<p>click on one of the topics under “top forums” on the left hand side toolbar thingy and then there should be a button that say new thread</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And the SAT isn’t influenced by school quality, teacher quality, family resources, etc…?</p>
<p>chem: i’m not a big fan of government run anything, except maybe the interstate. what we are watching with the rising UC tuitions and class overcrowding is the end of public higher education. The great experiment is ending. And when Berkeley hits 40k a year, probably within 7 years, it will no longer be a good “public” university, it will be an “average” private university. What will all you Cal guys say when you’re essentially private due to high cost. What will you do with the “we are the best public university in the world” chant?</p>
<p>The one man who put Cal on the map, Ernest Orlando Lawrence, has been dead a long time. And btw, he didn’t go to Cal. He was educated at a small (aka small class size) LAC.</p>
<p>So Chem, get a grip, Cal is OK, but it’s no tier 1 institution. And CHEM the Nobel Laureate professor of chemistry is teaching at USC, not Cal.</p>
<p>
Actually, I don’t believe the SAT is influenced by school quality and teacher quality at all. There are plenty of 2200+ in D grade schools and mere 1800s in high quality schools such as Harker of San Jose (the one I went to).
That leaves family resources…this is why I said SATs are MUCH BETTER indicator than GPA. I didn’t say its THE BEST and a flawless way to recruit students.</p>
<p>sentimentGX4:
</p>
<p>Nope. I wasn’t interested during high school. That is why I am 25 and transferring. 
Perhaps I was the odd one out. Although, I know not everybody researched colleges to a large extent. Plenty of people I know knew exactly where they wanted to go without much research, or knew they wanted to hit up a well known prestigious school out of state. My husband applied to one college out of high school and it was UCSD. (He was a shoo-in though).</p>
<p>I’m from FL and I’m applying to UCB, UCLA, and UCSB. The impression most people have over here is that UCBerk, obviously, is one of the greatest schools in the country, but is extremely Asian (sometimes a turn off to applicants from Florida) but has a great vibe. UCLA usually attracts a lot of the city kids but again the Asian factor comes in. UCSB is seen as a huge party school (can’t blame anyone) but still a solid college to go to.</p>
<p>^^it’s true there is a large asian student population at UCLA and CAL, but the way you phrase it sounds a bit racist. </p>
<p>the “asian factor”…what’s wrong with being asian? next thing you’ll know you’ll have a problem with the Irish:)</p>
<p>Can’t speak for Cal, but at UCLA…</p>
<p>What makes UCLA incredible is on those sunny even hot days that occur in December, Bruinwalk can be a great display of fashion. Warm-weather fashion is better than cold at UCLA. </p>
<p>Not everyday, but on those special days, everything seems to click. Try it sometime when school is in session around mid-day, 1PM or so - not Fridays, though.</p>
<p>Race is terribly unimportant; some of the days with the observer walking up BW, and the coeds walking down, the view can be very nice.</p>
<p>One learns to appreciate all races which I think is a good thing.</p>
<p>Know people from PA and NY. Not many people know about UCs outside of Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD, and UCSB</p>
<p>pacheight, first of all, it’s ChemE not Chem and second, USC has never had a graduate go on to become a Nobel Laureate. Besides, I thought you people complain that Nobel Laureates don’t matter to undergrads.</p>
<p>Cal Berkeley will always be public.</p>
<p>
I don’t necessarily agree. Besides, you said it measures ingenuity and creative thinking which can be different measures from general intelligence.</p>
<p>A person retakes the SAT and gains 100 points in score…are they now 100 points “more intelligent” than they were several months ago, or did they just learn strategies for the test?</p>
<p>The general public doesn’t care about Nobel Laureates. This is probably the ONLY defense for Berkeley you CC people use. </p>
<p>People generally care about getting a good education, a good social life, and money.</p>
<p>
That why I said “much better than GPA” if you read what I wrote. Maybe the person is more adapted to the test if he scores 100 points higher next time. Not necessarily intelligent. I understand that.
However, its even worse when an AIME/USAMO-qualifier ends up with a B for his AP Calc C class just because he didn’t complete his homework on time or his participation grade was low or because he failed the finals due to illness or if the teacher plainly doesn’t like him.</p>
<p>
Well good, because Berkeley easily offers those…plus Nobel Laureates. :)</p>
<p>
Well that’s called life. GPA is probably more accurate in measuring how a student will do over a college career…with all of life’s ups and downs.</p>
<p>*the “asian factor”…what’s wrong with being asian? next thing you’ll know you’ll have a problem with the Irish *</p>
<p>Most of my Asian friends at my high school (which was 60% Asian) didn’t apply to UCSB because they thought it was “too white”.</p>
<p>chemEEEEEEE: </p>
<p>Public means affordable and accessible, as Yudof said in a KGO interview the way things are going Cal and UCLA will only be affordable to upper middle class families, primarily families from affluent suburbs, ya that’s real “public”. The UC system is changing in ways I don’t think you understand…it’s becoming a huge student body mid priced, good quality (not great) private school. 30k + a year is private, not public.</p>
<p>for thousands of other students a new proposed tuition increase for the 2011-2012 school year could mean higher student loans.</p>
<p>Stacey Dejaswina is starting her third year and says a number of her friends are now on the fence as to whether or not they can afford the fee hikes, “That’s one reason they’re considering to not even apply to the school.”
<a href=“http://www.cbs8.com/Global/story.asp?S=13468025[/url]”>http://www.cbs8.com/Global/story.asp?S=13468025</a></p>
<p>UC President Mark G. Yudof said the tuition increase is unfortunate: “When you have no money, you have no money.”</p>
<p>Read more: [Tuition</a> Hikes: Protests in California and Elsewhere - TIME](<a href=“http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1942041,00.html#ixzz15BqolXk1]Tuition”>http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1942041,00.html#ixzz15BqolXk1)</p>
<p>Amid signs reading “RIP Affordable Education” and “California #1 in Prison Spending, #48 in Education,” Emily Bischof, a fourth year geography and environmental studies major at UCLA said the cuts are significant. “Upper division classes that once had 30 students now have 80 or 100 students and there are no teaching assistants. Professors are giving true-false, multiple choice Scantron exams.” Nicole Garner, a fourth year at UC </p>
<p>Read more: [Tuition</a> Hikes: Protests in California and Elsewhere - TIME](<a href=“http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1942041,00.html#ixzz15BqbVVCv]Tuition”>http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1942041,00.html#ixzz15BqbVVCv)</p>
<p>and the gpa thing at all UC’s please. state law requires that the top percent gpa kids from all HS in California are admitted to a UC. The top gpa kids from Redding high to Compton high get in to Cal. If you think that gpa is the same as the top gpa from Palo Alto high you’re smokin crack:)</p>
<p>The point is that a lot of those top gpa kids walking around Cal are not that smart because they matriculate from lousy academic “public” California high schools. And it explains why my friend the english prof at Cal say she is shocked at how many remedial students she gets in her class, when she came from Harvard she had been told how great Cal students are, she hasn’t seen it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And where did Glenn Seaborg go?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, some people at crappy schools still manage to have high SAT scores; some at good schools still manage to have merely above average SAT scores. That doesn’t really prove anything. The idea that it’s not influenced by school and teacher quality “at all” is absurd.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s also bad when an AIME/USAMO qualifier gets a B in his real analysis class because he doesn’t do the homework on time, can’t follow the material as it’s presented, and can’t catch up in time for the final exam. That’s college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Huh? Yudof’s master plan seems to be to drive up fees while increasing FA coverage. In other words, it’s the upper middle class, which can’t pay huge fees and doesn’t qualify for FA, that’s getting squeezed out. It’s silly to pretend that Yudof doesn’t have his own agenda when he’s saying things to the press. And citing 12 month old articles doesn’t help.</p>
<p>you’re mixed up</p>
<p>“it’s the upper middle class, which can’t pay huge fees and doesn’t qualify for FA”</p>
<p>granted the upper middle class would prefer to pay 1980 fees for their kid to go to Cal, but they can afford to pay private college fees if they have to. the 30k+ cost of Cal now blocks out middle class and many lower income families. And you’re dreaming if you think the state of California can make that up with FA. what part of broke aka the state has no money don’t you understand.</p>
<p>the UC system and specifically UCLA and Cal are no longer “public”. And why should an affluent family have to pay a 30k private school fee to send their kid to a “public” school, don’t they pay taxes and deserve a low cost public education as well.</p>
<p>The UC system is broke and broken.</p>
<p>and what good does Seaborg do for students at Cal now, he’s dead. The
nobel chem prof at USC is alive and still in the class room teaching.</p>
<p>your arguments and logic sound like you went to Cal:)</p>