zlacker

>>pessim+(OP)
Now in a better world we'd drop a word from this sentence and make it free for all state residents. That's closer to what it used to be.

Realistically this doesn't change much since it's extremely unlikely a foster kid wouldn't qualify for a full ride prior to this.

The only people who really get screwed are middle class families who make too much to qualify for aid, but can't really afford to pay for school.

>>999900+Ha
It's already difficult to attend California's public universities as a state resident; the more popular campuses prefer nonresidents/international students because they pay full price. No-tuition residents will be even less desired by admissions offices.

>>petsor+yG
Admissions data at UC Berkeley shows that nonresident students have historically been ~35% of admits, with 2022 at 28%. UCLA historically has had ~40% nonresident admits, with 2022 at 34%[0]. UCLA’s freshman profile shows that GPA and SAT/ACT scores (from when they were still required) are higher for nonresidents as well[1]. It’s reasonable to argue that resident admit percentage should be higher, but the idea that nonresidents are preferred isn’t supposed by admissions data.

As for the nonresident tuition issue, it seems like a matter of having the state make up the difference between resident and nonresident tuition so that the university receives the same fee regardless of residency status.

[0] https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/about-us/information-...

[1] https://admission.ucla.edu/apply/freshman/freshman-profile/2...