Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can totally understand why these tech companies rather hire H1B (foreign educated tech workers) or even outsource the jobs.

Even the discussion here show people naive about the need for solid STEM foundation in education.

There's not much connection. Presumably, those getting 4 year degrees should be trained. It is the fault, then, of universities, not the k-12 system.

4 yrs of university can not make up for a poor k-12 foundation, and that is exactly the point of the UC professors. it should not be their job to teach the missing foundation.

huh? What kind of revisionist trash is this? The UCs have always had people from all walks of life, who all did not receive an elite foundation. You can 100% start off on shaky territory and build yourself up to a competent professional; in fact, that is how much of my peers at Berkeley got through their engineering degree! It's so sad how much people here want to trap poor people into worse conditions, worse schooling, and worse opportunities.

No, that’s what CC and Calstates are for. if you lack the foundation, get it at CC (where focus is on teaching anyway) and then transfer to UC to finish the degree. What is the point of admitting undergrads who need so much remedial work that they can’t make use of all the research resources anyway? the current shambles is different from past generations. we’re talking needing remediation of MIDDLE school
Math. Its a complete joke and UC are going to be a laughingstock if they don’t take swift steps to save their reputation. for a little history lesson, check out what happened to
City College of NYC in the 1960s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can totally understand why these tech companies rather hire H1B (foreign educated tech workers) or even outsource the jobs.

Even the discussion here show people naive about the need for solid STEM foundation in education.

There's not much connection. Presumably, those getting 4 year degrees should be trained. It is the fault, then, of universities, not the k-12 system.

4 yrs of university can not make up for a poor k-12 foundation, and that is exactly the point of the UC professors. it should not be their job to teach the missing foundation.

huh? What kind of revisionist trash is this? The UCs have always had people from all walks of life, who all did not receive an elite foundation. You can 100% start off on shaky territory and build yourself up to a competent professional; in fact, that is how much of my peers at Berkeley got through their engineering degree! It's so sad how much people here want to trap poor people into worse conditions, worse schooling, and worse opportunities.

Nah not the poor but the under qualified

You don't have to pretend like you are being in anyway open to accepting poor people. We get it. You were pretty crystal clear that you are antagonizing poor people. Just saying "underqualified" doesn't mean much when I know you think the issue is the expansion of admissions towards lower performing high schools.

Lot of online material to help to you prepare for SAT. It is not hard

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can totally understand why these tech companies rather hire H1B (foreign educated tech workers) or even outsource the jobs.

Even the discussion here show people naive about the need for solid STEM foundation in education.

There's not much connection. Presumably, those getting 4 year degrees should be trained. It is the fault, then, of universities, not the k-12 system.

4 yrs of university can not make up for a poor k-12 foundation, and that is exactly the point of the UC professors. it should not be their job to teach the missing foundation.

huh? What kind of revisionist trash is this? The UCs have always had people from all walks of life, who all did not receive an elite foundation. You can 100% start off on shaky territory and build yourself up to a competent professional; in fact, that is how much of my peers at Berkeley got through their engineering degree! It's so sad how much people here want to trap poor people into worse conditions, worse schooling, and worse opportunities.

Nah not the poor but the under qualified

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The scary thing about what is happening to UCLA, Berkeley, UCI, UCSD, etc. is that STEM professors have objective data of the deficits and mediocrity of the students. But what about the reading comprehension and writing skills of these same students?

https://caaspp-elpac.ets.org/caaspp/DashViewReportSB?ps=true&lstTestYear=2025&lstTestType=B&lstGroup=1&lstSubGroup=1&lstSchoolType=A&lstGrade=13&lstCounty=00&lstDistrict=00000&lstSchool=0000000

The majority of California's public school students are below grade level across all metrics. The race to mediocrity is being won both by its high schools and the UC system. Imagine getting a Berkeley graduate who can't do high school math and can't read or write at the 11th grade level?

It appears Forbes was correct to exclude CA public schools from its “New Ivy” list. I am glad my DD was not interested in the west coast this admissions cycle. Had no idea how far the CA public schools had fallen academically.

Your daughter wouldn’t have gotten in.

She was admitted to a more selective T10. A school where kids are universally strong at math. Thanks for the input!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can totally understand why these tech companies rather hire H1B (foreign educated tech workers) or even outsource the jobs.

Even the discussion here show people naive about the need for solid STEM foundation in education.

There's not much connection. Presumably, those getting 4 year degrees should be trained. It is the fault, then, of universities, not the k-12 system.

4 yrs of university can not make up for a poor k-12 foundation, and that is exactly the point of the UC professors. it should not be their job to teach the missing foundation.

huh? What kind of revisionist trash is this? The UCs have always had people from all walks of life, who all did not receive an elite foundation. You can 100% start off on shaky territory and build yourself up to a competent professional; in fact, that is how much of my peers at Berkeley got through their engineering degree! It's so sad how much people here want to trap poor people into worse conditions, worse schooling, and worse opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can totally understand why these tech companies rather hire H1B (foreign educated tech workers) or even outsource the jobs.

Even the discussion here show people naive about the need for solid STEM foundation in education.

There's not much connection. Presumably, those getting 4 year degrees should be trained. It is the fault, then, of universities, not the k-12 system.

4 yrs of university can not make up for a poor k-12 foundation, and that is exactly the point of the UC professors. it should not be their job to teach the missing foundation.

It's funny how quick parents are to blame k-12 schools, but how little they'll self reflect on how they have participated in what is making our education system worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably UCLA and Cal now rely heavily on the better and competitive international students to sustain their reputation.

Or their research output and top professors, which have always been much more impressive than their students…just a hunch though

Perhaps this is the same for all the other elite institutes such as MIT, Stanford. It basically reflects the kind of people those elite companies want to hire.

Private research universities are a bit different. They have a lot less DEI programs and aren’t meant to represent a state. Berkeley is famous for every element it discovers. People generally respect MIT undergrads and also the research they produce.

I hope so. I heard different story in Princeton and Columbia.

What do you have against Princeton grads?

I don't like Jeff Bezos

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5/28 update: over 800 have signed, including
7 of the 9 Chairs of UC Mathematics Departments
Plus an additional 37 STEM department chairs

I still think they should consider both EBRW and Math. Not just Math. The reading comprehension is just as crucial.

If you take a peak inside some of the middle schools, nobody is reading an actual book anymore. They are listening to audio books. Someone needs to write an article for NYT called "The Death of Reading". You are right that it's not just math.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably UCLA and Cal now rely heavily on the better and competitive international students to sustain their reputation.

Or their research output and top professors, which have always been much more impressive than their students…just a hunch though

Perhaps this is the same for all the other elite institutes such as MIT, Stanford. It basically reflects the kind of people those elite companies want to hire.

Private research universities are a bit different. They have a lot less DEI programs and aren’t meant to represent a state. Berkeley is famous for every element it discovers. People generally respect MIT undergrads and also the research they produce.

I hope so. I heard different story in Princeton and Columbia.

What do you have against Princeton grads?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably UCLA and Cal now rely heavily on the better and competitive international students to sustain their reputation.

The state mandated fewer oos or international students could enroll in Berkeley and UCLA. They have a huge budget issue because of this. The increase in enrollment has come from underperforming California public schools.

Not true according to the news https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/01/08/uc-berkeley-enrollment-international-students

It says that they have more California residents. This just means they shrunk the share of out of state students. Did you read this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably UCLA and Cal now rely heavily on the better and competitive international students to sustain their reputation.

The state mandated fewer oos or international students could enroll in Berkeley and UCLA. They have a huge budget issue because of this. The increase in enrollment has come from underperforming California public schools.

Not true according to the news https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/01/08/uc-berkeley-enrollment-international-students

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably UCLA and Cal now rely heavily on the better and competitive international students to sustain their reputation.

Or their research output and top professors, which have always been much more impressive than their students…just a hunch though

Perhaps this is the same for all the other elite institutes such as MIT, Stanford. It basically reflects the kind of people those elite companies want to hire.

Private research universities are a bit different. They have a lot less DEI programs and aren’t meant to represent a state. Berkeley is famous for every element it discovers. People generally respect MIT undergrads and also the research they produce.

I hope so. I heard different story in Princeton and Columbia.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably UCLA and Cal now rely heavily on the better and competitive international students to sustain their reputation.

The state mandated fewer oos or international students could enroll in Berkeley and UCLA. They have a huge budget issue because of this. The increase in enrollment has come from underperforming California public schools.

Can you publish a source for this? I’ve seen nothing that the new students are from low income schools?