<p>Budget cuts have affected classes every semester for quite some time. Why are so many classes so full this semester?</p>
<p>Now I kind of feel kind of bad telling so many freshmen (here and on Facebook) to take 16 units, given the class issues</p>
<p>Yah, I remember 4 incidents where "freshman should take 15-17 units." Also I think it is because a lot of people are signing up for 4-5 classes knowing that they will drop a class if one or a couple of the classes seem unfavorable.</p>
<p>YOU'RE the guy who's been telling every one taking under 16 will make them weaksauce? You've made too many kids freak.</p>
<p>Blame it on increased enrollment as well. This year's graduating high school class is comprised of all the baby-boomer's kids. Record # of applicants and enrollment at all colleges across the nation.</p>
<p>Budget cuts = supply of classes decreasing
Increased enrollment = demand of classes increasing</p>
<p>Demand is above supply = disequilibrium (aka shortage)</p>
<p>I was going to mention the overenrollment as well. Berkeley has been overenrolling more recently (I assumed it was just regular growth), but this year accepted 200 more people than last year, despite the budget cuts. So, undergrad at Berkeley is now roughly 25,000 students. I'm not surprised classes are bloating.</p>
<p>Interestingly, Berkeley remained even more selective than it has in the past--for enrolled freshman, average 3.9 UW, 4.4 W, 2060 median SAT, 17% acceptance rate for OOS, 21% overall, etc.</p>
<p>This is not a good time to go to Berkeley or a CA public university for that matter. I hope that the school addresses this issue and attempts to provide a balanced solution. And it also didn't help that those 200 extra freshman took other seats in classes that us pitiful sophomores are waitlisted in. :'(</p>
<p>^Seriously. Sometimes the overcrowding/budget cut situation makes me wonder if the cheaper public university tuition is really worth it.
I don't do the whole "enroll in extra classes and drop the ones I don't want later" thing-- I use to though. Now I find myself losing classes to people who do precisely that. Oy, what karma.</p>
<p>Yeah, this whole course selection thing as well as the slashed welcome week (really? 2 days, then classes? :( ) is really making it harder for me to get excited about college. However, I talked to a current senior and he said not to worry about it too much - he was on many waitlists, but said he had always gotten into the classes he wanted.</p>
<p>Also, once AP credits get included, that should help when/if I jump up to junior standing?</p>
<p>
[quote]
the slashed welcome week (really? 2 days, then classes? )
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wow, really? Why'd they cut welcome week? That's really odd... I have some difficulty believing it was budget cuts, but perhaps it's too expensive to pay for all the administrative costs (materials, staff, etc.).</p>
<p>Doubtlessly, budget cuts play a role. I think the shabby economy does too; Berkeley is a much cheaper alternative for the average applicant.</p>
<p>Alternative to what? Housing prices in Berkeley isn't particularly low for an average applicant.</p>
<p>I'm not sure why welcome week (or welcome events as they're now called) got cut... makes it weird having classes start on wednesday :(</p>
<p>^^ yea Berkeley apt prices are ridiculous... Berkeley is No. 5 for most expensive college town (Coldwell</a> Banker-HPCI)</p>
<p>No surprise about Palo Alto + Stanford being #1 in most expensive 3 yrs in a row</p>
<p>This is a recent quote from the Stanford provost in the SF Chronicle:</p>
<p>
[quote]
For anybody whose income is below $100,000 per year, and that includes over 80 percent of the families in the United States, the package that we provide makes Stanford less expensive than going to UC Berkeley.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>:-/</p>
<p>That kind of makes me mad. It's like he's saying "in your face, Berkeley!" ;)</p>
<p>one thing to note is that cost of going to berkeley usually drops after the first year depending on housing/food situation. I know someone who paid about 20,000 last year (no FA) vs. the ~26,000 to go to Berkeley in the dorms this year</p>
<p>So what if Berkeley's housing is more expensive? It's not like housing prices offset a public school tuition. (A HUGE disparity here.)</p>
<p>I've heard the "Stanford is actually cheaper than Berkeley" argument many times before on this website. Frankly, it's BS. In theory, "80 percent of families in the United States" should find Stanford more affordable than Berkeley, but this is misleading in two ways: 1.) Californians, who constitute roughly 90% of Berkeley's enrollment, pay a significantly reduced price for a Berkeley education than most Americans, and 2.) Stanford's package only benefits those who are accepted. Even with need-blind admissions, Stanford's student body is disproportionately wealthy. (Similar arguments could be made for Berkeley's "ethnicity-blind" policies.)</p>
<p>^^ before, I would have made the same argument, but unfortunately, it's rather true. Not sure about the 80% part, but the rest is true.</p>
<p>Stanford has the following policy:
1) If your family makes below $45,000, everything is paid--tuition, room/board, books, travel, medical, etc.
2) If your family makes below $60,000, tuition and room/board are paid for.
3) If your family makes up to $100,000, tuition is paid for.
4) If your family makes up to $150,000, tuition is significantly reduced.
5) Loans are replaced with grants. No student must take out loans; a student may choose to take out loans in place of work-study, which is comparatively light.
6) Outside awards can be used to replace work-study.</p>
<p>According to Birgeneau, Berkeley stops giving aid to students (even Californians) at around $90,000.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Middle-class people are the most disadvantaged by this system. If you are admitted to Berkeley and your family income is above $90,000, we currently provide zero, or close to zero, financial aid. You must cover the total cost of $25,000 on your own.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Stanford gives free tuition for those at $100,000, making Stanford cost about $15,000--$11,000 less than Berkeley.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Stanford's package only benefits those who are accepted.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Er, as if it's any different at Berkeley and other schools...?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Even with need-blind admissions, Stanford's student body is disproportionately wealthy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'd disagree with that. Even before this very generous policy was instituted (this year), 76% of Stanford's undergrads were on financial aid. With these more generous reforms, I'd say that number will increase, even though the wealth of the student body isn't. Either way, that number is about the same for Berkeley. However, I would say that those who are not on aid at Stanford are going to be, on the average, more wealthy than those who aren't on aid at Berkeley. All in all, Stanford's student body is not "disproportionately wealthy." Stanford doesn't have the same proportion of Pell Grantees as Berkeley--that's inevitable with even more competitive admissions--but Stanford is making much more of an effort to recruit low-income students. Not only are these students' context taken into account (as at Berkeley) and thus they're given a boost, but Stanford is progressive in its efforts by being a partner college for QuestBridge, which recruits low-income students.</p>
<p>I myself am a low-income student, and Berkeley gave me over $5,000/year in loans and more work-study than Stanford (which gave me no loans) did. So even then, Stanford's a better deal.</p>
<p>For upper-income families, Berkeley will be cheaper, of course, but at the same time, these families can typically pay for Stanford without much of a problem.</p>
<p>"So what if Berkeley's housing is more expensive? It's not like housing prices offset a public school tuition. (A HUGE disparity here.)"</p>
<p>Dorm prices cost $15,000. </p>
<p>Houses in some other states cost $50,000.</p>
<p>"Dorms cost $15,000. Houses in some other states cost $50,000."</p>
<p>So, I guess I don't really understand your point here.</p>
<p>All I'm trying to say is, if you try attending a peer institution in a cheaper location, my theory is, you'll end up paying more anyway, given that most of Berkeley's competitors are private schools. As expensive as housing is in the East Bay, it's considerably less than a private school tuition.</p>
<p>Good example: The slums of downtown LA are probably more affordable than the Berkeley hills. Try attending USC and see how much money you save.</p>
<p>I guess it has to go back to what you define an "average" applicant is in your earlier post. What family income are you talking about? UC system caps off financial aid availability to families whose income reaches around $90000. Private universities won't have such a low ceiling, especially if you choose to compare Berkeley to its peer private universities which tend to be rich and prestigious.</p>
<p>College</a> Search - University of Southern California - USC - Cost & Financial Aid</p>
<p>College</a> Search - University of California: Berkeley - Cal - Cost & Financial Aid</p>
<p>Although the average indebtness of a student at graduation attending Berkeley is lower than that of one who attends USC, this figure is skewed by the huge number of students coming from low income families (for the purpose of this argument defined as "non-average"). For reference, 1/3 of all Berkeley students receives Pell Grants.</p>