UCs/UCLA the only schools with tuition hikes? What is this crap?

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Los Angeles
1

<p>Hey prospective freshmen, feast your eyes on this.</p>

<p>UCLA</a> Financial Aid Office - Financial Aid Cost of Education</p>

<p>In 2007-2008 (when I was applying as a freshman), tuition was $7,038 (mind you, this is for in state residents) and the approx. overall cost was ~$23,000. For 2009-2010 after mid year tuition hikes, tuition is $8,814 and the approx. overall cost is be ~$27,000. Okay looks lame right? Remember all the other private schools criticizing the UC system for having tuition hikes. Like the d-bags cross town. Hey let's look at their tuition yeah?</p>

<p>USC</a> Financial Aid - Applying & Receiving Financial Aid - Undergraduate - Costs</p>

<p>(NOTE:** Okay, the second site won't work because it's not a USC site, whatever. But I'm using my 2007-2008 USC application book for this info so yeah. I'm not making this crap up)</p>

<p>In 2007-2008 USC's tuition was $35,809 and the approx. overall was ~$47,000. In 2009-2010, USC's tuition is $38,570 and overall being ~$53,000.</p>

<p>UCLA from 2007-2008 to 2009-2010 = ^ $4,000</p>

<p>USC from 2007-2008 to 2009-2010 = ^ $6,000</p>

<p>Many people have argued the UC's are going down the drain and is unstable because they are charging so much now. People also claim that privates, such as the craphole across town are financially stable and are not affected by the recession. GLAD TO KNOW I CLEARED EVERYTHING UP. HOPE THIS HELPS IN YOUR DECISION BETWEEN UCLA AND USC. At UCLA, at least we're honest and we'll tell you our tuition has gone up (sadly). At USC, you will be lied to again and again.</p>

<p>Oh and just common sense, recession --> budget crisis.
UCLA --> State school, therefore affected by budget crisis/recession --> Less state funding --> higher tuition prices.</p>

<p>USC --> Private school, therefore not affected by budget crisis. But budget crisis affects donors --> Less private donors funding --> higher tuition prices.</p>

<p>Durhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Go Bruins.</p>

2

<p>Yeah, but I think private school students have the mindset that when attending a private university they will be paying top dollar and increases are expected. I know my sister (who goes to USC) didn’t complain because she was provided with additional grant money to offset the increases (and ended up paying less than she did last year). But, I don’t know if that’s the case with all private schools. We’re in that weird middle-class funk. </p>

<p>I believe where the UCs are failing is that in its mission it states that ‘tuition’ is free, that’s why we pay ‘fees’, and that public education is suppose to be affordable and accessible to the public. Privates don’t have that obligation, that’s why there isn’t a student uproar about their tuition increasing. If a private school student cannot afford to pay private tuition price they typically transfer to a more affordable alternative such as a UC. Again, the UC student complaint is that our ‘fees’ are getting too high, UCLA @ ~30k per year, that the median CA resident cannot afford to attend. The UC students alternative when ‘fees’ have gotten too high is to go to a CSU. While a upper middle class student can go from an elite private to an elite public. A lower to middle class student must suffer academic quality by going to a tier 2 school from an elite public school. </p>

<p>The main point is that there should be an affordable QUALITY education available to the public and the privates obviously don’t have to fulfill that mission, the UCs do.</p>

<p>However, there is a debate whether the UCLA can actually provide a quality education, but I won’t go into that.</p>

<p>Go Bears.</p>

3

<p>To the OP —</p>

<p>Not sure why you couldn’t have made your post and gotten the point across without trash talking another school. What did that add to the discussion?</p>

4

<p>Bayboi, stop pretending you go to Cal. </p>

<p>Yeah, OP, the derogatory stuff was not necessary, but thanks for this anyways. I noticed that myself, and the increase in private school tuition in general HAS been noted by some news outlets, as well as the private school struggle with funding. Now I’m not sure about USC’s admittance procedures, I think they’re large enough to be need-blind, but some of the other privates that have been suffering are not need-blind, and so your chances of getting in are reduced if you need funding. However, UCs have to be need-blind, so there’s a plus for our schools (merit-based!).</p>

<p>All-in-all, most schools aside from those with the very largest endowments are suffering some way or another. Thanks for pointing it out.</p>

5

<p>Sopheee, you’re ridiculous.</p>

6

<p>

No, I believe her when she says you don’t go to Berkeley.</p>

<p>Skimming through several pages of your posts, the primary subforum you post in is (overwhelmingly) UCLA. The only instance when you even posted in the Berkeley subforum is when a person was debating between the university, UCLA, and USC.</p>

<p>EDIT: You have never even taken part in a Berkeley discussion that doesn’t involve UCLA.</p>