TAG (with admission guarantee for fulfilling course requirements with a GPA stated ahead of time) is not available at UCB. All UCB transfer admission is determined competitively (but by major, since transfers come in as juniors).
UCB could reduce transfer as well as frosh admission to reduce student population, but note that one fewer transfer has less of an effect on campus population over the following years than one fewer frosh, since transfers will graduate in fewer years than frosh.
Iām not sure that itās just the rowdiness or noisiness of the students thatās creating some of the issues. For example we stayed at a house at the beach a couple years ago and the house next-door had 22 people in it. It was a big house and could definitely hold that number but the amount of general traffic in and out, the door slamming, the people sitting outside talking, the amount of trash that was generated was a lot! It all contributes to the overall quality of the neighborhood. When students live in apartment buildings or dormitories or condominiums that are designed for high density housing, the accompanying services are designed to handle the number of occupants and those buildings are usually zoned in specific areas. Finally Iām amazed that you can have that many students living in one house without violating zoning occupancy codes.
I suppose one option/solution is for Berkeley to adopt more of the Houston zoning mentality where anything can be built next to anything.
True, but the biggest impact would seem to be this for this coming Fall, because of the short notice. Once youāve whittled down to a total of 42,347 students, the management of the enrollment cap (freshman vs. transfers), going forward would, I think, become much less difficult.
Again, I donāt think the impact to freshman applicants will be as big as folks think, assuming the enrollment cap is instituted.
There are probably existing (long term) tenants and landlords with properties that would be affected by lower limits and would therefore lobby against such lower limits generally.
I think what youāre hearing is a lot of frustration from California students and their families because they already have a harder time getting into their own public colleges than students in other states and things like this Berkeley decision make it even harder. Last year, 7 of the top 10 applied-to colleges in the country were California public colleges (6 UCs plus Cal State Long Beach) and the number of applications just keeps going up. Itās become insanely competitive and totally unsustainable, with no quick or easy solutions in sight. Private and OOS colleges arenāt an option for many families, so people are anxious about their futures and easily worked up in what is already a very stressful process. I agree that people need to keep college decisions in perspective, but also understand the frustration.
āCalifornia has dedicated funding to expand enrollment by 5,000 full-time students at University of California schools and 10,000 full-time students at the California State University System. Gov. Gavin Newsomās latest budget proposals aim to further increase enrollment by the 2026-27 school year.ā
And theyāre plowing ahead with enrollment increases ā¦.are they also pursuing commensurate housing expansion?
I know Iām getting a little off-topic here, but CA just lost a seat/representative in Congress, because of the population decrease in the 2020 census. I realize that thereās another record # of apps this cycle, but in the longer term, I think the # of apps will crest and begin to decrease.
So, the UCās and CSUās can expand enrollment capacity, but it may be a bit of ātoo little, too lateā in the bigger scheme of CA population trends.
But ādemand for UCā is more like demand for prestige, so UC Merced is not desired.
Of course ādemand for prestigeā means that if other UC campuses do expand and become less selective as a result, they become disfavored among the prestige-seeking applicants.
UCB, UCLA, and UCSD are not obligated to take transfers (no TAG for those institutions). Most likely the state will fund UCB extra to take in-state above OOS and international applicants, but thatās just me speculating.
In the UC statement, partially posted above, it said this: āOur implementation strategies will focus on mitigating the harm to prospective students, largely by increasing online enrollment and/or asking new, incoming students to delay enrollment until January 2023."
Why canāt they offer online only enrollment to the 3,000 or 5,100 students? Are they not operationally equipped to do that?
Beyond that, I assume tens of thousands of students would jump at the chance to attend UCB virtually, especially if tuition is lower, and those students could live anywhere. There are many students who couldnāt care less about a ātraditionalā college experience who would love to have a UCB degree.
Why let other schools like ASU, including the new ASU local in LA (online only degrees), take the CA students? It is no surprise that ASU is starting its local business model with LA (and DC).
Definitely not for everyone, but the success of online schools like ASU, Western Governors, Southern New Hampshire, Liberty (all have 100K+ degree seeking student enrollments (pre-pandemic), which includes non-traditional age college going students) but since budget is the number one consideration for many families, it isnāt a crazy idea. I assure you that ASU Online did ample market research as to where to begin with their ASU Local offerings.
They would have to make every course that is not fully online / distance to be both in-person and online / distance. While it may be the case that many courses can do that (which is helpful if students or instructors get sick and need to stay home), that is different from ensuring that every course can do that.
I would not be surprised if the traditional college students with high end high school academic credentials (heavily represented on these forums and probably most of the high school students aiming for UCB these days) mostly expect an in-person residential college experience, so that online / distance education, even for only a semester or two, will be seen as less desirable. Online / distance education would be more attractive or less unattractive to other student demographics who would otherwise attend commuter-focused universities or community colleges (non-traditional students may even favor online / distance format if they have to work around greater work and family obligations).
