"Regents voted to cap nonresident undergraduate enrollment to 18% at UC Davis, UC Santa Barbara, UC Santa Cruz, UC Riverside and UC Merced. Four campuses that already exceed that level — UCLA, UC Berkeley, UC San Diego and UC Irvine — will be allowed to keep but not increase the higher percentage they enroll in 2017-18.
Nonresidents currently make up 16.5% of the system’s 210,170 undergraduates."
These numbers are way higher than the 10% (90% quoted earlier) number. The 16.5% is the average across all UC campuses, and the top UC schools are understandably going to be above that.
I still can’t figure whether this is sarcasm. But heart my post if you agree!
My oldest is a college freshman right now. She didn’t get into the UC schools she wanted (SB and Irvine, she did get into SC but she chose not to go), although she wanted CS major which is relatively more competitive. So potentially she is a victim of the increased non-resident student ratio and that’s why I am curious.
Rather than comparing the average OOS student ratio of all public schools in each state, what people really care about are the top (say 25%) of the public schools. I have no idea how that compares with other states.
Colleges are where exploratory sex is as expected. Don’t drink alcohol or walk around scantily dressed at night then. Many rape accusations are false, usually don’t get what she wants after consensual.
Just look at where the tax dollars go, you should be able to figure out easily. There is no college tax, so tax money can be spent in whatever way they want, plus nobody would pay attention.
Sarcasm? Not at all. given there is a shortage of quality STEM teachers… as RE investing might be a more attractive option for those with the means.
Congrats to your daughter for entering a CS program! Did she stay in-state? CA does have a wide selection of colleges, although the top choices are hard to get in, especially for engineering around SV. I know a couple of people who decided to send their above-average kids to local community colleges hoping to get into UCs via transfer. I haven’t looked at the numbers yet, but I believe a not insignificant number of state residents enter the system this way (although not guaranteed) They mentioned the smaller size, cost and convenience as pros in one case.
I don’t have much more to add about in-state admissions to the top UCs. I came from a state where the main public university was okay, but had a reputation for heavy partying (drinking) so I saw it an a safety school only, kind of like an insurance policy you hope you dont need to use.
I wonder if anyone has experience applying to UT Austin. Interestingly it seems they get a big chunk of funding from oil-producing lands by the railroad tracks they were granted (along with TX A&M) as part of the state constitution.
If one insist of going to UCB and not able to go directly, the next best path is:
SJSU or community college for 1-2 years then apply to UCB.
All UCs are obliged to take in a certain % of transfer students.
I know that’s possible.
However, why perfect GPA CA student with 12 AP classes is rejected from state university and has to try such bypass route? That’s because UCB gives only 65% of admission to in-state students.
This means UCB as a state university does not fulfull its main role, providing quality education to in-state kids.
No kidding.
A women drives home drunk and plows into someone. She’s responsible.
A women gets so drunk she doesn’t know what she’s doing and the next morning regrets what she did. She bears NO responsibility.
The attitude is not only unfair it’s actually demeaning to women.
given there is a shortage of quality STEM teachers… as RE investing might be a more attractive option for those with the means.