Looks like the upper edge of upper middle class to the lower part of the upper class (i.e. upper class but not plutocrat class). Probably ranging from upper part of the “next 9%” referenced in #97 to the lower part of the “top 1%” also referenced in #97.
“Has anyone seen enrollment numbers for Fall 2017 from UCB yet? I’m wondering if they will see some impact from the protests there like Mizzou is experiencing. Looks like their freshman acceptance rate rose from 17.5% to 18.3% this year, which could either be indicative of an issue or could be statistically irrelevant.”
There may be a small impact at Berkeley but nothing like at Mizzou. They are both public universities, but beyond that their admissions situations are apples and oranges. Berkeley is a Top 20 national university and is commonly ranked #1 among public universities… Missouri is currently ranked #111 on USNews. Berkeley’s acceptance rate usually hovers around 15%. Missouri’s is nearly 80%. Thus if some students turn up their noses at Berkeley due to the recent protests there are plenty of other highly-qualified applicants eager to take their place.
@Barrons, yes, that’s the group I am referring to - feel lucky because except for those at the tippy top those days are likely over.
@Scipio I agree that UCB’s reputation will shield it from the impact that Mizzou experienced. I’d be very surprised if there were no impact at all, but maybe people’s “social unrest sensitivity” is as low as their price sensitivity when it comes to the UNSWR top ranked schools.
- []How did their yield compare to previous years, and to the trends of other top schools?
[]How did their yield for full-pay OOS and international students compare to previous years?
[]How many students accepted to UCB and other UC’s chose another UC versus Berkeley - maybe even to UCI, contributing to the enrollment problem there?
[]Did they have to go further down into their waitlist this year?
@Scipio @shortnuke The official UC stats came out and Berkeley’s freshman acceptance rate was 17.2% this year, apparently down a tick from 17.5% last year. If our area is any indication, their yield was high because kids from the 2 large public HS near us are overwhelmingly choosing Berkeley based on the numbers who will be attending. 30+ going to Berkeley from one school vs 18 to UCLA. Similar at the other school from what I saw.
@youcee Thanks for the info.
@youcee That aligns with my observation here as well. I have not seen any increase of kids in our area choosing other UCs or other schools over Berkeley. It appears to be as popular and highly sought after as ever.
Perhaps part of the reason is that being a hot-spot of political protest has long been embedded in Berkeley’s DNA. No one is shocked by it. It may be even be expected. When you check the Berkeley box on your UC app, thoughts that the campus might at some point be the scene of a protest of one kind or another have already been “baked-in” to the decision making equation.
Also, the fight between the alt-right and black-mask groups was not about school policies and practices that affect students who are not involved in them.
In contrast, there was significant discontent at Missouri about school policies in various areas, such as the graduate student health insurance issue, the resignation of the system president over various issues, the actions of a communications faculty member, and the dismissal of said faculty member, that were exposed and publicized during news coverage of the protests. I.e. the events there give the impression that there are significant problems with the school itself that could affect all students, rather than few incidents of rival alt-right and black-mask groups fighting each other.
@Scipio I agree no bad PR will hurt UCB, however it won’t help them keep pace with UCLA’s popularity. UCLA’s stats are higher than UCB’s for the first time.
A few of you have mentioned that Cal Poly is overenrolled. Knowing that, it’s funny to me that S18 is getting emails from that school encouraging him to apply. We live in the Midwest and S has never expressed an interest in any California school.
@youcee RE: UCB: From what I heard, every kid from a local central CA high school was accepted from the waitlist this year with most kids accepting. Not sure why they were underenrolled to begin with, but I am sure they are filling their seats from the waitlist.
@gclsports OOS kids at Calpoly or UCs pay full OOS tuition… they get more $ per student and are willing to take XX number of OOS to help support their programs.
The other thing I will mention about UCs is that their enrollment is growing due to their automatic transfer programs for in state students coming from CCs. While frosh classes certainly seem to be overenrolled this year at many schools, some of UCs higher numbers are coming from transfers, and some (if not all) UCs guarantee housing for first year transfer students.
@Scipio Agree 100% regarding Berkeley. Many students are attracted by its activism and the recent controversy has made it even more well known. Berkeley is a place that you expect controversy and protest. Kids I have worked with have found this a selling point.
@VANDEMORY1342 UCLA stat’s are higher but UCB is far better known internationally. Its grad programs are also world class. UCLA is much like NYU in that respect.
@twicemama I know certain state public university systems use that strategy and so I figured that was behind the mailing from CalPoly. But even if we could afford full pay OOS (and we can’t), we would never consider doing that if we felt like the school targeted my kid based solely on the school’s perception that we could afford full pay. That’s what the CalPoly mailing felt like, given that it was so random, and knowing that they are overenrolled. It seemed to be saying, “Hey, yeah, we know we’re overenrolled and will likely have a hard time accommodating the students we already have. But please, random student from out of state who’s never shown any interest in us, apply! We need you to subsidize everyone else’s education.” Others may not, but I personally would feel very used being full pay under those circumstances.
This is not completely true.
Considerable stock is owned by pension funds, helping fund the retirement of tens of millions of employees, most of whom belong to unions. And this is even though most pension fund assets are now invested in bonds.
Not that this helps in paying immediately upcoming college bills.
Actually, UCLA is as well known as UCB internationally.
Just that UCB is considered elite because most of its academic departments across the full academic spectrum are peers of their Ivy/peer elite counterparts or leave them in the dust(I.e. Engineering/CS) whereas UCLA’s academics up until recently were considered respectable, but not quite on UCB’s elite level.
Also, unless you’re talking a few notable academic gems*, equating UCLA with NYU is IMO doing UCLA’s past and present overall international rep a serious injustice.
Based on what I’ve heard from international students…especially from those who were undergrad/grad students 2+ decades ago…NYU with the exception of the academic gems would have been considered a steep step down compared to UCLA unless one was studying Applied Math, Business, or performing arts.
- Stern School of Business, Tisch School of the Arts, Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences(Notably Applied Math).
Flight to perceived value is also my bet on the cause of the overenrollment. I’m middle class, with zero stock accumulation beyond a pathetic 401(k) that we’ve raided too much already, and there will be no full-pay option in my household, and I’ll be damned if I’ll pay $70k a year for a twee LAC with a rock-climbing wall but few majors and a 40% graduation rate. I’m also in PA, where paying for a spot anywhere in the state system is a financial albatross on all middle-class families. People are now researching cars and dishwashers with laser focus; I suspect the same devotion to research has opened many eyes to the downsides of some colleges.
I graduated in 1980 from Michigan and was unaware until many years later that it was a bad time for employment. I didn’t know a single person who didn’t have a good/professional job upon graduation, although several took jobs out of state. I got hired into high-tech a week before graduation – with a degree in English. I know this is anecdotal and am only posting because @garland’s experience was so different from mine and highlights how far perception can be from reality. I have the same discord with the threads discussing worry over our children not being able to be as successful as we were. I’ve always assumed our son will do better than we have, but that remains to be seen.
Anyway, on the subject the subject of overenrollment, there is a raging discussion on the (non-CC) service academy forum about the ethics and morality of academy appointees putting down deposits and holding on to acceptances from their “plan B” colleges until they get through summer basic training in the event of either a medical turnback or deciding that the military isn’t for them. (Basic training ends in plenty of time to proceed with plan B if necessary.). Many of the posters there rage about how unethical this “insurance” is but don’t seem to grasp the concept of yield management or the fact that so many colleges are over enrolled that a handful of potential cadets or midshipmen (or anyone else) notifying these colleges in late summer that they do not plan to matriculate is not only already accounted for but is a blessing to overenrolled schools. I’ve pointed that discussion here for some enlightenment, but those folks are a different breed.
The idea with such Academy alums and some like-minded sympathizers is that one should only apply and matriculate into a service academy only if one is fully committed to a full career(20+ years) as a commissioned officer in the armed forces. They don’t seem to account for/care that most service academy graduates never make it that far due to the “up-or out” promotional policies which effectively forces many officers to leave before they reach 20 nor do they account for the fact some may end up being RIFed alongside their reserve officer counterparts from ROTC/OCS.
Not surprisingly, they also don’t look too kindly among academy students who transfer out after one or two years like an older cousin did when he decided the military wasn’t for him and he opted for the greater academic challenges from Caltech or academy graduates who leave the military right after their active-duty obligation runs out(a.k.a. “Five and dive”, “punching out after 5”, etc) .
More ironic is how some of those academy alums who are contemptuous of academy students who leave before they are on the hook for the 5 year military commitment(before the first day of one’s third year) or those who leave after 5 years of active-duty service or otherwise before serving 20+ years are themselves folks who did the same for voluntary and not-so-voluntary reasons(i.e. failed to be promoted after 2 sessions with the promotion board or RIFed during military drawdowns).
More interestingly, they don’t seem to have the same degree of scorn for academy cadets who are forced out due to poor academic or military performance during training which is also graded. Seems their reasoning is that it’s worse to voluntary leave than it is to be forced out.
Incidentally, I knew of two former Academy cadets(West Point) who dropped out in the middle/not too long after summer training known as “Beast Barracks”. Both found that the 24/7 military environment wasn’t what they wanted from their undergrad years.