<p>Yes, USC and many privates do that. Here is what USC says: "USC will continue to consider each applicant's best SAT sub-scores, even if from different sittings or from the old SAT. "</p>
<p>I mean, I don't really care, but that DOES inflate scores. Who knows though, it may be more accurate than composite scores!</p>
<p>Between Marshall and Haas, which is the more difficult to get accepted into?</p>
<p>Of course Haas is much harder....
(because Marshall accepted me and Haas didn't lol)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Of course Haas is much harder....
(because Marshall accepted me and Haas didn't lol)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>haha.</p>
<p>Between Haas and Marshall, I would say Haas- why? Mainly because you have to apply after your second year of college, and primarily factors from the previous two years, especially grades (at probably a more difficult scale with higher quality other students being compared to you) are considered, and it does (secondly) mean you have to get into Berkeley, which in general is harder than getting into USC (I'd say from within California, Berkeley is easiest and USC hardest, but outside, this drastically reverses, making Berkeley in general far harder to get into). <a href="http://www.marshall.usc.edu/web/Undergraduate.cfm?doc_id=3445%5B/url%5D">http://www.marshall.usc.edu/web/Undergraduate.cfm?doc_id=3445</a> makes it seem like people's majors aren't considered, at least those who indicate business, in a seperate pool of applicants than others.</p>
<p>Berkeley? Easiest? Since when? Says who? Are you sure we're talking about the same Berkeley?</p>
<p>uhhhh haas is the number 3 business school in the nation and is a heck of a lot cheaper. Berkeley also has a better name than USC.</p>
<p>Haas is definitely harder to get into than USC Marshall, even within California.</p>
<p>What I meant was that of anyplace in the world, California residents, those who tend to live in California, have the easiest time getting in- not that it is easy really, if you look at what is required of them, and how many are rejected, but that of anyplace in the world, getting into Berkeley as a resident of California (who tend to live in California) is easiest. USC has the most competition within the state of California, whereas in more distant states, it's easier to get into than from California (so I heard and read and sounds feasible, too), and Berkeley is harder to get into from out of state. Fair enough?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'd say from within California, Berkeley is easiest and USC hardest
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Nope, even for California residents, UCB is much harder to get into than USC....</p>
<p>There are like 20 people at my school who got into USC but not UCB..
Other way around, I haven't seen any.....</p>
<p>Well... if you are in ELC, UCB may be easier....</p>
<p>Uhhhhh... never mind... didn't see DRab's post up there.</p>
<p>About the average SAT scores Fall 2005 incoming freshmen:
UCB: 1300 (best single sitting)
UCLA: 1285 (best single sitting)
USC: 1368 (best composite mutiple sittings)</p>
<p>I'm sure that the averages for UCB and UCLA would rise if the UCs took the best composite, but i doubt, especially for UCLA that they would surpass USC's 1368. If you believe in the merits of the SAT, this evidence suggests that SC students are just as bright, if not brighter than any UC's.
[quote]
Between Marshall and Haas, which is the more difficult to get accepted into?
[/quote]
I believe Haas ug is more selective than marshall ug, probaby both in-state and out-of-state. They have less seats available for the business students than marshall does. </p>
<p>Getting into an extremely competitive and "prestigious" program is great. Congrats, that says a lot about your ability. But again, i ask, will your future business employer truly care that Haas' acceptance rate was a little lower than Marshall's in 2005?</p>
<p>rojanman720, could you cite your sources? I think you're way off, and additonally, you're only looking at one figure- most use 25th and 75th percentile.</p>
<p>You're way off on the numbers bud.</p>
<p>UCLA: 1346 (659 + 687) single sitting
<a href="http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/Prospect/Adm_fr/Frosh_Prof05.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/Prospect/Adm_fr/Frosh_Prof05.htm</a></p>
<p>UCB: 1335 (650 + 685 approx) single sitting
<a href="http://students.berkeley.edu/admissions/freshmen.asp%5B/url%5D">http://students.berkeley.edu/admissions/freshmen.asp</a></p>
<p>
[quote]
But again, i ask, will your future business employer truly care that Haas' acceptance rate was a little lower than Marshall's in 2005?
[/quote]
Unless the employer is a Trojan, he should care. Given everything is equal, the Haas candidate is smarter and proven to handle a highly stressful and competitive environment. Hey you try getting into Haas as an undergrad (not a transfer student). Apply after two years, maintain around a 3.6 GPA.
<a href="http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/Undergrad/statsucb.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/Undergrad/statsucb.html</a> </p>
<p>The true SAT average of the Haas students is probably higher than the average of the school's admit profile SAT. Haas consists of the better students at UC Berkeley.</p>
<p>Well, just to add fuel to the fire:</p>
<p>Here's a prestige ranking of colleges from an independent group:</p>
<p>You'll notice that UCB is at #19 and USC is at #49</p>
<p>Hey, they're both in the top 50 nationwide--I'd say that's pretty good.</p>
<p>The Consus Group
<a href="http://www.consusgroup.com/news/rankings/colleges/colleges.asp%5B/url%5D">http://www.consusgroup.com/news/rankings/colleges/colleges.asp</a></p>
<p>UCB - #9
UCLA - #10
USC - #54</p>
<p>To expand on dyip10's comment that only the best get into UC Berkeley's Haas school. According to this site:</p>
<p>58% of those applying from within UC Berkeley were accepted, and the average SAT scores of those accepted was 1360 (best single sitting) </p>
<p>which I guess should be compared to USC Marshall's SAT scores of 1368 (best composite multiple sittings)</p>
<p>
[quote]
You're way off on the numbers bud.</p>
<p>UCLA: 1346 (659 + 687) single sitting
<a href="http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/Pros...rosh_Prof05.htm%5B/url%5D%5B/quote%5D">http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/Pros...rosh_Prof05.htm
[/quote]
</a>
No i'm not, bud.</p>
<p>You're wrong: 659 + 687 are average SAT scores for ADMITS, not actual MATRICULANTS. Some applicants get in UCLA, but don't actually attend, like me. </p>
<p>The real average for UCLA INCOMING FRESHMEN 2005:
</a>
[quote]
UCB: 1335 (650 + 685 approx) single sitting
<a href="http://students.berkeley.edu/admissions/freshmen.asp%5B/url%5D%5B/quote%5D">http://students.berkeley.edu/admissions/freshmen.asp
[/quote]
</a>
Wrong again: you can't just get an "approximation" by taking the average of the middle %50 brackets; if you know anything about statistics, it doesn't work that way:
</a>
Granted, it's referencing Cosmogirl, but at least it gives an AVERAGE for Cal and not a MEDIAN or middle %50...
[quote]
Given everything is equal, the Haas candidate is smarter and proven to handle a highly stressful and competitive environment.
[/quote]
That is so subjective. I challenge you to find proof that the Haas candidate is smarter. You don't think maintaining a high GPA at Marshall, wherer the curve is set at 2.85 is tough? think again.
[quote]
<a href="http://brody.com/college/resources/college_rankings.php%5B/url%5D">http://brody.com/college/resources/college_rankings.php</a></p>
<p>You'll notice that UCB is at #19 and USC is at #49
[/quote]
Again, if you really really think "prestige" in the business world is more important than networking and social skills, then go to Haas. And like you said, it's not like Marshall is a no-name business school; it's a name brand especially in the west coast where the best come to recruit.</p>
<p>Notice how the data has the number matriculated? You think that the scores on this document are from admits and not matriculants, even though it says the date of July 2005, long after students have decided where they will attend? The admitted SAT averages are even HIGHER, probably much higher than the numbers shown.</p>
<p>
[quote]
That is so subjective. I challenge you to find proof that the Haas candidate is smarter. You don't think maintaining a high GPA at Marshall, wherer the curve is set at 2.85 is tough? think again.
[/quote]
Yes it is subjective. I guess I wasn't very clear. Since Haas requires admissions after 2 years, only the better Cal students considering business apply and are admitted. Therefore, the average GPA of a Haas graduate is probably higher than a Marshall graduate. I am not saying Marshall is easy with its curve. However, people can graduate with a 2.9 from Marshall but not from Haas. Granted, after a student is admitted to Haas, he can slack off and get below a 3.0 and still graduate. Although students have told me Haas is easier after you get in, so I would assume that the average GPA of a Haas graduate is higher.</p>
<p>If you take the worse Marshall student compared to the worse Haas student, then the Haas student would probably have a higher GPA. It gets subjective when you compare the best at Marshall compared to the best at Cal.</p>
<p>Uhhhh Haas hands down. Has a better name and is simply just a much better school than USC and is respected much more.</p>
<p>
[quote]
<a href="http://students.berkeley.edu/admissions/freshmen.asp%5B/url%5D">http://students.berkeley.edu/admissions/freshmen.asp</a></p>
<p>Notice how the data has the number matriculated? You think that the scores on this document are from admits and not matriculants, even though it says the date of July 2005, long after students have decided where they will attend? The admitted SAT averages are even HIGHER, probably much higher than the numbers shown.
[/quote]
No no, DRab you misunderstand me.</p>
<p>I said the UCLA reference was for admits; i realize Cal's reference is for matriculants. My complaint with the Cal reference is that it takes the average of the Middle %50 numbers, which doesn't reflect the real average. The real average lies in the link i provided..</p>