Thanks. I think 18% refers to OOS + International admits. OOS is less than that.
At this point, there is nothing else left than to sit back and watch (or fume). Again, we move on and hope for the best for all the applicants.
Thatâs fine and understood but the issue is what was known and made known pre-applications on this cycle. UCB sent a âkeep your hopes upâ note to applicants without one word that OOS is likely to be curtailed after the appeals court decision.
Good luck with that argument. This was a public court decision on the books with plenty of ink spilled on the topic by NYT and other national media.
By that same token, did UCs warn in state applicants in 2008-2009 that they will massively prefer OOS kids to shore up their budgets affected by the recession.
3 Likes
While I feel sad for those students that may be denied an acceptance letter to UCB this year, theyâre an accomplished group and I feel confident theyâll have other equally amazing college options.
As far as shutting out more non-California residents long term, my prediction is that the Cali budget surplus will be short lived (as most of itâs sources wonât be easily replicated and government overspending appears quite popular with voters) and OOS/International applicants will regain their âattractivenessâ to shore up the UCB (and other UCs) budget.
1 Like
I donât have a dog in this fight anymore and apparently am not making myself understood, so I will try one last time and then Iâm out.
I am aware that UW has department caps. Worthy in-state candidates still receive rejections â just like in California.
My point seems to be getting lost in this. It isnât about sour grapes â my kid does not even WANT to go to California anymore. And it isnât about California being wrong to set OOS caps.
My point was simply that California isnât that unique. UWâs entering class of 2021 was 28% nonresident; worthy Washington candidates were turned away.
Californiaâs 18% cap is far more stringent, but many keep calling for that to be driven down to 10% (or even lower at UCB this year due to the lawsuit). That is despite the fact that Californians can also attend UCLA, UCI, UCSB, and UCD, all of which are ranked higher than UW, I believe.
The balance between reliance on OOS tuition and making room for deserving residents is an issue in MANY states.
And those OOS applicants are generally paying more in OOS tuition over 4 years than the average taxpayer pays into the UC system over 20 years, all while continuing to pay taxes in their own states. (The same is true of Californian students attending UW.)
The posts that disappoint me are the ones that argue in favor of restricting OOS admits even further than they already are by (1) suggesting OOS applicants are somehow less deserving, when there is no evidence their ECs, essays, and stats donât measure up, or (2) suggesting that OOS students are somehow taking advantage of Californians and stealing places Californians are entitled to, when they are in fact subsidizing spots for Californians.
The tension between providing opportunity for state residents and shoring up budgets with OOS tuition exists MANY places. It does not mean that every OOS student is undeserving, or thieving an entitlement from a worthy Californian (any more than admitted Californians are stealing spots from Washington superstars rejected at UW), but that is the how the tone of some of the comments here and elsewhere came across to me. That is all.
6 Likes
For any OOS parents bothered by the reductions, please see @Ally86âs excellent point:
Personally, the fact that my daughter is very likely not getting into UCB doesnât bother me much - with the point mentioned above being high on my list of reasons.
(Note: I donât mean this to be an anti-Cal post. Cal is absolutely a great school. Iâm just saying, maybe OOS parents shouldnât consider it as huge a loss if their kid doesnât get in)
5 Likes
I agree. If I was OOS, the UCs wonât be as attractive but the CSUs will be.
1 Like
Throughout CC, when an OOS student has a UC on their list, ucbalumnus, gumbymom and others quickly point out that OOS students receive little to no financial help from the UCs. Many times the response is âmoney is not a factor.â After admissions are announced, you will see OOS students (and parents) post that they didnât realize it would cost so much. Wait for it.
14 Likes
There has been only one objective robust analysis done on this subject. And that was by the CA state auditor who found the following.
That said, I donât think OOS folks are somehow less deserving.
Last year, California State Auditor Elaine Howle came to the conclusion that The University of California system lowered their academic standards for out-of-state students, while leaving many California residents dismal because they meet the basic requirements and even exceeded them: high GPA, extracurricular and high test scores.
2 Likes
Ya, but nobody wants to attend those other UCâs. 
(itâs a joke, take it easy out there)
Also, youâre comment sounds like a knock against WSU and the Western, Central and Eastern Washington schools. But mostly a knock on Pullman. 
(said tongue-in-cheek)
Since âeveryoneâ is either leaving the state or planning to leave (Texas, Idaho, Montana, etc.), Iâm sure those OOS enrollment caps will eventually go away in a few years. But that in no way will help the Class of 2026.
According to the website OOS students need a higher minimum GPA (3.4) than IS students 3.0).
Also interesting that certain UCs were exempted from the 18% cap.
âUC Berkeley, UCLA, UC Irvine and UC San Diego, are exempt because their current percentages of nonresidents are higher than the 18 percent cap: UC Berkeley: 24.4 percent, UCLA: 22.8 percent, UC Irvine: 18.9 percent and UCSD: 22.9 percent.
However, they are required to maintain their current percentages and limit their future enrollment percentages of nonresident undergraduates to their current levels.â
Obviously âeveryoneâ actually wants to be in California, which is why itâs so hard to get in.
2 Likes
I would argue that not many kids are getting into Cal (or any of the other UCs except for Merced and Riverside) with a 3.0 or even a 3.4. The minimums are different, sure. Minimums donât really mean anything in context with actual IS vs. OOS acceptances.
2 Likes
As I said, thatâs right now. But we (CA) just lost a seat in Congress, because the population of CA has decreased since the 2010 Census, in relation to the other states, but thatâs partially due to new migration to other states as well.
But I believe we now have a net migration out of CA. But again, thatâs no help to the Class of 2026.
Hereâs Why California Is Losing Population for the First Time.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-population-loss-accelerated-during-pandemic-11639564203
California population continues decline, driven by lower immigration, fewer births and pandemic deaths
Unfortunately, these may be paywalled. Sorry!
I agree that OOS kids accepted to Cal unlikely to be less qualified than the IS kids. However, the article made a blanket statement regarding OOS without any breakdown among schools and at least the official policy is OOS kids need a higher minimum GPA for UC schools.
Iâd also note that article is referring to a report from 2017.
Most UCs are selective enough that an applicant with a GPA < 3.4 has little or no chance of admission. For fall 2021 frosh, UCM admitted 89% of such applicants, while UCR admitted 23%, UCD admitted 10%, UCSC admitted 9%, and the other 5 UCs admitted 0-1%.
Since non-resident applicants do not appear to be that interested in UCM or UCR, the higher 3.4 minimum GPA is probably of little importance in non-resident applications and admissions.
I will simply say that the 2020 census because its a redistricting year was highly politicized and the courts had to get involved because the Census Bureau did everything possible to under-count people of color.
3 Likes
I believe that as well, but weâre (CA) still losing population. I added a few links above, which may be paywalled.
In any case, no help to the Class of 2026.
1 Like
Agreed. With COvid, people had greater flexibility to move and work from locations with cheaper housing. My only comment was on the redistricting piece which was a result of clear sabotage.
1 Like