<p>What are your favorite things about ucla?</p>
<p>Recruiting and reputation is outstanding in engineering/CS. I’m currently doing a fantastic internship alongside mostly Stanford and MIT students. I wouldn’t have had this opportunity from my previous college (UC Riverside).</p>
<p>Pros: Great for Sport Teams. Amazing law and natural science program. One of the best universities in the world. Great Student Newspaper. </p>
<p>Cons: professors arent very accessible</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>strongly agree with this, they generally seem pretty overworked and have little time to talk outside of their OH.</p>
<p>Cons: people **** on the toilet seats and sometimes don’t flush the toilet after going number 2… (you people know who you are, and I hope you feel guilty)…</p>
<p>Con- 50% asian like all UC’s.</p>
<p>50% asians… how is that a bad thing?</p>
<p>all the UCs aren’t 50% asian. That being said, Cal, UCLA, UCSD, and UCI predominantly are, but i don’t think UCD or UCSB are. It’s not necessarily a bad or a good thing. But asians only make up like 2% of the US census, so it’s kind of odd when they make up like 50% of a given university (although i think the percentage of asians in california is much higher)</p>
<p>i believe the statistics are as follows:</p>
<p>UCB: ~50%
UCLA: ~40%
UCSD: ~50%
UCI : ~50%</p>
<p>con- too many asians and white people; not enough diversity. </p>
<p>the demographics of ucla do not accurately reflect the demographics of southern california. </p>
<p>all because of 209.</p>
<p>we need to assist societys less-advantaged members to remedy the effects of past discrimination.</p>
<p>society benefits when we maintain diverse schools, workplaces, and businesses. people from different backgrounds, cultures, and genders bring complementary skills that collectively enrich the places where they work and learn.</p>
<p>Con: it’s in LA</p>
<p>pro: attractive student body. here and Berkeley is night and day</p>
<p>If you want to see more “society’s less-advantaged members” in UC campuses, then you need to tell those “society’s less-advantaged members” to study hard and not to spend their time after school doing nothing but wandering around the streets. </p>
<p>It’s not UC’s fault that they don’t have enough grades to be admitted. </p>
<p>Plus, it’s not really that hard to meet the minimum admission requirement to get into lower UCs like Riverside or Merced.</p>
<p>There’s not much the UC’s can do about the diversity. It’s not like it would give admittance based on if you are or aren’t this specific race.</p>
<p>@wifey99999999: whoa, you have to be careful how you phrase that. The reason why those “disadvantaged” people cannot get the grades is because they don’t have the environment to study. Who the hell is going to be thinking about “I need to get an A in AP Calculus BC or I won’t get into UCLA!!” (assuming the less privileged high schools even have the program) when they have other more pressing problems at hand. People who suffer from bullying, financial struggles, family issues, and etc have a difficult time seeing past their problems, and for these reasons they turn to things like drugs and crime in order to “escape”. So, wifey9999999, I seriously hope that you are not as narrow-minded as you sounded like in your post.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>that’s a bit presumptuous. additionally, there’s a reason why they’re called ‘society’s less-advantaged members’ simply because, they are. It’s very well supported that children from more affluent families tend to do better academically than those who aren’t. The statistics are out there and they support this. It could be for a number of reasons: 1) you usually have access to more/higher quality/both resources 2) more affluent families tend to be better educated, and hence, probably have a higher emphasis on education etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No it’s not their fault. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t do anything about it though. UC stands for University of CALIFORNIA. And, even if not equally, all californians contribute to it, and as a result, it should have some representation of the whole of californians (which i feel it does)</p>
<p>You can think ‘oh cry me a river, if they worked hard enough they would get in’ but there’s no denying the strong correlation between income and education. It’s probably very reasonable for you to be against this since, i imagine, it goes against your interests. But just because it does, doesn’t mean it’s fair. </p>
<p>Going solely based on academics has its advantages and disadvantages. One the one hand, the prestige of the university is increased, and from an administrator’s perspective, the students seem very well prepared for the level of difficulty at the university, in addition that if more affluent families attend, this probably leads to increased donations from alumni. The downside is it goes against diversity, and universities end up being filled with either a few races, people from affluent backgrounds, or both.</p>
<p>the upside of adding diversity is you get a unique mix of students who are interacting with other students that they wouldn’t have otherwise have had the opportunity to do so. (e.g. students who come from places where there’s simply one or two races.) In addition, you also help give quality education to students who come from poor/working class families. The downside is that it isn’t ‘fair’ to those students who worked hard, who don’t get in because other students who didn’t work as hard, academically, got in because of other factors.</p>
<p>Inasmuch as we can’t control the affluence of the families we are born into, we can control how we view applicants based on things like this, and hence, what roll it takes on their academics. John Rawls argues that these inequalities are fair because things like this make up for historical injustices which put minorities in the situation they’re in, and as a result, why they’re academics are poorer. I agree with this.</p>
<p>overall though it’s just a political issue. The UCs, a public university, don’t want to be accused of racism (which ironically would occur either way but apparently its worse against minorities) so that’s why the current policies are in place.</p>
<p>It’s funny how this became a debate on the diversity at the uc’s
By the way, aren’t all colleges requires by law to not discriminate by race? I never understood that… The whole “whites/Asians are the majority” thing</p>
<p>Although it’s an interesting statistic, I don’t mind the percentage of ethnic/racial groups the way they are. I understand that many people may be hung up over the issue of race, but that isn’t necessarily relevant to the quality of the school itself, or for you attaining your degree. I’m Caucasian myself though. Anyway, thanks for starting the thread. I’m about to enter UCLA, and I’d like to know more about what I’m getting into, if you know what I mean.</p>
<p>public ones are, private ones aren’t (although i’m sure they’d look really bad if it was found out that they did.) IIRC UCLA was accused of ‘racist admission practices’ and some professor retired over the issue or something. Nobody really cares anymore about it though imo.</p>
<p>Sorry, it’s more of you being naive than me being narrow-minded. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t use their background as an excuse for not getting to an UC. And I am not talking about the more selective UCs. I am talking about lower tier UC like Merced or Riverside. UC guarantees a spot at one of its campuses (i.e. Merced or Riverside or Santa Cruz, etc) for all California high school graduates who meet the minimum eligibility. And I think you know that it’s not very hard to attain UC’s minimum if you put in some decent amount of work to get passing grades on average. You don’t have to be rich or be super smart or take a bunch of AP classes to get into one of the UCs. It’s just about whether or not they want to do it… not that much to do with their family background, IMO.</p>
<p>Wifey is right. Besides, it doesn’t make any logical sense to admit unprepared students into top-UC’s. Why is it such a bad thing for these “less-advantaged” students to go to community college for 2 years and transfer to a good UC, more prepared to handle the coursework?</p>