<p>
</p>
<p>But that hardly solves the problem - indeed, it’s a case of the cure being just as bad as the disease. Berkeley transfers are typical of neither their transferee school nor of California in general. They may come from rich families that emphasize education, they may have the wealth to allow them to study full-time without having to work, they may be able to hire private tutors to help boost their grades. </p>
<p>I can personally think of some Berkeley transfers of which all three were true. Heck, one of them was a self-described ne’er-do-well while in high school, even flunking out for a period of time. But the fact that he came from a family of millionaires meant that he was able to quickly re-establish himself in community college and transfer to Berkeley. A Horatio Alger story it certainly was not. Heck, the guy was driving a better car as a teenager than my parents could afford even to this day. </p>
<p>If the problem to be solved is that some people are poorer than others, then Berkeley should tweak its admissions policies - both transfer and freshman - to address it as a matter of social engineering. That at least would be the intellectually honest choice. To fold social policy within the transfer process is as deceitful as much as it is ineffective for many of the successful transfer students are themselves rich. </p>
<p>It is also probably unfair - and that’s precisely the topic at hand here. It is at least strongly perceived that admission as a transfer is easier than admission as a freshman. Which is why I return to the notion of a standardized test that is run by Haas. That would be eminently aboveboard, for it then wouldn’t matter whether you’re a transfer or a freshman admit. You either score well or you don’t.</p>