Talk:California State University
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Seniors(age 60 or older) can go to any CSU for free - well... almost
check out this list of waivers. Tuition is free. Only a few material fee. http://www.calstate.edu/budget/FeeEnrll_Info/FeeInfo/Fee_Wvr_Info/fee_wvers-complte_lst.pdf
[edit] Article Contents and Formatting
So I changed the campus list to a table format for a better presentation. Streltzer 20:58, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Calstate vs UC
Is it true that Calstate is better than UC for its undergraduate programs? Because I heard UC doesn't offer "learning by doing" experience as much as Calstate, especially Calpoly.
An engineering faculty from CSULA (who visited my campus, MTSAC) even went further & said that UC put undergrad on backseat; I realized that his opinion might be biased, but can someone please enlighten me?
My landlord, who graduated from UCLA with Bachelor in EE, clarified those rumors, and said that he didn't get too many "hands-on" experience from his school, he also mentioned about this TA (Teaching Assistant) thing, which further discouraged me, since I want to be taught by professor, not some undergrad & grad students.
I'm well aware that UC is, of course, more prestigious than Calstate, but after listening to those statements, it's kinda make me want to transfer to Calpoly, instead of UC.
- First of all, this area is not the place to ask such general questions on Wikipedia; try the reference desk (it's accessible through a link of the Help page, I think). Talk pages are supposed to be about discussing editing issues for the page they're attached to.
- But to answer your question, yes, UC Berkeley and UCLA are notorious for a stressful undergraduate experience (which I can personally testify to). If you're looking for a trial-by-fire challenge in learning how to deal with apathetic, impersonal bureaucracies where you have to make appointments weeks in advance to talk to a counselor (the kind of bureaucracies you will have to deal with anyway if you go into business, government, or law), then UC is a great fit. If you'd rather enjoy your college years at a school with decent customer service, I advise you to find a smaller, less bureaucratic school like Caltech or Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. --Coolcaesar 05:34, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- At this risk of offending colleagues and mentors who might stumble onto this page, I can attest that overall, CSU provides a better undergrad experience. I received my B.A. from CSU Stanislaus and Ph.D. from a UC Santa Barbara, so I should know. There are many faculty at UC schools who are dedicated to undergraduate teaching and enjoy it; however, there are many more students to serve and many tasks are relegated to TAs. At a typical UC school, you will find yourself in a general ed. class of a few hundred students; you will mostly interact with a TA in discussion sections; if you are lucky the prof might remember your name; you will have tremendous bureaucracy. At a typical CSU school, you will find yourself in a general ed. class of 40-50 students; you will deal directly with the prof; within your major, you will work closely with them; you will find reasonable customer service. Keep in mind, the UC system is specifically aimed at research first. This makes for excellent graduate programs and exciting experiences for unusually talented undergraduates. This does not mean you cannot have a great undergraduate UC experience; just be aware. The CSU system is focused on undergraduate teaching first; in general, the faculty are much more involved personally. Now, I commit a grave error in judgment by attaching my username to this. Revolver 03:36, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
I was wondering how each of the CSU and Cal Poly campuses would rank academically in the Shanghai Jiao Tong University survey (do a google search for "best universities"). The only one that appears in the survey is San Diego State at number 301 out of 500 world universities. Does anyone know how much lower say a Cal Poly campus would be than UC Riverside or Santa Cruz (both # 101 of 500)? If someone really knows please reply to my query. Thanks. Vivaldi4Stagioni 07:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Flagship Campus - Controversy
What evidence is there to back-up these statements of support? What support really exists for this concept? What about citations to documents other than webpages promoting this drastic change? Anyway, how is it that a small group of SJSU people have managed to turn this article into an advocacy page for their attempt to establish San Jose as the 'flagship' campus? All of the statements about this need to be excised from the main encyclopedia article and put into a separate article. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia article about the CSU as a whole. Streltzer 22:20, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- The evidence of support is in the membership of the CSU Students of San Jose (250 members) and CSU Alumni of San Jose (53 members), CSU Spartans (36 members) and other groups. Also, since this issue involves the institution of a statewide flagship campus, in does involve the whole CSU. Michaelch7 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that it should be a separate article, so that the arguments and references can stand (or not) on their own merits. Some of the inaccuracies can be cleared up, as well: the Chancellor's Office is in Long Beach, but not at CSU Long Beach.--Curtis Clark 23:54, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- It looks like the disputed language concerning the 'flagship' campus controversy has been removed. So, is there are a new article concerning that matter for all of us to review and comment? Streltzer 17:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, where has the text be moved? Or was it simply deleted by a Wikipedia vandal (NeoChaosX) under the guise that it wasn't relevant, but really because he is opposed to the issue. (pure SJSU censorship) Michaelch7 27 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- There is a parallel discussion at Talk:San José State University. 65.104.77.179 01:36, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- Just to throw in my two bits: As far as I can see, there is no real controversy. I haven't seen any coverage of any "controversy" in the L.A. Times, the San Jose Mercury News, or the San Francisco Chronicle (and I skim at least one of those three each day, and all three during any one week). I've not sure Wikipedia even should be mentioning it. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research.--Coolcaesar 06:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly. As I mentioned on the talk page for SJSU, it's just the GoState folks using Wikipedia as a tool to force their viewpoint on what's really an SJSU-only non-issue on others. If that's all they're going to add, they should keep it on their own webpage, because Wikipedia is not the place for promoting one's cause. NeoChaosX 08:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
You are wrong. The issue of restoration of CSU student rights in San Jose has been covered in the San Jose Mercury News, the Spartan Daily (repeatedly), and the SpartanThunder.com website. There are close to 400 students and alumni in groups like the CSU Students of San Jose, CSU Alumni of San Jose, and CSU Spartans who support CSU restoration in San Jose. This is a valid and legitimate issue in the CSU system, and your attempts to suppress it amount to typical SJSU repression of California State Normal School history and CSU student and alumni rights in San Jose. Michaelch7 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- If your numbers are correct (213 SJSU students, 53 alumni, and 36 other boosters), than the GoState group is a non-issue. SJSU has over 25,000 students and I believe over a million alumni, so GoState represents less than 0.1% of the student body and a completely insignificant amount of the alumni. Removal of the links from this page is appropiate, as they have nothing to do with the subject of this article, the California State University System. Additionally, if the GoState article were nominated for deletion, I'd vote to delete. Gentgeen 09:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of CSU San Jose group links - Controversy
Why have legitimate external links to Gostate.org, California State Bell, websites that advocate statewide reform of the CSU been repeatedly deleted by NeoChaosX. This is Wikipedia vandalism, and has been reported. Michaelch7 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- What part of my edits were vandalism? A site about the campaign to rename San Jose State has nothing to do with the CSU system (and better belongs in the GoState article), so it shouldn't belong on this page. NeoChaosX 02:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Back to Topic
This article needs updating. The CSU Seal appearing in this article is not the latest one appearing on the CSU website -http://www.calstate.edu/ . The article states the University System was founded in 1862, but the latest seal and the official website lists 1857, the year that the oldest campus (San Jose) was founded. [Yes San Jose State University is older than the University of California, Berkeley. And that makes the CSU system (1857) older than the UC system (1868).] highdesert --Highdesert 18:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- I recommend you tell Michaelch7 that. He's convinced it's 1862, since that's when Minns' Normal School became Cal State Normal School. You're right, though, the CSU system does count 1857 as the founding of the system, and that's what should be listed here, despite what some random user and his small band of suporters believe it should be. As far as the seal goes, if there's a bigger version of the newer seal, we could put it in there. The one on the CSU website is too small, IMO. NeoChaosX 18:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I think Wikipedia will eventually implode with all the bickering in these discussion threads. If the California State University system claims 1857 then that is the official date. An encyclopedia deals with facts not opinions. There is a larger seal on this page: http://www.calstate.edu/GC/csu/#seal --Highdesert 20:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Order of Images
I think the images should either follow the chronological order, or alpha. Anyone willing to change this to match the UC page? --67.170.168.68 04:04, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- The images were originally in a gallery format, then someone changed them to the current format. I think their idea was to put them in order of student population, but I think I agree that it should be changed to alphabetical order as you suggest. And how about someone replacing the image of the 'lonely bus stop' for CSU Stanislaus? Streltzer 22:20, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] UC vs. CSU campus names: City Statism
Made note of this significant difference between the UC and CSU systems. CSU Spartan 22:20, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- The way you've worded it (e.g., "not permitted") seems rather POV to me.--Curtis Clark 03:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that the "City Statism" comment as written by CSU Spartan was not appropriate. Perhaps he or she could provide us a link to a CSU policy statement or Chancellor's speech on this issue, then we could hopefully craft a more neutral comment. Streltzer 17:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Reinstated text after deletion vandalism. Removed "not permitted" language. All statements are factual and obvious, and may be confirmed at http://www.calstate.edu and http://www.sjsu.edu. The CSU identity of San Jose State and other CSU schools was removed by the California State Legislature in 1974, after direct lobbying by alumni associations at those campuses. Sources: Statutes of California (1974) and http://www.calstate.edu/PA/info/milestones.shtml. There is no record in the Spartan Daily or other SJSU historical materials that any student or alumni vote occurred before the SJSU alumni Association lobbied the legislature. Proof that SJSU students and alumni may not purchase CSU-oriented gear: http://www.spartanbookstore.com. Asking for protection of this article against deletion vandalism. CSU Spartan 22:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Don't take it too personally. The section is arguably POV and contains many unsourced statements. Gentgeen was doing what he felt was right to preserve the quality of the article as a whole. He's also an admin, so I wouldn't go around accusing him of vandalism.
- As for the substantive nature of the section, I think its importance is a little dubious. It's clear from the list of campuses that some include the CSU moniker and some do not. From my experience, most UC grads identify with their individual campus as much as CSU students, but neither your nor my personal experience belongs in the article. Most apparel available from the Berkeley store prominently uses the names "Cal" or "Berkeley". The statement about CSU students having to explain that their campus is a CSU is completely anecdotal and probably non-notable. There will always be some portion of the population who can't grasp that a State university in California is a California State University, but really, how many? -Anþony 20:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Unless someone else edits or deletes this then CSU Spartan's changes need to be removed. This is not neutral point of view, contains anecdotable evidence (at best), is of a subject that lacks importance and notability, and is simply, once again, CSU Spartan's attempt to advocate for his own small organization of disgruntled Go State people. I appreciate his enthusiasm for the subject but why do we keep having this argument over and over again? Is there a public policy statement issued by the CSU that prohibits the purchase of "California State University" clothing? No or CSU Spartan would have told us that... so I see no choice but to delete this entire brand new section ("City Statism"). Comments? Streltzer 21:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Unless we have some evidence that this is a serious CSU-wide debate about a uniform identity, then it should just go. It apparently stems from a few "CSU San Jose" advocacy groups who want to appropriate "California State" as the school's nickname the same way Berkely is known as California in sports. AFAIK, this is a non-issue outside of San Jose. -Anþony 23:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Evidence that a campus CSU identity is an important issue at many CSU campuses includes the sucessful struggle by CSU professors in early 2005 to save the California State University, Sacramento's identity. The professors cited the "prestige" and "stature" of a CSU identity. Sources: CSU Sacramento Academic Senate: http://www.csus.edu/acse/archive/0405/05fsa_mar_17.htm and CSUS State Hornet: http://www.statehornet.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/03/17/4239c4535eaae CSU Spartan 23:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Further evidence of the importance of a CSU identity: Students, alumni and administrators at the California State University, Long Beach, fought successfully to save their school's CSU identity in 1973-1974, against provinicalists who wanted to rename the school "Long Beach State". Source: The Daily 49er Article Archive: http://www.csulb.edu/~d49er/ CSU Spartan 23:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- I still think it's way overstated. When I was a grad student at UC Davis (admittedly quite a few years ago), there was no "University of California" merchandise; it was all "Cal Aggies" and "UC Davis". And it was resented by many that UC Berkeley was often called "the University of California". UC is hardly as monolithic as the comparison suggests.--Curtis Clark 03:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- This comment raises the issue of whether the real reason for some of these objections is elitism among UC grads, and possibly a hidden agenda to cover up this issue to help maintain a competitive advantage over the obscure CSU city-state schools like "SJSU". CSU Spartan 23:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- I concur with Curtis Clark and everyone else that CSU Spartan is attempting to insert biased original research into the article in violation of Wikipedia core policies. --Coolcaesar 06:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- This isn't biased original research. It's a sourced description of the current factual state of affairs, and historical facts, based on information that obvious and readily available to anyone. Also, the Five Pillars of the Wikipedia not only permit, but require that the Wikipedia have a neutral point of view, which requires that different viewpoints be accommodated. Also, the examples about "Berkeley" and "UC Davis" being the same as "SJSU" are utter nonsense. The obvious difference is that those schools have the word "California" in their names, while the CSU city-state schools don't. Since California is by far the largest U.s. state in population, and argubly the best known worldwide, this is a very significant distinction.CSU Spartan 23:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- I still think this is inappropriate and a front for advocacy by the GoState people, and that it should be deleted in its entirety. However, I did my best editing of CSU Spartan's text to tone-down some of the unsupportable comments and more blatant advoacy of his position, pending a community determination of the propriety of this section. Streltzer 20:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Nice job, reasonably NPOV. I'd support leaving it like that, if it would avoid an edit war.--Curtis Clark 04:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- I strenuously object to the removal of the text about CSU students not being able to purchase CSU oriented gear, particularly at "San Jose State", which is the founding campus of the CSU, and is the school (California State Normal School) the entire CSU is named after. Also, the text about students and grads having to explain that they are CSU students/grads now says "a university in the California State University system". This is inaccurate and misleading. As stated at the begining of the CSU article, the CSU is one statewide corporate entity, comprising all campuses and the Chancellor's office. There is no separate "university with the CSU system". The city-state names are simply veneers imposed by organizations like the SJSU Alumni Association, which represents at best about 5 percent of the alumni of the California State University, San Jose. In the interests of neutrality, however, I ask that another editor makes these changes. Also, I have applied for a Wikipedia advocate to help defend this section against those who so vehemently want to see it censored and suppressed, just like the California State Normal School article was. CSU Spartan 23:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Nice job, reasonably NPOV. I'd support leaving it like that, if it would avoid an edit war.--Curtis Clark 04:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- I still think this is inappropriate and a front for advocacy by the GoState people, and that it should be deleted in its entirety. However, I did my best editing of CSU Spartan's text to tone-down some of the unsupportable comments and more blatant advoacy of his position, pending a community determination of the propriety of this section. Streltzer 20:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- This isn't biased original research. It's a sourced description of the current factual state of affairs, and historical facts, based on information that obvious and readily available to anyone. Also, the Five Pillars of the Wikipedia not only permit, but require that the Wikipedia have a neutral point of view, which requires that different viewpoints be accommodated. Also, the examples about "Berkeley" and "UC Davis" being the same as "SJSU" are utter nonsense. The obvious difference is that those schools have the word "California" in their names, while the CSU city-state schools don't. Since California is by far the largest U.s. state in population, and argubly the best known worldwide, this is a very significant distinction.CSU Spartan 23:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- I still think it's way overstated. When I was a grad student at UC Davis (admittedly quite a few years ago), there was no "University of California" merchandise; it was all "Cal Aggies" and "UC Davis". And it was resented by many that UC Berkeley was often called "the University of California". UC is hardly as monolithic as the comparison suggests.--Curtis Clark 03:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Unless we have some evidence that this is a serious CSU-wide debate about a uniform identity, then it should just go. It apparently stems from a few "CSU San Jose" advocacy groups who want to appropriate "California State" as the school's nickname the same way Berkely is known as California in sports. AFAIK, this is a non-issue outside of San Jose. -Anþony 23:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Reinstated text after deletion vandalism. Removed "not permitted" language. All statements are factual and obvious, and may be confirmed at http://www.calstate.edu and http://www.sjsu.edu. The CSU identity of San Jose State and other CSU schools was removed by the California State Legislature in 1974, after direct lobbying by alumni associations at those campuses. Sources: Statutes of California (1974) and http://www.calstate.edu/PA/info/milestones.shtml. There is no record in the Spartan Daily or other SJSU historical materials that any student or alumni vote occurred before the SJSU alumni Association lobbied the legislature. Proof that SJSU students and alumni may not purchase CSU-oriented gear: http://www.spartanbookstore.com. Asking for protection of this article against deletion vandalism. CSU Spartan 22:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Another serious problem with this section is its placement within the article, since it purports to compare the CSU and UC systems. Even if we accept it as a serious statewide debate (which I still contest), the contrast with UC schools is tenuous at best, but more likely just plain wrong, chiefly the opening statement:
Another difference between the two university systems is the presence of a unified "University of California" identity at all UC campuses, and the lack of a unified "California State University" identity for the individual campuses in the CSU system.
That can hardly be said to be a significant difference between the two universities, even if there wasn't plenty evidence that, just like CSU students, UC students identify more with their campus than the "University of California". Then there's a little bit that explains the history of the names even though that's already covered in the History section and has nothing to do with the UCs. Finally we get to the real meat: an anecdote explaining that there are dumb people in the world. All you can really say to compare CSU and UC on this point is that the UC schools have consistent formal names and the CSUs don't. -Anþony 08:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- This is obviously a very significant difference between the two systems, and is a big part of why the UC is a much more prestigious and wealthy system and the CSU has been referred to as an "Invisible Giant" (Invisible Giant: The California State Colleges (1971), Donald Gerth. See http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/wcpa/ow/5b9aceac75a9e635.html ). I reinstated neutrally worded text about the inability of students at the total city-state schools to buy CSU oriented gear. Also added text about the other partial city-state schools, and the recent name change struggle at CSUS, which is strong evidence of the importance of this issue at CSU campuses. Sources: CSU Sacramento Academic Senate: http://www.csus.edu/acse/archive/0405/05fsa_mar_17.htm and CSUS State Hornet: http://www.statehornet.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/03/17/4239c4535eaae CSU Spartan 23:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
- I've gone ahead and made some radical changes to the section, throwing out most of what I felt was fluff to refocus on comparing UC and CSU in this regard. We don't need a list of campuses that are "city state" or "partially city state" -- that's obvious from the list of campuses earlier in the article. All of the stuff about the history of the university names is included, appropriately, in the History section and need not be duplicated. I've included your book source, though to be honest I've only your word that Donald Gerth ever said anything like that. I would appreciate it if you could quote a relevant passage from the book.
- Your changes are pretty good, and will hopefully mollify the more rabid editors who want to completely censor this information about an important distinction between the two systems. The book is available at the CSU library in San Jose, but cannot be checked out, so it may take me a while to secure the passage you request. I reinstated the sourced, factural and highly relevant text about the aborted "Sac State" name change in early 2005. Sources: CSU Sacramento Academic Senate: http://www.csus.edu/acse/archive/0405/05fsa_mar_17.htm and CSUS State Hornet: http://www.statehornet.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/03/17/4239c4535eaaeCSU Spartan 23:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- As for the apparel issue: at every UC and CSU campus, students may only purchase university-branded apparel that bears university-approved names. That's just obvious. CSU San Jose is not an approved name, and so you cannot buy shirts that say CSU San Jose from the school. You also cannot buy shirts that say "Cal Riverside" or "UCLA Aggies", so I fail to see how this is any different at the UCs. -Anþony 06:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
- I disagree with your characterization of this issue. The fact is that San Jose degrees are granted by "the Trustees of the California State University at San Jose". That is the school's real identity, which is used by tens of thousands to market their degrees. To view a copy of a CSU San Jose degree, click on the "CSU Degree San Jose" link here: http://www.gostate.org/Sitemap.htm . It is not only a CSU campus granting CSU degrees, it is the campus that gave the entire CSU its original name, (California State Normal School). That's very different from the examples you give. CSU Spartan 23:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- The school's administration decides the name(s) they use and they are under no obligation to promote anyone else's idea of the school's "real identity". Whenever any organization has control over their public image, they're going to do things their way. That's just natural. The degree is actually a perfect example of that: "San Jose State University" is the largest and most prominent thing on the page! -75.15.118.8 03:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- I disagree with your characterization of this issue. The fact is that San Jose degrees are granted by "the Trustees of the California State University at San Jose". That is the school's real identity, which is used by tens of thousands to market their degrees. To view a copy of a CSU San Jose degree, click on the "CSU Degree San Jose" link here: http://www.gostate.org/Sitemap.htm . It is not only a CSU campus granting CSU degrees, it is the campus that gave the entire CSU its original name, (California State Normal School). That's very different from the examples you give. CSU Spartan 23:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- I've gone ahead and made some radical changes to the section, throwing out most of what I felt was fluff to refocus on comparing UC and CSU in this regard. We don't need a list of campuses that are "city state" or "partially city state" -- that's obvious from the list of campuses earlier in the article. All of the stuff about the history of the university names is included, appropriately, in the History section and need not be duplicated. I've included your book source, though to be honest I've only your word that Donald Gerth ever said anything like that. I would appreciate it if you could quote a relevant passage from the book.
The CSUS/Sac State part doesn't flow well just tacked on like that. It is a factual statement (although you gloss over that cost was important factor) but what point are you trying to make with it? Remember it needs to relate back to the comparison with UC. -Anþony 07:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- You say it doesn't "flow well". That sounds very POV to me. What exactly do you mean? Of course it relates to the UC vs. CSU comparison, as an example of the importance and recency of the issue being discussed in this section. If you don't like the "flow", then make it flow better, but don't just delete it. CSU Spartan 23:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's not a question of POV, it's a question of good writing and a logical procession of ideas. It's an unrelated piece of information that's out of place in an section comparing the UC & CSU systems. We're not talking about the CSU vs. City-State debate, we're talking about UC vs. CSU. The Gerth book is relevant only because it relates the naming conventions to another difference between two systems: their perceived prestige. The Sac State example, on the other hand, doesn't have anything to do with UC, so it can't possibly be comparing the two systems. We don't need to show that the debate is important or recent because that's not the point of the section. If you can find a proper place in this article or elsewhere to cover the debate itself, you could include it there. -Anþony 00:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- You say I can include something about the naming debate, but it's not as easy as you say. I have included that before, and the city-statists always delete it, using some trumped up pretext to defend their vandalism. But I will take your advice and add a something somewhere about the campus naming debate in the CSU system, which has occured at several campuses, and I hope you will help defend it against city-statist attempts to censor and suppress all but their own myopic and provincial point of view. CSU Spartan 23:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's not a question of POV, it's a question of good writing and a logical procession of ideas. It's an unrelated piece of information that's out of place in an section comparing the UC & CSU systems. We're not talking about the CSU vs. City-State debate, we're talking about UC vs. CSU. The Gerth book is relevant only because it relates the naming conventions to another difference between two systems: their perceived prestige. The Sac State example, on the other hand, doesn't have anything to do with UC, so it can't possibly be comparing the two systems. We don't need to show that the debate is important or recent because that's not the point of the section. If you can find a proper place in this article or elsewhere to cover the debate itself, you could include it there. -Anþony 00:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- You say it doesn't "flow well". That sounds very POV to me. What exactly do you mean? Of course it relates to the UC vs. CSU comparison, as an example of the importance and recency of the issue being discussed in this section. If you don't like the "flow", then make it flow better, but don't just delete it. CSU Spartan 23:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] community colleges?
The CSU system is composed of 23 campuses and has 414,000 students supported by 44,000 faculty members and staff.[1] It is the largest system of postsecondary education in the United States that does not include community colleges.[2]
Yet, in the paragraph previous, it says that the California State University system contains the California Community College System.
Is this a contradiction, or am I misinterpreting it entirely? LogicalDash 00:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- I do think you are mis-reading it... there are 3 seperate, state-supported higher education systems in California: (1) the University of California System and its 11 campuses; (2) the California State University System and it 23 campuses; and the (3) California Community College System and its many, many different colleges. The CSU does not include any community or junior colleges, unlike several other state college systems, like New York (SUNY) and Wisconsin. Streltzer 00:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] California State Normal School
Restored link to this article, which has been restored by the Wikipedia as part of the Wikipedia Project California Michaelch7 31 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CSU.PNG
Image:CSU.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CALSTATE SEAL.PNG
Image:CALSTATE SEAL.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Just caught apparent vandalism
User:Correctos recently deleted my edit regarding Kevin Starr's quote about the CSU system with no explanation, which is incompetent at best and vandalism at worst. Starr is the former state historian and one of the preeminent scholars on the history of the state, and that quote is actually the most neutral part of a larger analysis of the defects of CSU relative to UC. So I am countermanding that deletion.
The quote was in the article for months and is fully compliant with all Wikipedia editorial policies (WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, and WP:V). If I see that quote deleted again I will be happy to take this issue through dispute resolution and arbitration if necessary. See User:Ericsaindon2 for what happened last time I took a user to arbitration. --Coolcaesar 04:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- Support your reversion, Coolceasar. Happy hunting! Ameriquedialectics 04:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] I was in Long Beach recently...
I am uploading a picture shortly. Now I will have contributed photos of the headquarters of all three of California's higher education systems to Wikipedia! --Coolcaesar 05:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)