Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

As an alumnus, I have occasionally pondered as to what would make our school better going forward.
And one such suggestion is to reduce the number of transfer admits from community colleges.

Since my freshman year at Cal, I found it ridiculous that Cal accepts such a large number of junior college transfers (over 2,000 admits each year) in the fall and spring.
I felt it was a slap in the face for the majority of Cal students who worked hard in their high school years to achieve good GPAs, SAT scores, solid extracurricular activities, only to find 1/4 of their classmates hailing from community colleges.

Most of the transfer students I met at Cal were those students who could not get into 4-year colleges in their high school years. It was shocking to see a lot of them transfer to Berkeley rather easily through the JC route and boast their academic ability and supposedly a Berkeley "pedigree".

I am aware of the fact that a good chunk of these students perform decently at Cal. However, their academic achievement is not the case in point. UC's preference to accept such a large number of transfer admits from JCs and give them preferential weight over applicants from other four-year colleges do not bode well for the student quality of our alma mater.

I've met numerous Asian transfer admits who boast their degrees from Cal. It was interesting to see that most of them could not enter decent schools in Asia and thus chose the community college route to get into the Univ. of Calif. The worst part is, a lot of Asian people I've met, do not respect Berkeley undergrad degrees as much because Berkeley is seen as an easy school to get in, especially after seeing these transfer students who fail to go to college in their Asian countries, and yet manage to get into Berkeley several years later through the JC route.

If the Univ. of Calif insists on sticking with its transfer admission policy, I would like to ask them to require SAT I and SAT IIs as part of tightened transfer application procedures. Just looking at the first year's community college grades to determine admits without requiring any standardized exams is an inequitably preferential treatment for transfer admits.

A quintessential college life is, in general, formed with four-year camaraderie and school spirit. Promotion of transfer admission, I believe, does not serve in the best interest for the overall image of school selectivity and quality of students, not to mention alumni satisfaction.

Any comment is appreciated. Please note that this is not to antagonize any particular group on purpose, but to discuss ways to improve Berkeley's academic reputation and student quality.

Kagor

By Calkidd (Calkidd) on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 12:55 pm: Edit

"I felt it was a slap in the face...to find 1/4 of their classmates hailing from community colleges."

I for one never cared too much where any of my classmates came from; there are far better indicators of intelligence and aptitude out there than high school performance, something that seems lost on a crowd that seems to hold the belief that all of us had the same opportunities in our teenage years. Most of the transfer students I knew from engineering were more focused than the four year studetns, maybe because they were going to Berkeley in order to get a job somewhere and not to go to college for the sake of going to college. Yeah there are some people who game the system. But to assume that someone who went to community college is somehow beneath a "four-year" admit is incredibly arrogant.

By Kryptic (Kryptic) on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 01:22 pm: Edit

It sounds like you should have gone to Harvard, you have the Ivy snobbery down pat. The academic performance *IS* relevant. Transfer students perform as well, or BETTER, than freshman admits. Every advisor, every professor, and every college speaker that I've ever heard talk about the subject reconfirms this fact. The purpose of Berkeley is not to make you feel like you're special, it's to educatate the best and brightest of our society. If transfer students are graduating with the same statistical credentials as freshmen admits, they clearly belong into that category.

In my own case, you're right. I couldn't have gotten into Cal from HS. I graduated with a 1.8 GPA. HS wasn't challenging, and I spent most of 'classtime' reading either fiction, the encyclopedia, or random other reference books. While some boring Math teacher blabbed on about calculus, I was pouring through Milton and Chaucer. While some other boring Art teacher blabbed on about perspective, I was rethinking the design of some apps I was involved with in Slackware 0.92. However, after HS I entered the software industry, was promoted on average every 6-8 months, and by the time I was 24 I was well on my way to my first million, was traveling the globe doing symposiums and cutting business deals, and was holding down executive management jobs. Oh, and I was also going to school - maintaining nearly a 4.0, while working full time, at several four year institutions in Oregon and a JC here in CA. I've been published in over 20 magazines, I've been on TV in 4 continents, and I've provided training sessions or lectures to over 10,000 people. I've architected new models for scalable and inexpensive enterprise software systems, which are being used by numerous fortune 500 companies, and I've served as engineering lead and architect for cross-national teams of PhD programmers. So you think I'm not Cal material?

What have *you* done? Getting a 5 on a few AP tests, or doing well on an SAT, is no indication that you'll do well in the real world. It may correlate with college performance, but I've hired handfuls of MIT graduates, handfuls of Berkeley graduates, and many dozens of graduates from tier-2 school, across a host of disciplines - and I've had to fire just as many 4.0 grads as I have 2.0 grads. Doing well in school does not mean that you have the maturity, responsibility, or even the creative spark to do well outside of school. Especially when we're just talking undergraduate degrees. God knows, it certainly doesn't mean you can work well with peers or on teams. If anything, the 4.0 grads from top institutions tend to possess a certain cockiness that actually interferes with their ability to work with their peers. A little humility goes a long way to bridging the gap between people.

So think what you want, but the statistics do not back you up. Those concerned with "college life" and "school spirit" more than their actual education probably don't belong at Cal.

By Kryptic (Kryptic) on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 01:45 pm: Edit

But, while we're on the subject of people who don't belong at Cal. Let me add my own two cents. International students. Cal is a public school, funded by public dollars, built using the resources of the state of California. Why should we pay our tax dollars to support students who will almost certainly leave the state after they graduate? The purpose of public funding for institutions like Cal is to produce a positive economic impact on the state. We train people who will contribute to our society, and people who leave do not contribute - in fact, by improving the environment elsewhere, they may directly detract from California's economic abilities. We are wasting our resources on people like you. Sure, some of these students stay - and sure, some domestic students leave - but when looked at from the impetus of "doing what's right for the state", no argument can succinctly defend international admissions. I'm sorry, but your higher tuition does NOT cover the entire costs (modern and historic) it takes to run the University. Also, you displace qualified in-state students who would have stayed and would have contributed to our economy. We attend the University of California, and part of the "Cal Spirit" is rooted in being a "California student" or, at the very least, a "US student".

I have no problem at all with International students in-general, and as a rule I prefer the company of my foreign friends, but these students belong at places like Stanford and other private institutions. Our civic dollars should be used to reinforce -our- society, in the case of publicly funded institutions such as UC. That's why they exist.

By Davejohnson (Davejohnson) on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 02:04 pm: Edit

My own experience. I was somewhat of a slacker in high school, graduating with a 3.4 gpa. Although I wasn't sure I'd be attending college, I took the SAT and scored a good but not great score (1390). After high school, I began working in the television industry working for such networks as MTV, USA, and CBS as a production assistant (very FUN job). Eventually I got bored and decided to go back to school. ~80 units later (4.0), I find myself at CAL with elitists like yourself who look down on based on the fact that my academic "peak" in life wasn't in high school.

By Shyboy13 (Shyboy13) on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 02:27 pm: Edit

Kagor, I guess you realize that not everyone thinks like you do. Perhaps you should have went to an Ivy league school like Kryptic suggested. I believe like the posters here so I wont get too deep into it. You should check out the "Why Community College" thread under "College Admissions." It may be of interest to you. Have you noticed that there are many UC bashers on College Confidential? I for one am quick to defend Cal and the rest of the UC's when people put them down. If you try to divide us by separating transfers from fresmen admits then our "army" will only get weaker. Of course, that last sentance was a joke but it makes sense. More importantly, read the previous posts because they have enlightening information in them.

By Onnihs (Onnihs) on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 04:32 pm: Edit

Kagor you're full of crock.

I find it highly offensive that you feel people like me, junior transfers, are sub-par in terms of our academic achievement.

Would you like a cookie because of what you've done in high school? What about people like me, who WORKED full time to put themselves through community college in order to fulfill our academic goals? What have you done that is so valorous besides get decent grades in high school? As far as I'm concerned, it is world's harder to be admitted to UC Berkeley through the JC system than it is through high school. Think about the workload. We've had to maintain super high GPA's while doing college level coursework.

You're a dummy if you think Cal accepts a large number of JC transfers. Cal is by far one of the most selective in California - if you can't respect us transfers, then at least be glad that we are the top of the litter.

Stupid crock.

By Collegeat30 (Collegeat30) on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 11:37 pm: Edit

Kryptic, your story sounds so much like mine!

I was not challenged in high school and used to read subversive books in the front row of history class instead of memorizing names and dates. I am a really good test-taker and managed to have a 3.6 and get a 1220 on the SAT before I dropped out at age 16. I identify very well with the main character of Good Will Hunting.

Like you, I started a business before returning to school at community college, where I had a 4.0 average while running a business and working as a writer in the financial field. I'm a bit of a polymath, with varied interests.

However, I don't think that we are the typical community college applicants. I'd love to hear more about your experiences at Berkeley, if you'd like to correspond. My e-mail address is in my profile.

By Khan (Khan) on Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - 12:55 am: Edit

Now, let's not be overly harsh on Kagor. Although he focuses on the apparent preferential treatment given to transfer admits (whether true or not), he's trying to ask a bigger question.

What can be done to improve the reputation and value of a Berkeley degree? I don't care if you're an elitist or not. Don't you want your school's reputation to improve? Our school has room for improvement.

Berkeley has the makings of a great/elite university, but there are a few things that are preventing it from the ranks of HYPSM. One of them is the ease (perceived or real) of getting in compared to HYPSM (whether it be as a freshman or transfer admit).

I really don't want to start another prestige thread, but here are my two cents. If Berkeley started reducing its freshman and transfer admissions and overall number of spots available for enrollment, this will help Berkeley being perceived as a more selective/prestigious university. By selective, I mean an admissions rate of 15% or less. We're currently arond 24% for freshman admits. "Selectivity" or perceived selectivity is one of the main reasons Berkeley is held back from being added to ranks of HYPSMC.

We, as alumni, should be asking what can be done to improve the reputation of our school. Hopefully we're not taking things personally in the process.

By Nhungkia (Nhungkia) on Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - 02:16 am: Edit

"If Berkeley started reducing its freshman and transfer admissions and overall number of spots available for enrollment, this will help Berkeley being perceived as a more selective/prestigious university. By selective, I mean an admissions rate of 15% or less."

While I understand what you are trying to say, I still think this isn't what Cal is about. Cal is about giving as many qualified students as possible a world class education. If Cal was a private school, I would wholeheartedly agree with you, but it is a public university funded by the state. I think Cal could do better administratively and it could do a few things for its undergrads, but I don't think selectivity has to do with it. This is just my two cents.

By Techingithome (Techingithome) on Friday, September 10, 2004 - 07:39 pm: Edit

Community college folk aren't necessarily beneath berkely and its charm, in fact, there are those who are genius material and will turn out to find travel in the tenth dimension or something. They probably choose the beaten transfer road due to financial hardships or proximity to home.

i for one am ever greatful to the UC system for providing excellent education regardless of whether the student is a transfer or not. it really makes many opportunites available. THANK GOD FOR BERKELEY...

By Avoidingwork (Avoidingwork) on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 10:48 am: Edit

My suggestion for improving the quality of CAL's student body is simple (in concept, not in implementation).....improve California's public K-12 schools. Lets start with adequate funding.

By Nkased (Nkased) on Monday, September 13, 2004 - 03:14 pm: Edit

I think those of you who think that transfers should not be admitted are selfish. You care more about the prestige of your school than the wellbeing of other students. Let me tell you, transferring is NOT a piece of cake, especially to Berkeley. Also, there are several reasons people do not attend 4 year colleges right after high school. Most can get gain admission into a 4 year university, but choose to transfer as a way of paying less and possibly getting into a better school. I don't think the decisions one makes as 15-year-old should condemn them for the rest of their lives. I think performance at community college is far more indicative of academic ability (especially with the inclusion of prerequisites for one's major) than some bs AP classes in high school and the SAT's, which is flawed and biased beyond belief. Also, community college students tend to be more diverse ethnically and socially, which contributes to a college environment more than you think. I'd much rather go to college with poorer students that might have failed in high school than pretentious snobs.

By Onnihs (Onnihs) on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 - 04:38 pm: Edit

hahaha i think Kryptic's initial response blew Kagor's post out of the water, lol.

you go boy, w00t

By Stanfordman99 (Stanfordman99) on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 - 11:37 pm: Edit

"by the time I was 24 I was well on my way to my first million, was traveling the globe doing symposiums and cutting business deals, and was holding down executive management jobs. Oh, and I was also going to school - maintaining nearly a 4.0, while working full time, at several four year institutions in Oregon and a JC here in CA. I've been published in over 20 magazines, I've been on TV in 4 continents, and I've provided training sessions or lectures to over 10,000 people. I've architected new models for scalable and inexpensive enterprise software systems, which are being used by numerous fortune 500 companies, and I've served as engineering lead and architect for cross-national teams of PhD programmers. So you think I'm not Cal material?"

What the hell are you going to college for? I am really impressed by what you have done, but why go to Berkeley if you are making big bucks and are being shown on TV in 4 continents? I mean Bill Gates never thought about going back to Harvard.

I have to say that Berkeley's JC transfer admission thing does make the school more accessible and is a positive thing for the university. Some people are late bloomers. Some people may be smart and qualified but cannot afford to pay Berkeley's tuition for 4 years--so they go to community college for 2 years and save lots of money.

I think international students deserve a place in Berkeley too. If California wants to maintain a friendly image around the world, it has to allow some of the brightest foriegn students to come here and then spread the word to their country about how great California is. Other countries may also look favorably upon California if it sees that we are allowing access to our greatest public insitutions to their best students. International image is very important for California's finances because we are part of a global economy and the opinions of other countries do matter.

By Stanfordman99 (Stanfordman99) on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 - 11:37 pm: Edit

"by the time I was 24 I was well on my way to my first million, was traveling the globe doing symposiums and cutting business deals, and was holding down executive management jobs. Oh, and I was also going to school - maintaining nearly a 4.0, while working full time, at several four year institutions in Oregon and a JC here in CA. I've been published in over 20 magazines, I've been on TV in 4 continents, and I've provided training sessions or lectures to over 10,000 people. I've architected new models for scalable and inexpensive enterprise software systems, which are being used by numerous fortune 500 companies, and I've served as engineering lead and architect for cross-national teams of PhD programmers. So you think I'm not Cal material?"

What the hell are you going to college for? I am really impressed by what you have done, but why go to Berkeley if you are making big bucks and are being shown on TV in 4 continents? I mean Bill Gates never thought about going back to Harvard.

I have to say that Berkeley's JC transfer admission thing does make the school more accessible and is a positive thing for the university. Some people are late bloomers. Some people may be smart and qualified but cannot afford to pay Berkeley's tuition for 4 years--so they go to community college for 2 years and save lots of money.

I think international students deserve a place in Berkeley too. If California wants to maintain a friendly image around the world, it has to allow some of the brightest foriegn students to come here and then spread the word to their country about how great California is. Other countries may also look favorably upon California if it sees that we are allowing access to our greatest public insitutions to their best students. International image is very important for California's finances because we are part of a global economy and the opinions of other countries do matter.

By Kryptic (Kryptic) on Wednesday, September 15, 2004 - 01:53 am: Edit

Why? Because after working in the SW industry for a dozen years, I'm sick of it. There's nothing that sucks your soul out of your body, as well as all of your creative juices, more than sitting in a cubicle farm for 40-60 hours every single week... busily marching towards bogus deadlines, all in a vein effort to 'enhance shareholder value'. It's unfulfilling on every single level - creatively, intellectually, emotionally, etc. You realize this eventually, after the excitement at making a huge salary wears off, and you pop your head over your cube wall - only to see 1000 other miserable faces typing out droplets of their life towards the same Sisyphean tasks. You wonder to yourself, is this really what I want out of life? Is this what I want to remember, as I lie on my death bed and flash back over the time I spent on this world?

Sure, I was fortunate in my job to also get OUT of the office regularly, to travel, and to interface with other people... and, when I was working at startups, it was a bit more bearable. But ultimately, it's still unfulfilling. Some people come to the realization that they want to do something more significant with their lives, leave some trace of themselves upon the world other than a signed plaque "contributed to Intel's expansion into China H2'97". So, I decided to go back to school - to do something for *me* - to challenge myself at one of the world's best universities, to try to discovery new interests that appeal to me, and to work towards getting a PhD and to possibly give back to the world through research and teaching. If nothing else, it's an escape for a few years from an environment that most people will come to hate.

Besides, although I was making 'big bucks' during the tech boom, like many others, a bad choice of investments somehow managed to infringe my ability to live the cafe life in Paris after it fell apart. For some people, money is a motivator - for others, the dream of money is a motivator. Once you obtain it, you can determine which of the two types of individual you are. Me? I was caught up in the American Dream, but ultimately discoverd that my own personal happiness and satisfaction had less to do with my bank account, and more to do with the people I surround myself with and my intellectual growth.

Anyways, that's way too much about me - but perhaps it explains why you see some other re-entry students on the campus. Perhaps it also gives some other people hope that, when they face the same mid-20s existential crisis I did, they can realize that other options exist. =) Your course in life is only as 'set' as you choose it to be.

You bring a good point vis-a-vis international students. I would agree that these things are important. I'm not too concerned with it at the undergraduate level, but many schools have grad enrollments comprising >50% international. That saddens me, considering that we're spending all of our resources on people that have a high chance of taking that knowledge back to their own country. Perhaps there's a happy medium between not allowing it at all and where we are today.