<p>If anyone could give me insight into this, I'd be very appreciative. Is this some sort of government requirement/quota?</p>
<p>I'd also love stats that aren't readily available on the Pathways website about four-year college versus CC admissions, GPA averages (if possible separated by CC/four-year applicants) of admits, and so on--any year you may have will do, and I'm particularly looking for Cal data. Thanks!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is this some sort of government requirement/quota?
[/quote]
Hah
Dude, the UC system is a public system; it's inherent that they would give priority to #1 California students and #2 THEIR OWN SYSTEM--CA community colleges are part of the higher education plan. First, comm college transfers have priority, then intercampus, then California residents in general. The transfer system provides for mobility for all residents of California, with the Ccc to UC being a focus in that effort.</p>
<p>Well, yes, these are givens, but for almost every UC, the four-year percentage acceptance rates are much, much lower than that of the CC ones. I don't think four-year students would have stats that are so much worse than the CC students, so I was thinking there were other reasons as well (such as a quota). It still is a bit of a silly question :), but oh well.</p>
<p>Plus if you already attend a 4-year school you have the potential to earn a 4-year degree regardless of your admission status, CC students do not. I can see the logic there.</p>
<p>That's a nice op-ed. The main reason I like it is it shows what so, so, so, so many applicants to UC (particularly Berkeley) don't understand; that a public university is about educating as many citizens as possible, not trying to close its doors to all but the most elite--so very different from private schools...</p>
<p>I dont know, it doesnt really seem fair. Obviously it should be on a case to case basis, but to give priority to someone who could have very well afforded to go to a 4-year school but didnt have the grades or test scores over someone who did?</p>
<p>If you read that link, their purpose isn't solely to go after rich, middle class kids that didn't go to college straight out of high school.</p>
<p>"They also offer late bloomers or students whose personal or work responsibilities have kept them from full-time study a precious second chance at higher education."</p>
<p>"including the fact that the community colleges are the place where most of California's minority students begin their higher education."</p>
<p>Although from different reports I've read, most of the transfers are not minority students and they're still trying to improve on that.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I dont know, it doesnt really seem fair. Obviously it should be on a case to case basis, but to give priority to someone who could have very well afforded to go to a 4-year school but didnt have the grades or test scores over someone who did?
[/quote]
There is much more to it than whether someone could "afford" to go to a university or not. The community college system is supposed to be an outlet for all kinds of students to eventually go to a CSU or UC. </p>
<p>Also the "grades or test scores" argument is way off. You have to succeed at a community college in order to transfer to a UC; and yes, community college success is COLLEGE SUCCESS, very different from high school. </p>
<p>Ultimately it is not unfair because all students in California have the opportunity to go to community college and transfer.</p>
<p>Did you know that Princeton spends more than a million dollars in maintaining a garden they keep on campus? From an airplane, the garden is supposed to look like their coat of arms.</p>
<p>Like I said, it should be a case to case basis. I never said that just because you're going to a cc doesnt mean you shouldn't get the opportunity to go to a UC. And I did read the article, it was the "late bloomers" part that got to me. I interpret that to mean that you didnt do particularly well in hs but you would still get priority over someone who did and got into a UC. Obviously if you've been working or can't afford to go to a UC out of hs there should be exceptions. You guys took what I wrote out of context.</p>
<p>i read some of peoples post on this particular OP, and i have to argue with many of you that the fact that UCs give priority to Community College students is the fact that after they earn 60 units, they have nowhere to go but to a UC or Cal state, as oppose to those already in a university who can already earn a degree and are transfering on the fact that they dont like the school or because they want to show off on rankings...</p>
<p>And like I always hear on CC, community college success and 4-year university success is completely different. Sorry if I only assumed that getting a 4.0 of UCSB is harder than getting a 4.0 at a community college</p>
<p>i actually have friends at UCSB, and my community college offers a better education than UCSB, in fact, we are more competitive. Do not tell me that a 4.0 at UCSB should be more valued than a CC, because you are totally wrong.</p>
<p>Think of it this way, UCSB students already have a school to attend, but CC students dont, so who do you think is going to compete for the better grades? ;)</p>
<p>
[quote]
the fact that UCs give priority to Community College students is the fact that after they earn 60 units, they have nowhere to go but to a UC or Cal state, as oppose to those already in a university who can already earn a degree and are transfering on the fact that they dont like the school or because they want to show off on rankings...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What about the poor old four-year students (say, from a private school) who realize they can't afford an education at their school? Where do they have to turn? (This is where the case by case basis thing should come in.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
I interpret that to mean that you didnt do particularly well in hs but you would still get priority over someone who did and got into a UC.
[/quote]
Ahaha....YEAH! THAT IS CORRECT! "LATE BLOOMER"! That means someone who has SUCCEEDED IN COLLEGE! They were a late bloomer! They didn't do well in high school but SUCCEEDED IN COLLEGE! SUCCESS IN COLLEGE IS OF MUCH MORE VALUE WHEN IT COMES TO PREDICTING...........SUCCESS IN COLLEGE!
[quote]
And like I always hear on CC, community college success and 4-year university success is completely different.
[/quote]
Wrong. Transfers do just as well at UCs as those who entered as freshmen. It doesn't even matter--the important distinction isn't between university success and community college success, it's between HIGH SCHOOL SUCCESS and community college success. Community college, even if easier than a UC, is still a college; a high school is............NOT a college!</p>
<p>gabe is right, UC and CC students do the same, in fact, some CCs are even more competitive than some UCs. Like SMC, who has the most students transfering to UCLA, are probably smarter than kids from UCR or Merced (unless if they were offered full tuition!) lol.</p>
<p>and to the responce about the kids who didnt realize in a 4 year they couldnt afford it...they could always turn to a CC and transfer... :p</p>
<p>OK! A LATE BLOOMER who did poorly in hs but well in college versus someone who did well in hs and just as well in college. And yes, for the MOST PART, a 4 year school is tougher than a CC. I think you're going to have a hard time arguing otherwise.</p>
<p>"Obviously if you've been working or can't afford to go to a UC out of hs there should be exceptions."</p>
<p>So, as long as the reason for going to community college has to do with finances, then it gets your stamp of approval? How about if you are 15 years old and your brother is diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma? Then two weeks later your mother is diagnosed with a completely unrelated cancer and dies 6 months later? Is that a decent excuse for ending up at community college? I mean, because it's pretty hard to get straight A's when your family life is crushing before you..ya know?</p>