Does anyone else find Haas decisions ridiculous?

[cnat]

<p>This is not really relevant but what if Haas classes were just filled with just the freshman admits who scored at the top in all their prereqs. You would get some ridiculous curves. Throw in some transfers to balance it out a bit.</p>

<p>On a side note, transfers provide a new demographic. While the average fall admit Haas student is probably a middle/upper middle class white or asian student, the transfer pool brings in well performing minority students and students of a wider range of socioeconomic backgrounds.</p>

<p>Do so many people get A’s in haas classes because they just like to throw out A’s or is it because everyone does well and deserves A’s?</p>

[student14x]

<p>

On the contrary, I think many people would argue that a comparison of grades between Haas transfers and those who started out as Cal freshman is pointless. To compare the grades of the two different applicant pools is to assume that the difficulty of getting those grades are comparable. Let’s be honest here, is that really the case? From what I’ve gathered, no. I haven’t found a CC that people claim to be more difficult than Cal.

</p>

<p>Tastybeef. Sorry. What I meant was to compare the grades of Haas transfers in Cal’s upper div classes vs the grades of the original Cal students in the same upper div classes. If they are similar, Haas should continue to admit transfers.</p>

[kenf1234]

<p>

You also seem to be under the false impression that transferring from UC/CSU to another UC is quite common while it is not. In addition to that, CC transfers get highest priority, which makes transferring for freshman admits even less feasible.

</p>

<p>UC to CSU is quite common and easy. UC to UC is harder. CSU to UC is irrelevant to this discussion.</p>

<p>Just because there isn’t an articulation agreement, that doesn’t mean the credits don’t transfer. They do. The CC to UC path is an established one, so there are articulation agreements. But if you don’t get into UCB Haas, you can transfer to SJSU, and all of your units are going to transfer, though there may be some CSU-specific requirement courses you still need to take to graduate.</p>

<p>I agree with student14x. If the transfer students are performing substantially below sophomore admits in Haas upper division classes, then maybe on some level you can argue the current system is unfair, or at least that it is not a proper meritocracy. But so far you have produced no evidence of this whatsoever.</p>

[tastybeef]

<p>“This is not really relevant but what if Haas classes were just filled with just the freshman admits who scored at the top in all their prereqs. You would get some ridiculous curves. Throw in some transfers to balance it out a bit.”</p>

<p>Whoa. Strong words there: it seems like you’re saying that top transfer students do not perform as well as top freshman admits. kenf1234 might accuse you of having a superiority complex there. ;)</p>

<p>“Do so many people get A’s in haas classes because they just like to throw out A’s or is it because everyone does well and deserves A’s?”</p>

<p>I have no idea, but interesting though.</p>

<p>“UC to CSU is quite common and easy.”</p>

<p>Oh, really? What would your sources be for this assertion? I’d love to see statistics on the number of people who transfer from UC’s to CSU’s for Business Administration. If you find any, please let me know.</p>

<p>“But if you don’t get into UCB Haas, you can transfer to SJSU, and all of your units are going to transfer, though there may be some CSU-specific requirement courses you still need to take to graduate.”</p>

<p>Is this another unfounded assertion? Because from what I see on SJSU’s website, this certainly isn’t the case. There is no articulation for any of the courses from Berkeley and you will have wasted 2 years at Berkeley were you to do this.</p>

<p>Source:
[SJSU</a> Articulation Office](<a href=“http://info.sjsu.edu/web-dbgen/artic/UCBERKELEY/template-16.html]SJSU”>Artic.sjsu.edu)</p>

<p>“If the transfer students are performing substantially below sophomore admits in Haas upper division classes, then maybe on some level you can argue the current system is unfair, or at least that it is not a proper meritocracy. But so far you have produced no evidence of this whatsoever.”</p>

<p>I’m arguing that the admission process is less stringent for admission students because of the lack of a standardized testing evaluation as well as other ignored criteria applied to freshman admits. There’s a difference between admission based on meritocracy and subsequent performance after admissions. And to follow your train of thought, there is no evidence to support the notion that transfer students are performing on par with freshman admits in Haas courses either. However, there is clear evidence that the admission process is more lenient for transfer students.</p>

[kenf1234]

<p>The link you give is from SJSU to Berkeley. That is not what we are discussing. We are talking about Berkeley to SJSU. People drop out of Berkeley for whatever reason and graduate from CSUs all the time. The courses transfer, of course.</p>

[tastybeef]

<p>“The link you give is from SJSU to Berkeley.”</p>

<p>Nope, it works backwards too. Here’s assist.org for Berkeley TO SJSU.</p>

<p>[ASSIST</a> Report: UCB 07-08 SJSU Articulation Agreement by Major](<a href=“Welcome to ASSIST”>Welcome to ASSIST)</p>

<p>“The courses transfer, of course.”</p>

<p>No source? I understand that general education transfers over, but I’m assuming that you mean major prereqs, which as I’ve shown above, DO NOT transfer over.</p>

[kenf1234]

<p>

I’ve shown above, DO NOT transfer over.

</p>

<p>Yes. You are right.</p>

[sunfish]

<p>Can anyone speculate the average age difference between continuing students and transfer students?
It’s 20 vs. 22.
Also, does Cal has a program similar to other UCs that guarantees admission if you spend two years at cc?</p>

[kenf1234]

<p>

Also, does Cal has a program similar to other UCs that guarantees admission if you spend two years at cc?

</p>

<p>No, my understanding is that it doesn’t.</p>

[tastybeef]

<p>“Can anyone speculate the average age difference between continuing students and transfer students?”</p>

<p>I’d say they’re probably, on average, older.</p>

[thatgirltoo]

<p>Curious to know, is the age difference a bad or good thing? </p>

<p>One thing you might fail to bring into the picture is that oftentimes, transfer students have had to balance work and family in ways that students who started at Berkeley as a freshman never have. Transfer students have also often held jobs that give them real-life experience in business (or other relevant majors), whereas the 4-year Cal student may not - not as internships, but for basic survival. I’m not saying that this is always the case, but I think it definitely plays a part when an admissions officer is deciding whether to accept a transfer student or not. School and academic achievement are not always the only criteria…</p>

<p>Also, there is no reason why a transfer student should not be given a chance or should be “relegated” to attending a CSU. It seems to me that it is much more difficult to enter Haas as a transfer student than as a 4-year attendee of Cal, based on the numbers alone, and that the low number of transfer students admitted does not really take away so many places as to make it unfair. If you eliminate transfer spots, well, you’ve only allowed an additional 5-9% of Cal students to be accepted into Haas (I’m speculating on the number, forgive me if I haven’t done the math).</p>

<p>Whether or not classes at CC are less difficult than classes at Berkeley is sort of a moot point. The transfer student has no way of knowing whether a class at CC is less difficult, nor does a 4-year student at Cal. Are there any studies done on this, or is your theory based on speculation and rumor? Like all classes, some professors are very difficult and demanding, while some are not. Until I see it for myself, I will not believe that ALL Cal professors are more demanding than the most demanding professors that I’ve had at CC. I will not dispute that the majority of classes I’ve taken at CC have been more or less “easy” (for me), but that might be because I’ve always naturally found school to be easy. There are plenty of students in those classes who found them to be really difficult who have earned very low grades. But these students have not been accepted by Cal, unless by some strange occurrence or other mitigating factor. I’m ready for Cal and welcome the challenge that Cal promises to give me, just like I would hope any starting freshman would welcome the same.</p>

<p>(By the way, my major is not business or economics or anything like it, nor did I try to get into Haas.)</p>

[tastybeef]

<p>“School and academic achievement are not always the only criteria…”</p>

<p>That’s an excellent point, but you forget that it is also factored into admissions for continuing students. Haas website makes it clear that grades can only get you so far. It constitutes for 50% of the admission process while essays are worth 35% and the resume 15%. As such, I’d argue that continuing students admitted to Haas also have these real-life experiences that you contend most of them lack.</p>

<p>“Also, there is no reason why a transfer student should not be given a chance or should be “relegated” to attending a CSU.”</p>

<p>I believe top transfer students deserve spots in Haas for all of their hard work, but not in the relative distribution as it is now.</p>

<p>“It seems to me that it is much more difficult to enter Haas as a transfer student than as a 4-year attendee of Cal, based on the numbers alone, and that the low number of transfer students admitted does not really take away so many places as to make it unfair.”</p>

<p>Well let’s just look at the numbers alone.
2007-2008 transfer cycle:
1314 applicants
871 ineligible applicants
443 eligible applicants
96 offers of admission</p>

<p>Based on the numbers alone, it seems to me that most transfer applicants to Haas are not even serious about applying to Haas. All they had to do to become eligible applicants was to SHOW planned completion of admission requirements. This is what, a matter of planning out your courses for a few quarter and semesters? Now, one can make the weak argument that maybe those courses were not available to these applicants. But really, look up assist.org, there are plenty of community colleges around along with distance learning courses that satisfy these requirements.</p>

<p>For those who are actually eligible for admissions, around 22% are accepted. Is that much harder than getting into Cal in the first place (25%) and then getting into Haas (50%) for an overall acceptance rate of roughly 12.5%? The numbers don’t seem to show that it’s harder to get in as transfer student. In fact, it shows that it is much harder for continuing students to get in.</p>

<p>While I don’t think it’s fair to remove all seats reserved for transfer applicants, however let’s just entertain ourselves with what that would mean for continuing students in the 2007-2008 cycle. 96 offers of admissions were given to transfer students and 260 offers of admission were to continuing students. That’s a total of 356 seats. Hence, those 96 seats for transfer students take up roughly 27% of the entire entering class. If those seats were allotted solely for continuing students consisting of 489 applicants, then an extra 20% of the continuing applicant students would be able to secure seats in Haas. That’s not a small number by any means.</p>

<p>“Whether or not classes at CC are less difficult than classes at Berkeley is sort of a moot point.”</p>

<p>No, it is not a moot point. My contention has always been that for the largest selection factor in Haas admissions, academics, transfer students have an easier time taking those courses at CC’s than at Berkeley.</p>

<p>“Are there any studies done on this, or is your theory based on speculation and rumor?”</p>

<p>There are a few sites with this information: thecampusbuddy.com, pickaprof.com, you name it. Just for kicks and giggles, look up the grade distribution for courses that freshman admits have to take and compare them to their counterparts at “hard” CC’s, such as SMC or De Anza. You will find that these CC course counterparts are easier. Furthermore, this is not taking into account the difference in the student bodies either.</p>

<p>“There are plenty of students in those classes who found them to be really difficult who have earned very low grades. But these students have not been accepted by Cal, unless by some strange occurrence or other mitigating factor.”</p>

<p>Erm, okay. It’s nothing out of the ordinary to reject transfer students with low grades. However, I stress that there should be a tougher selection process for transfer students with high grades than there is now, because these CC grades are not as hard to earn as Berkeley grades. As such, it should be much harder for transfer students than continuing students to get into Haas.</p>

[sunfish]

<p>

“Can anyone speculate the average age difference between continuing students and transfer students?”</p>

<p>I’d say they’re probably, on average, older.

The age difference is reported in Haas admissions statistics.</p>

<p>

It seems to me that it is much more difficult to enter Haas as a transfer student than as a 4-year attendee of Cal, based on the numbers alone

This is an illogical argument. For this to make sense, you have to subject group A and group B to the same control environment.</p>

<p>

the low number of transfer students admitted does not really take away so many places as to make it unfair

The number of admitted transfer students is about a third of the number of continuing students. </p>

<p>

If you eliminate transfer spots, well, you’ve only allowed an additional 5-9% of Cal students to be accepted into Haas

The number is about 20%.</p>

<p>

Whether or not classes at CC are less difficult than classes at Berkeley is sort of a moot point. The transfer student has no way of knowing whether a class at CC is less difficult, nor does a 4-year student at Cal. Are there any studies done on this, or is your theory based on speculation and rumor? Like all classes, some professors are very difficult and demanding, while some are not. Until I see it for myself, I will not believe that ALL Cal professors are more demanding than the most demanding professors that I’ve had at CC.

This is not even remotely disputable. On average, getting an A at Cal, especially for the Haas prereqs, is significantly more difficult than that at a CC. Furthermore, the amount of effort required to achieve a higher gpa at Cal is also substantially more. I think it’s more difficult to get an A in an AP class or a 5 in an AP exam than getting an A at a CC.</p>

<p>

I will not dispute that the majority of classes I’ve taken at CC have been more or less “easy” (for me), but that might be because I’ve always naturally found school to be easy.

Sorry to inform you that your “easy” experience is far from unique. It’s one that is shared by many many good 10th/11th graders. Mind you that many of these students don’t make it to Cal. </p>

<p>

There are plenty of students in those classes who found them to be really difficult who have earned very low grades

Thank you for providing an explanation of why the CC classes are “easy” – this is known as the law of the lowest common denominator.</p>

<p>

I’m ready for Cal and welcome the challenge that Cal promises to give me, just like I would hope any starting freshman would welcome the same.

I really hope that you try pre-Haas or premed at Cal and do well becasue then you can come back and post something like this again:
“…because I’ve always naturally found school to be easy. There are plenty of students in those classes who found them to be really difficult who have earned very low grades…”
And this time your reasoning may actually be right.</p>

[student14x]

<p>Sunfish. I always thought that upper div at Cal is more difficult than Cal’s lower div because the prehaas would act as a weed out mechanism,hence forcing the best of best to eventually compete in curved upper div haas classes. Hence, the view that since the CC transfers graduate in a similar fashion, they are still top students despite the significantly lower initial hurdle.</p>

[sunfish]

<p>

I always thought that upper div at Cal is more difficult than Cal’s lower div because the prehaas would act as a weed out mechanism,hence forcing the best of best to eventually compete in curved upper div haas classes.

Upper div is generally easier than lower div at Cal due to the lower div weeding process. Grades for upper div Haas are very generous. “Best of the best” argument really cannot explain why it is difficult, nor can it explain why it isn’t. </p>

<p>

Hence, the view that since the CC transfers graduate in a similar fashion, they are still top students despite the significantly lower initial hurdle.

I’m afraid this is a flawed argument since it’s quite plausible that the top 10% of one school may fall below the bottom 50% of another school.</p>

[dvrjosh]

<p>I can’t believe people bother arguing about this. Do you think the admissions people really don’t look back at graduation rates/grades to make sure the transfers perform well enough to justify the number of admissions? No one here is an expert, the people in charge are, and they don’t have an axe to grind with either group. Almost all of this thread is absurd.</p>

<p>I slacked off in highschool, went to the military, grew up a lot, went to a CC and excelled, then got into Haas. I’ll be damned if someone gets away with these whiny arguments in front of me when I’m there. I’ve paid my dues and I’ll be busting my ass same as everyone else.</p>

[changusmc]

<p>So… to sum up this thread.</p>

<p>A certain 4-year Cal students wants to make himself feel better by saying that transfers have it too easy.</p>

[sunfish]

<p>

Do you think the admissions people really don’t look back at graduation rates/grades to make sure the transfers perform well enough to justify the number of admissions?

Probably they do, but it’s beside the point. Do you honestly believe that the 50% rejected continuing students are not capable of “performing well enough” had they been admitted to Haas? </p>

<p>

No one here is an expert, the people in charge are, and they don’t have an axe to grind with either group.

So you agree with all Cal policies. Furthermore, you agree with all government policies.</p>

<p>

I slacked off in highschool, went to the military, grew up a lot, went to a CC and excelled, then got into Haas. I’ll be damned if someone gets away with these whiny arguments in front of me when I’m there. I’ve paid my dues and I’ll be busting my ass same as everyone else.

You can’t be serious. You busted your ass for 2 years at a CC while the continuing Cal students busted their asses for 4 years at high schools, got into Cal despite the odds, busted their asses, if there were any left, for 2 more years.
Tell me who deserves to be more ticked off?</p>

[thatgirltoo]

<br>

<blockquote>
<p>Well let’s just look at the numbers alone.
2007-2008 transfer cycle:
1314 applicants
871 ineligible applicants
443 eligible applicants
96 offers of admission<<</p>
</blockquote>

<br>

<p>Just curious, what are the similar numbers for Berkeley students applying to Haas?</p>

[sakky]

<p>All vitriol aside, I think there actually is a legitimate point in this thread, which is that there is a lingering suspicious that transfer students may not be subject to the same standards that freshman-admits are. Of course, nobody knows that for sure, but the suspicion certainly exists. </p>

<p>Allow me to note that I have nothing against the notion of transfer students per se. In fact, I sometimes think that all Berkeley admissions should be transfer admissions, or in other words, that Berkeley’s undergrad program only extend to the junior and senior years. This is because I believe (as do others) that, by far, the weakest part of the Berkeley undergrad program is in the first 2 years, with the myriad giant impersonal weeder classes for freshmen and sophomores, and that the educational experience improves significantly as one reaches the upper division. Many (probably most) Berkeley professors are simply not interested in teaching basic intro courses. {For example, if you’re a brilliant Berkeley math professor working on the most cutting edge of mathematical proofs, do you really want to spend your time explaining how to calculate a simple derivative?}. Hence, by jettisoning the basic coursework, Berkeley would be able to repurpose academic resources towards offering a greater variety of upper division classes.</p>

<p>But anyway, that’s neither here nor there. The issue is whether transfer students are subject to the same rigor as are freshman-admits when it comes to Haas. And to that, I would say that what Berkeley could do is simply not offer direct transfer admission to Haas. Instead, Berkeley could provide only general admission to Berkeley L&S, and those transfer students for the fall would then have to take some Haas prereqs during that fall and then apply to Haas in the spring. Note, I don’t think they should have to take all of the Haas prereqs, as there seem to be too many of them to reasonably take in one semester. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable to require that they take 3 or 4 of them during that fall (i.e. BA 10, the stat & econ requirement, maybe the CS requirement). If they don’t make it into Haas, then they can still stay in L&S and graduate from one of its majors, just like those freshman-admits who try to get into Haas and don’t succeed. Another method would be to admit those transfers into Haas but on a conditional basis, predicated on the notion that they have to take and pass the final exams of the Berkeley prereqs that they skipped. Note: I’m not asking for them to get top grades in those finals. I am simply asking that they pass, and they would be graded on a P/NP basis on those finals. I think this is entirely reasonable: after all, if you really are a worthy transfer student, then you should have little trouble in earning passing scores in those finals. </p>

<p>Some might wonder about the asymmetry of why community college transfer students should have to complete prereqs at Berkeley when Berkeley students don’t have to take prereqs at community colleges. The answer is simple: transfer students are coming to Berkeley, but Berkelye students are not going to community college. Hence, it’s only fair that transfer students should conform to the rules at Berkeley. </p>

<p>In short, the general problem regarding all transfer admissions, and not just regarding Haas specifically, is that transfer students get to skip over weeders that Berkeley students have to take. That’s the root source of unfairness. </p>

<p>

I can’t believe people bother arguing about this. Do you think the admissions people really don’t look back at graduation rates/grades to make sure the transfers perform well enough to justify the number of admissions? No one here is an expert, the people in charge are, and they don’t have an axe to grind with either group. Almost all of this thread is absurd

</p>

<p>Well, having dealt with the administration myself many times, I can definitely believe that they either don’t look back at graduation rates or prior grades, or even if they did, that they don’t care. It’s not about them having axes to grind. Look, these administrators are basically politicians. If some undeserving people manage to get admitted over other deserving people, they don’t really care. After all, it doesn’t hurt those administrators. </p>

<p>

I slacked off in highschool, went to the military, grew up a lot, went to a CC and excelled, then got into Haas. I’ll be damned if someone gets away with these whiny arguments in front of me when I’m there. I’ve paid my dues and I’ll be busting my ass same as everyone else.

</p>

<p>But that’s precisely the point of contention: whether you really did pay your dues. The fact of the matter is, you didn’t take the prereqs at Berkeley. Granted, you took them at community college, but it is an open question as to whether they are of the same rigor. </p>

<p>But like I said, I have nothing against transfer admissions as a concept. The issue is with transfer students being allowed to skip over Berkeley weeders. Which is why I think that, as a matter of fairness, transfer students should be required to somehow take those weeders also. If those transfer students are indeed worthy, then they will have no trouble.</p>