Yeah right. Yesterday, the Contra Costa Times wrote “Cal may be starting to look a lot like Stanford,” in reference to the possibility that UC Berkeley may be privatized. The Daily Cal has more on the issue, with additional comments from Boalt Dean Edley.

Things get even more interesting when we take a look at this article from yesterday’s Stanford Daily, “Tuition to be waived for low-income admits“:

Of the students Stanford admits each year from Logan High School in Union City, some end up on the Farm while others choose less-expensive University of California schools. But Sharon Hope, program manager for the public high school’s college and career center, says that many talented students from low-income families don’t even consider Stanford because of its $40,000-a-year price tag.

University President John Hennessy recently announced a financial aid policy intended to change that. By 2010, families earning less than $45,000 per year will not be expected to contribute any money toward their child’s undergraduate education at Stanford. The student may still have to do work-study and take out loans, but Stanford will cover everything else, from tuition to books to toothpaste.

Stanford trying to make the UCs less attractive?

“If you have a student who’s admitted to Stanford and they’re also admitted to UC-Berkeley, and cost is an issue, they’re going to go with the one they can afford,” she said. And though Stanford does offer financial aid to middle-class families, “the plan involves loans — that’s the scary thing for kids, and parents too.”

Is this a role reversal? Berkeley discusses plans to go “private,” while Stanford acts to be more “public”? Are we at a turning point in public education, where we have come to understand that maybe the market can serve the “public good” better after all?