<p>“UCSD is a flagship university you ignorant people. Don’t you know that some of the programs, including the sciences, outrank UCLA by a long shot. Make sure you read your literature before posting these stupid comments.” </p>
<p>Thus this proves why UCR and all other UCs > UCSD.</p>
<p>He just wanted to make himself feel better because he has no shot of transferring to UCLA, which is an actual flagship school</p>
<p>that guy Chris is a funny guy he just made my day lol… Im happy i pick UCR over UCSD, so i dont has to deal with uptight ppl : )</p>
<p>At this point I don’t think he’ll post again, seems everyone’s mad at him :/</p>
<p>Actual Flagships = CAL, UCLA, UCSF( founded in 1890 so cmon)</p>
<p>I think UCR is older than UCSD too.Plus UCR saved the American citrus industry.UCR was a partner with Toyota in building the Prius.</p>
<p>UCR is still UCR…</p>
<p>You have to admit</p>
<p>in any case, UCSF is weird, no undergraduate program…</p>
<p>But it’s San Fran :D</p>
<p>But isn’t UCR and UCB the only 2 UCs which offer Business major as undergrad. I am not counting Irvine since that just opened.</p>
<p>the only bad thing of UCR is that it takes anyone as long as you have hair and breath. Research wise its very competitive. You have to admit. Yeah UCSF is just SF they are too busy having lgbt parades.</p>
<p>Cal and UCR are the only schools with a business degree for undergrads</p>
<p>It’s true UCR has admission problem and you never hear the school officials addressing this issue. It’s weird…it’s like they try to go around the problem. Establishing med school and support programs are great ideas for elevating UCR status, but how about addressing the admission rate? This is where the public perception comes from and the school doesn’t do a thing about it.</p>
<p>lol that’s true. If the admission rate went down and became a school that not “everyone can get into”… I think UCR would get a lot more respect. I mean… UCR is just a back up school for a lot of people. :</p>
<p>I don’t think UCR – or any campus – will close down entirely. That’s just too radical of a proposal. A proposal to close UCR floated around in the early 1990s, and we’re still here.</p>
<p>If you read the full letter, UCSD also proposed that we “immediately” enroll about 500 out-of-state students. It seems superficial in this case, and it would probably anger a lot of people who strongly believe that the UC and CSU systems have to primarily enroll CA residents since we are paying taxes. But since we’re just so willing to make radical compromises…</p>
<p>Also – UCSD also “suggested” that we “drop the pretense that all campuses are created equal” in order to “preserve excellence.” How’s that for killing members of your own team? If they feel that strongly about that proposal, that could actually work against them. Since we’re not going to play fair, larger cuts should be made to these (undeniably, relatively more funded) “flagship” (which everyone knows is Cal and UCLA and the graduate university UCSF) schools.</p>
<p>On the other note:
I agree that a significant part of UCR’s negative reputation is due to the less selective admission rate and student attitude (which is often a cyclical problem where people who don’t like UCR attend anyway and then badmouth it). Does this diminish the teaching quality at UCR? Hardly. UCR has some EXCELLENT professors and some plain TERRIBLE professors, like any other college campus. Math and science are taught similarly along the UC system. The humanities fields have so much diversity that it would be hard to argue if a particular field is truly taught better at one campus versus another. Along with teaching, reputation also hinges on research and we have some national authorities on particular subjects. I have to say, UCR is pretty well qualified in both these respects.</p>
<p>I think most people are upset at the proposal not because it’s too radical but the fact that it’s insulting. </p>
<p>Anyway, i don’t want to talk too much about the proposal (It’s clearly not viable). I just want to say that I lost a lot of respect for the professor who drafted it and the 22 department chairs who signed the letter.</p>