. And worrying that politicians might be hurting the UCs drove my initial posts.
I’m posted here because this is a topic that I care about. It’s irrelevant where my daughter enrolls. And because I started this thread that I’m willing to let die with a difference of opinion and yet keep getting engaged with posts that rely upon nothing except brute force. The fact that I’m a Florida resident doesn’t make my logic and arguments spurious.
Haven’t read the thread in several days, but OP, if you are paying out of pocket for Pomona (great school!) why does it still matter what the state schools do since your daughter won’t be attending.
^^ completely agree
I have already blocked this khanam person.
^I am now doing likewise.
Closing thread since it seems to have been reduced to attacking the OP. I have to admit I don’t know why someone has to have a personal stake in an issue to have an opinion. I have opinions on lots of issues that affect me not at all or at most tangentially and slightly. We don’t censor people based on how much something affects them directly.