<p>like 90 percent of admitted students are from california. is there like a state policy that forces them do so? of couse as a california resident i am not against this policy of favoring california students but why exactly do ucs favor californians?</p>
<p>because the UC's are funded by state taxpayer dollars</p>
<p>and they are rather expensive for OOS kids. At ~$45k (and increasing) to attend a UC at OOS prices, a private college offers a better value proposition, IMO.</p>
<p>Many state university systems favor in-state students as to price, because in-state families pay taxes to support the university, and then out-of-state students feel priced out. And most students go to college close to home. So most state universities in large states mostly enroll in-state students. In smaller states nearer to other states, you can occasionally find state universities with a high percentage of out-of-state students, but that isn't the most commonly seen pattern.</p>
<p>how many private colleges offer a better value proposition than top UCs? 10? 20?</p>
<p>yeah actually academically the ucs match that of the ivy schools but then again the ucs are not up to par in terms of prestige compared to ivies</p>
<p>I don't know about it matching the Ivies academically; I'd say that the same subject matter is taught, but the student-teacher ratios for the UCs are much higher than the Ivies are (except Cornell probably).</p>
<p>...it is called the University of California for a reason.</p>
<p>
[quote]
like 90 percent of admitted students are from california. is there like a state policy that forces them do so?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
because the UC's are funded by state taxpayer dollars
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
it is called the University of California for a reason
[/quote]
</p>
<p>To be clear, 90% of the undergraduate students are state residents. UC graduate * students, especially at Berkeley and UCLA, are far more geographically diverse. For example, I know certain Berkeley PhD programs who didn't matriculate a *single state resident in certain years; everybody who matriculated in those years was OOS or a foreign national. Yet clearly those graduate programs are also funded by state taxpayer dollars. In fact, the graduate programs , on a per-capita basis, probably get more state taxpayer funding than do the undergrad programs. {For example, it clearly costs more to train a PhD chemical engineer than it does to train a BS chemical engineer.} </p>
<p>An interesting paradox indeed, that UC's reserve most of their seats in their undergrad programs for state residents, but have no problem in importing large quantities of non-residents for their graduate programs.</p>
<p>The primary goal of the UC is to educate the next generation of the Californian workforce. They primarily exist to serve Californian students, so of course they accept more California kids.</p>
<p>perhaps 90% of the applicants are from california?</p>
<p>because they are in california, and funded by the california government, in order to serve californians. if your own family's not going to help u, who will?</p>
<p>Remember, we Californians PAY for UC's in our taxes. I don't know of any other public system that is nationally attractive. Our kids should NOT have to get 4.0's to get into the state university system!</p>
<p>^well for Berkeley and UCLA you might have to, regardless of where you are from, unless you are outstanding in other areas aside from grades.</p>
<p>i would love to get into ucla. probably the only college that is both academically stellar and "cool".</p>
<p>Accepting grad students from OOS is in California's best interests. ;) They tend to stay. But, for undergrad the Cal States and UC's should be primarily for CA residents. If some OOS student wants to pay the price of a private school to go to a public university, let them, but it is silly to do that.</p>
<p>perhaps sakky needs to return to SAT vocab prep. There is no "paradox" between undergrad and grad admissions -- it is simply public policy.</p>
<p>Why do the UCs favor Californian students?</p>
<p>^^ What kind of a question is that? Did you forget that the University of Nevada is primarily full of students from Nevada or the University of Arizona is primarily full of students from Arizona? Wouldn't you expect the same from the UC's?</p>
<p>Each state pays tax dollars towards their college system and that is a perfectly good reason for colleges to give priority to instate students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Accepting grad students from OOS is in California's best interests. They tend to stay.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Do they really? I'm not so sure - or at least, I'm not so sure that the grad students are more likely to stay in California than the undergrads would. </p>
<p>I'll give you one case in point. A lot of the newly minted PhD's coming out of Berkeley and UCLA are looking to enter academia, hence, trying to place in assistant professorships. Yet the fact is, there actually really aren't that many total colleges and universities in the state of California. You are far more likely to get an academic position, say, in the Northeast where there are just lots and lots of colleges. {For example, I know a guy who came from OOS to get his PhD in philosophy at Berkeley, and upon graduation immediately left California to take a tenure-track position at Syracuse University. What exactly did the California taxpayers get in return for subsidizing his program?} </p>
<p>This line of logic would lead one to say that those OOS PhD students should actually pay full-price, but then get a rebate if they decide to stay in the state afterwards. But as it stands now, that doesn't happen: those OOS students are free to take their subsidized PhD's and immediately leave the state. </p>
<p>
[quote]
perhaps sakky needs to return to SAT vocab prep. There is no "paradox" between undergrad and grad admissions -- it is simply public policy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Perhaps bluebayou needs to retake a class on simple logic. Of course it is simply "public policy". What I am asking is why is public policy set up that way. Specifically, why should public policy favor undergrad state residents but not grad state residents. The funding argument does not fly because taxpayers fund both. That's the paradox.</p>
<p>^^Write your legislator. [You are literally the first person I have ever met that actually cares about this issue.]</p>