Anonymous wrote:I’m struggling to believe some of the antidotal stories.

DC is an incoming freshmen student at UMich. Registration began this week. DC registered yesterday. He had no problem registering for the classes he wanted. CoE if that matters.

I agree. It’s funny how Michigan is lumped in with UC schools as if all publics are exactly the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Omg this sounds awful.

I now understand why no kids from our private go to UCLA or Berkeley

They are great if you are In-state. But definately not worth OOS prices. If I'm paying $60K+, my kid will have smaller class and the ability to get the courses they need when they need them.

Let's be honest. They are not great in-state. The price is right for in-state. And the name is great on the diploma. But the student experience sux.

Except UCLA is an absolute monster when it comes to outlasting literally every other university in the country when it comes to the core student rankings, including quality of life and overall experience.

But yeah, other than that …

Oh for sure. Other than the 5 pages on this thread of complaints. No, definitely.

https://www.niche.com/colleges/university-of-california-los-angeles/

Now show us the schools that are so much better!!!

BHAHAHAHHA!! You're citing Niche?! Hahahahahah!!!!!!!

Cool! Show us the “real” rankings that count now! Niche is trash, so looking forward to seeing the treasure you bring forth to settle this!

Oh, wait - what’s that? The “real” rankings are the ones you see in this thread, comprised of parents whose kids were rejected by UCLA and some fugazi pre-med lecturer who claims that 1,200 student classes are commonplace?

Just curious what you are claiming is not true. Which of the following do you dispute

--UCLA regularly puts three freshmen and/or sophomores in dorm rooms built as doubles

-- There is an even greater housing shortage at the other UCs

-- The list of impacted majors at most UCs include popular majors like computer science, engineering, psychology. . . .

--It is very difficult to transfer into an impacted major

--There are some classes in certain majors with other 1000 students enrolled, at least at Berkeley

--It can be difficult to register for required classes

What about incoming freshman with 50+ units already banked via AP testing and matriculating into a major that’s not impacted? Do they have a chance of graduating in less than six years?

I’d like to know this as well.

Many if not nearly all students come in with a ton of credits. Don't assume that it's that special.

Go take a tour. Ask students about advising, including whether they were assigned a faculty advisor, how often they meet with their advisor, and what input their advisor has provided. Ask students about class registration and how many students graduate in 4 years. Ask about class sizes and quality and if they get feedback on written work product. Go sit in a lecture see who is paying attention or if the lecture is full. See if anyone asks questions. Ask if exams are multiple choice. Ask if cheating is a problem. Ask if there are enough materials for labs or if they run out. Ask about housing. Ask about what students do on weekends. Ask about the political parties and special interest groups in student government. Ask. Ask. Ask.

Holy smokes. These are good.
I’m worried the answers will disappoint me at most flagships.
The best answers would be from SLACs right (other than the weekend question)….

Any private, especially those with less than 10,000 students, are unlikely to have these particular issues.

Right. And there almost invariably a direct correlation to cost. You want to spend $320 - $400K to send your kid to a private with the various associated trade-offs, that’s great. If others make other decisions based on the trade-offs that matter to them, also great.

It’s just that graduating from Macalester or Davidson or Occidental, by way of example, instead of Michigan or Berkeley or UCLA is going to very likely cost you in the long run much more than the higher cost of attendance on the front end.

The oos cost of the UC’s isn’t that far off from a private college. You do realize most of us actually live in the DC area, and not California.

Anonymous wrote:All UCLA did for me was land me in Silicon Valley, ruining my life forever. The end.

0/10 - would not recommend.

Sarcasm or no? Because I can read it either way.

Anonymous wrote:All of them, including Cornell, are lower rated than Berkeley and UCLA .. ?

Are people seriously choosing schools that are lower rated, and in places like Ithaca, NY, over higher rated schools in California?

USC is fine as a proxy (but without the NM pricing, more than 2x the cost), but anybody choosing NYU or especially BU over Berkeley or UCLA really isn't suitable for either of the latter schools anyway.

Consider that decision a test-out ...

I wouldn't fixate on rankings these days. USNews dropped the ball last year. Things like class size, the qualifications of instructors, how many years it takes to graduate, and so on and so forth are no longer considered in their algorithm. What matters now are the number of Pell Grant students, which is a dumb thing to measure since the top private universities give outstanding grant-based financial aid to low income students, therefore making Pell grants unnecessary. Last year's rankings are a total fail if you really care about the quality of undergraduate education.

Personally, I don't think Berkeley and UCLA have any business on a top 20 list for undergrad. Sure, the PhDs may do some research but that's not really relevant for undergrads. And I for sure would choose lower ranked private schools like Cornell, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, Rice, Notre Dame, Georgetown, CMU, Emory, WashU, USC, and NYU over the UC factories. Particularly for OOS.

I’m the early UCLA poster who mentioned buying classes. My DC hasn’t done it, but my understanding is that the students drop/add at a coordinated time.

I think the feedback from the grad student is solid. My DC has friends who love UCLA warts and all, but my DC is lukewarm about large parts of it and knows kids who are transferring out. The current TA strike has been a huge pita.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m struggling to believe some of the antidotal stories.

DC is an incoming freshmen student at UMich. Registration began this week. DC registered yesterday. He had no problem registering for the classes he wanted. CoE if that matters.

Story about freshmen dorms at UCLA is true. DC is a student there and was placed with 2 others in a double. So 3 in one room.

I’m the UMich registration poster and I believe you that UCLA put 3 people in double rooms. It’s not that unusual.
Also heard of other universities converting dorm lounges into dorm rooms too as needed. It sucks, but not the end of the world. It’s a problem when schools don’t predict yield accurately for whatever reason.

Anonymous wrote:All of them, including Cornell, are lower rated than Berkeley and UCLA .. ?

Are people seriously choosing schools that are lower rated, and in places like Ithaca, NY, over higher rated schools in California?

USC is fine as a proxy (but without the NM pricing, more than 2x the cost), but anybody choosing NYU or especially BU over Berkeley or UCLA really isn't suitable for either of the latter schools anyway.

Consider that decision a test-out ...

Or, put differently, are people seriously considering making their decision based on totally artificial and made up rankings instead of fit?

Anonymous wrote:All of them, including Cornell, are lower rated than Berkeley and UCLA .. ?

Are people seriously choosing schools that are lower rated, and in places like Ithaca, NY, over higher rated schools in California?

USC is fine as a proxy (but without the NM pricing, more than 2x the cost), but anybody choosing NYU or especially BU over Berkeley or UCLA really isn't suitable for either of the latter schools anyway.

Consider that decision a test-out ...

Many people no longer care about the U.S. news rankings now that they are concerned mostly with first gen and Pell grant eligible students. UCLA does some important research but I have zero doubt that the quality of the undergraduate experience (size of classes, degrees held by professors, percentage of classes taught by TAs, and housing) is better at Cornell.

FWIW, no connection to either of these schools.

Anonymous wrote:Cornell, USC, NYU, BU (larger privates)
Vs
UCLA, Michigan, Berkeley (extremely large, but highly ranked Publix that are comparable in cost)

Hmmm. I don’t think I would go to any of the California schools to be honest

I really think it's entirely school and major dependent, and can change as faculty and administration turn over.

For instance the film program at UCLA is going to be completely unlike the pre-med program at UCLA. As is chemistry at NYU vs theatre.

Or consider history at UMD vs CS.

My sister did a highly ranked program at Yale for grad school and was super disappointed because the program was only limping along with recently retired faculty. There were big gaps that hadn't been filled so courses weren't being offered and aspects of the program were entirely absent.

Another sister did her undergrad at a huge state school and had a fabulous experience with a niche major and tons of faculty attention.

You need to do your research.

All of them, including Cornell, are lower rated than Berkeley and UCLA .. ?

Are people seriously choosing schools that are lower rated, and in places like Ithaca, NY, over higher rated schools in California?

USC is fine as a proxy (but without the NM pricing, more than 2x the cost), but anybody choosing NYU or especially BU over Berkeley or UCLA really isn't suitable for either of the latter schools anyway.

Consider that decision a test-out ...

Cornell, USC, NYU, BU (larger privates)
Vs
UCLA, Michigan, Berkeley (extremely large, but highly ranked Publix that are comparable in cost)

Hmmm. I don’t think I would go to any of the California schools to be honest

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Omg this sounds awful.

I now understand why no kids from our private go to UCLA or Berkeley

They are great if you are In-state. But definately not worth OOS prices. If I'm paying $60K+, my kid will have smaller class and the ability to get the courses they need when they need them.

Let's be honest. They are not great in-state. The price is right for in-state. And the name is great on the diploma. But the student experience sux.

Except UCLA is an absolute monster when it comes to outlasting literally every other university in the country when it comes to the core student rankings, including quality of life and overall experience.

But yeah, other than that …

Oh for sure. Other than the 5 pages on this thread of complaints. No, definitely.

https://www.niche.com/colleges/university-of-california-los-angeles/

Now show us the schools that are so much better!!!

BHAHAHAHHA!! You're citing Niche?! Hahahahahah!!!!!!!

Cool! Show us the “real” rankings that count now! Niche is trash, so looking forward to seeing the treasure you bring forth to settle this!

Oh, wait - what’s that? The “real” rankings are the ones you see in this thread, comprised of parents whose kids were rejected by UCLA and some fugazi pre-med lecturer who claims that 1,200 student classes are commonplace?

Just curious what you are claiming is not true. Which of the following do you dispute

--UCLA regularly puts three freshmen and/or sophomores in dorm rooms built as doubles

-- There is an even greater housing shortage at the other UCs

-- The list of impacted majors at most UCs include popular majors like computer science, engineering, psychology. . . .

--It is very difficult to transfer into an impacted major

--There are some classes in certain majors with other 1000 students enrolled, at least at Berkeley

--It can be difficult to register for required classes

What about incoming freshman with 50+ units already banked via AP testing and matriculating into a major that’s not impacted? Do they have a chance of graduating in less than six years?

I’d like to know this as well.

Many if not nearly all students come in with a ton of credits. Don't assume that it's that special.

Go take a tour. Ask students about advising, including whether they were assigned a faculty advisor, how often they meet with their advisor, and what input their advisor has provided. Ask students about class registration and how many students graduate in 4 years. Ask about class sizes and quality and if they get feedback on written work product. Go sit in a lecture see who is paying attention or if the lecture is full. See if anyone asks questions. Ask if exams are multiple choice. Ask if cheating is a problem. Ask if there are enough materials for labs or if they run out. Ask about housing. Ask about what students do on weekends. Ask about the political parties and special interest groups in student government. Ask. Ask. Ask.

Holy smokes. These are good.
I’m worried the answers will disappoint me at most flagships.
The best answers would be from SLACs right (other than the weekend question)….

Any private, especially those with less than 10,000 students, are unlikely to have these particular issues.

Right. And there almost invariably a direct correlation to cost. You want to spend $320 - $400K to send your kid to a private with the various associated trade-offs, that’s great. If others make other decisions based on the trade-offs that matter to them, also great.

It’s just that graduating from Macalester or Davidson or Occidental, by way of example, instead of Michigan or Berkeley or UCLA is going to very likely cost you in the long run much more than the higher cost of attendance on the front end.

But replace those three schools with larger privates….Cornell, USC, NYU, BU.
Then what?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Omg this sounds awful.

I now understand why no kids from our private go to UCLA or Berkeley

They are great if you are In-state. But definately not worth OOS prices. If I'm paying $60K+, my kid will have smaller class and the ability to get the courses they need when they need them.

Let's be honest. They are not great in-state. The price is right for in-state. And the name is great on the diploma. But the student experience sux.

Except UCLA is an absolute monster when it comes to outlasting literally every other university in the country when it comes to the core student rankings, including quality of life and overall experience.

But yeah, other than that …

Oh for sure. Other than the 5 pages on this thread of complaints. No, definitely.

https://www.niche.com/colleges/university-of-california-los-angeles/

Now show us the schools that are so much better!!!

BHAHAHAHHA!! You're citing Niche?! Hahahahahah!!!!!!!

Cool! Show us the “real” rankings that count now! Niche is trash, so looking forward to seeing the treasure you bring forth to settle this!

Oh, wait - what’s that? The “real” rankings are the ones you see in this thread, comprised of parents whose kids were rejected by UCLA and some fugazi pre-med lecturer who claims that 1,200 student classes are commonplace?

Just curious what you are claiming is not true. Which of the following do you dispute

--UCLA regularly puts three freshmen and/or sophomores in dorm rooms built as doubles

-- There is an even greater housing shortage at the other UCs

-- The list of impacted majors at most UCs include popular majors like computer science, engineering, psychology. . . .

--It is very difficult to transfer into an impacted major

--There are some classes in certain majors with other 1000 students enrolled, at least at Berkeley

--It can be difficult to register for required classes

What about incoming freshman with 50+ units already banked via AP testing and matriculating into a major that’s not impacted? Do they have a chance of graduating in less than six years?

I’d like to know this as well.

Many if not nearly all students come in with a ton of credits. Don't assume that it's that special.

Go take a tour. Ask students about advising, including whether they were assigned a faculty advisor, how often they meet with their advisor, and what input their advisor has provided. Ask students about class registration and how many students graduate in 4 years. Ask about class sizes and quality and if they get feedback on written work product. Go sit in a lecture see who is paying attention or if the lecture is full. See if anyone asks questions. Ask if exams are multiple choice. Ask if cheating is a problem. Ask if there are enough materials for labs or if they run out. Ask about housing. Ask about what students do on weekends. Ask about the political parties and special interest groups in student government. Ask. Ask. Ask.

Holy smokes. These are good.
I’m worried the answers will disappoint me at most flagships.
The best answers would be from SLACs right (other than the weekend question)….

Any private, especially those with less than 10,000 students, are unlikely to have these particular issues.

Right. And there almost invariably a direct correlation to cost. You want to spend $320 - $400K to send your kid to a private with the various associated trade-offs, that’s great. If others make other decisions based on the trade-offs that matter to them, also great.

It’s just that graduating from Macalester or Davidson or Occidental, by way of example, instead of Michigan or Berkeley or UCLA is going to very likely cost you in the long run much more than the higher cost of attendance on the front end.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Omg this sounds awful.

I now understand why no kids from our private go to UCLA or Berkeley

They are great if you are In-state. But definately not worth OOS prices. If I'm paying $60K+, my kid will have smaller class and the ability to get the courses they need when they need them.

Let's be honest. They are not great in-state. The price is right for in-state. And the name is great on the diploma. But the student experience sux.

Except UCLA is an absolute monster when it comes to outlasting literally every other university in the country when it comes to the core student rankings, including quality of life and overall experience.

But yeah, other than that …

Oh for sure. Other than the 5 pages on this thread of complaints. No, definitely.

https://www.niche.com/colleges/university-of-california-los-angeles/

Now show us the schools that are so much better!!!

BHAHAHAHHA!! You're citing Niche?! Hahahahahah!!!!!!!

Cool! Show us the “real” rankings that count now! Niche is trash, so looking forward to seeing the treasure you bring forth to settle this!

Oh, wait - what’s that? The “real” rankings are the ones you see in this thread, comprised of parents whose kids were rejected by UCLA and some fugazi pre-med lecturer who claims that 1,200 student classes are commonplace?

Just curious what you are claiming is not true. Which of the following do you dispute

--UCLA regularly puts three freshmen and/or sophomores in dorm rooms built as doubles

-- There is an even greater housing shortage at the other UCs

-- The list of impacted majors at most UCs include popular majors like computer science, engineering, psychology. . . .

--It is very difficult to transfer into an impacted major

--There are some classes in certain majors with other 1000 students enrolled, at least at Berkeley

--It can be difficult to register for required classes

What about incoming freshman with 50+ units already banked via AP testing and matriculating into a major that’s not impacted? Do they have a chance of graduating in less than six years?

I’d like to know this as well.

Many if not nearly all students come in with a ton of credits. Don't assume that it's that special.

Go take a tour. Ask students about advising, including whether they were assigned a faculty advisor, how often they meet with their advisor, and what input their advisor has provided. Ask students about class registration and how many students graduate in 4 years. Ask about class sizes and quality and if they get feedback on written work product. Go sit in a lecture see who is paying attention or if the lecture is full. See if anyone asks questions. Ask if exams are multiple choice. Ask if cheating is a problem. Ask if there are enough materials for labs or if they run out. Ask about housing. Ask about what students do on weekends. Ask about the political parties and special interest groups in student government. Ask. Ask. Ask.

Holy smokes. These are good.
I’m worried the answers will disappoint me at most flagships.
The best answers would be from SLACs right (other than the weekend question)….

Any private, especially those with less than 10,000 students, are unlikely to have these particular issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Omg this sounds awful.

I now understand why no kids from our private go to UCLA or Berkeley

They are great if you are In-state. But definately not worth OOS prices. If I'm paying $60K+, my kid will have smaller class and the ability to get the courses they need when they need them.

Let's be honest. They are not great in-state. The price is right for in-state. And the name is great on the diploma. But the student experience sux.

Except UCLA is an absolute monster when it comes to outlasting literally every other university in the country when it comes to the core student rankings, including quality of life and overall experience.

But yeah, other than that …

Oh for sure. Other than the 5 pages on this thread of complaints. No, definitely.

https://www.niche.com/colleges/university-of-california-los-angeles/

Now show us the schools that are so much better!!!

BHAHAHAHHA!! You're citing Niche?! Hahahahahah!!!!!!!

Cool! Show us the “real” rankings that count now! Niche is trash, so looking forward to seeing the treasure you bring forth to settle this!

Oh, wait - what’s that? The “real” rankings are the ones you see in this thread, comprised of parents whose kids were rejected by UCLA and some fugazi pre-med lecturer who claims that 1,200 student classes are commonplace?

Just curious what you are claiming is not true. Which of the following do you dispute

--UCLA regularly puts three freshmen and/or sophomores in dorm rooms built as doubles

-- There is an even greater housing shortage at the other UCs

-- The list of impacted majors at most UCs include popular majors like computer science, engineering, psychology. . . .

--It is very difficult to transfer into an impacted major

--There are some classes in certain majors with other 1000 students enrolled, at least at Berkeley

--It can be difficult to register for required classes

What about incoming freshman with 50+ units already banked via AP testing and matriculating into a major that’s not impacted? Do they have a chance of graduating in less than six years?

I don’t know, where above did I mention graduating in six years?

The only undergrads that I knew who took 6 years to graduate from UCLA had changed majors fairly late in the game. But it was really common for pre-meds to need more than 4 years to fit in the impacted labs and pre-med requirements. Some managed by taking a summer session, but others extended into a subsequent school year.