Arguably the worst dimension of the whole deal with the UC situation is that it is *actively antithetical to equity goals*, on top of the self-evident absurdity. If no one hires UC graduates because they know the degrees are nonsense, how is that any good for disadvantaged graduates?
I wasnt ready to go right into college after high-school so I joined the army instead.
The army REALLY sucked, but when I got out I was more than ready to go to college. I went to a CC first, took the remedial classes I needed to, then transferred to UCSB
Later I got my CPA and MBA.
I got a great education at the CC. In many ways the classes were better than at UCSB. Smaller class sizes and the semester instead of quarter system.
Plus I saved a LOT of money. Moreover I was not ready to go directly to UCSB. I needed the solid foundation.
There's nothing wrong with going directly to a CC first, and for most kids its probably the better choice
I was very dismayed when reading that op-ed the other day, and considered bringing it up with my colleagues at UC Irvine, but I figured no one needs that sort of downer the week before classes begin.
Absolutely. Learning is a far more important and valuable enterprise. Diplomas are valuable that they signify that a student competed certain requirements. But we rely on the entire academic experience, freedom of speech, and freedom of thinking, curiosity and science--to propel humanity toward the future. For example: look to Martha Nussbaum for a definition of liberal education. Democracy NEEDS liberal education--and higher education in every way. The world needs rigorous science, enduring arts, and hard charging social science. Becoming AI driven diploma mills will surely destroy us.
Arguably the worst dimension of the whole deal with the UC situation is that it is *actively antithetical to equity goals*, on top of the self-evident absurdity. If no one hires UC graduates because they know the degrees are nonsense, how is that any good for disadvantaged graduates?
YES!
Strong agreement here.
I wasnt ready to go right into college after high-school so I joined the army instead.
The army REALLY sucked, but when I got out I was more than ready to go to college. I went to a CC first, took the remedial classes I needed to, then transferred to UCSB
Later I got my CPA and MBA.
I got a great education at the CC. In many ways the classes were better than at UCSB. Smaller class sizes and the semester instead of quarter system.
Plus I saved a LOT of money. Moreover I was not ready to go directly to UCSB. I needed the solid foundation.
There's nothing wrong with going directly to a CC first, and for most kids its probably the better choice
I was very dismayed when reading that op-ed the other day, and considered bringing it up with my colleagues at UC Irvine, but I figured no one needs that sort of downer the week before classes begin.
Absolutely. Learning is a far more important and valuable enterprise. Diplomas are valuable that they signify that a student competed certain requirements. But we rely on the entire academic experience, freedom of speech, and freedom of thinking, curiosity and science--to propel humanity toward the future. For example: look to Martha Nussbaum for a definition of liberal education. Democracy NEEDS liberal education--and higher education in every way. The world needs rigorous science, enduring arts, and hard charging social science. Becoming AI driven diploma mills will surely destroy us.
From a utilitarian perspective, maybe, but the worst NYT op-ed from the past week, purely from the perspective of writing quality, has to be https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/13/opinion/ella-langley-landman-rural-politics.html