<p>Who said all transfer student comes from a CC? I got unaccepted while attending UCSC and I still have to take the GE’s at Revelle.</p>
<p>UCLAri,</p>
<p>Assuming you transferred from a CC, you should take it as a compliment: you saved a bunch of tuition money and got the same degree. Most freshman admits don’t realize the benefits of the CC transfer route. You did, good job.</p>
<p>SuperSengSkeet,</p>
<p>I was unclear. I was referring to CC transfer students and should have explicitly stated that.</p>
<p>tastybeef,</p>
<p>Also, I would like to note that I did get into plenty of schools out of HS. I just couldn’t afford them for four years. </p>
<p>While I do agree that there are “skin-of-their-nose” admits from CCs, there are also many superbly qualified transfers. Some people just mature later than others, I suppose.</p>
<p>stop attacking freshman admits. They worked hard in HS so stop devaluing their accomplishments. Yea, transferring is a great way to save some money. But do transfers get the full college experience? And I heard that transfers take longer to graduate in certain majors because of the fact that credits do not always transfer.</p>
<p>Nobody was attacking freshman admits.</p>
<p>maybe attack was too strong of a word, but nevertheless, the posts above does provoke some kind of negative feeling towards freshman admits. People need to stop saying that CC transfers are superior or in an advantage to regular freshman admits cuz we know that’s not true.</p>
<p>jasonlee,</p>
<p>The truth is, however, that transfers do have some advantages over freshman admits. Mostly the fact that many of them can skip weeders at the UC and do them at a CC instead. There’s also the cost benefit: it’s simply cheaper to do your first two years at a CC and transfer.</p>
<p>Those are advantages. We’re not saying that the students themselves are any different, but that the pathways are. Don’t take it personally.</p>
<p>The name of the school printed on your diploma should not be a matter of pride. </p>
<p>Come time for grad school applications or job hunting, your successful completion of college (even if it’s Stanford) isn’t going to matter if you haven’t demonstrated personal success. Achieve that and have pride in yourself and not your status as a student commodity.</p>
<p>^ok but don’t forget that there are some disadvantages as well!</p>
<p>And the silly questions never end…</p>
<p>UCSD is a fantastic school! Buy yourself a sweatshirt!</p>
<p>Saying you’re not proud to go to UCSD is saying you’re not proud of the hard work you put in during high school to get into a quality school.</p>
<p>D@mn straight.</p>
<p>I still don’t get it, what’s wrong with UCSD with people? Just because it’s not as “well known” as Cal or UCLA?</p>
<p>Cal is full of hippies living in trees, and LA is full of smog and traffic.</p>
<p>I really don’t get the appeal of either, other than the “brand-name.”</p>
<p>agree with Kevin.
I strongly believe that UCSD, should it continue to be an excellent institution, will be world renowned like Cal and UCLA in the next 20 years.</p>
<p>why would you turn down cal for sd…</p>
<p>lmao</p>
<p>Perhaps there are those who preferred SD over cal, zzzboy…me being one of them. Prestige isn’t everything.</p>
<p>for one, Cal is way too far away. second, UCSD seems more chilled than Cal. And Cal doesn’t have the major I’m looking for. There’s more reasons why but I don’t feel like typing them out.</p>
<p>“Cal is full of hippies living in trees, and LA is full of smog and traffic. I really don’t get the appeal of either, other than the “brand-name.””</p>
<p>well, if you’re going to say something like that, why don’t i just come back with “sd is for cal and LA rejects and is socially dead.” hey, everyone says it, so why don’t we just assume it’s true? you seem to like generalizations, after all. (btw, i don’t think putting down other schools is the best way to build pride.)</p>
<p>also, brand name seems to mean something to the vast majority of people, doesn’t it? don’t act like you’re above it.</p>
<p>i know i’m going to get plenty of heat for this (sigh, why does it always have to be like this?), but … that was a ridiculous post, imo.</p>
<p>That was actually well put, cenire. I’ve had to say some of those things to people I know, too. The whole brand-name thing, however, is debatable, IMO. I’ve encountered so many different beliefs about that argument… though it’s true, most people are swayed by prestige. I won’t act like I’m not one of them, either! haha.</p>
<p>SD isn’t as well-recognized as Cal/LA at the moment because it hasn’t been around as long. It’s still considered the next most prestigious after those two UCs, and its reputation is rising fast enough so that it will hopefully close the gap in years to come.</p>