<p>according to the point system, do i make it in?</p>
<p>UC GPA: 3.54 - 3540 points
SAT (1770 + 450 + 620) = 2840 * .8 = 2272
40 courses = 500
ed. environment (school API score = 2) = 300
low family income = 300
first gen college = 300
leadership (co captian varsity tennis, co captain jv and varsity tennis, club council of french club) = 150
volunteer >200 hrs = 300</p>
<p>total = 3540+2272+500+300+300+300+150+300 = 7662
point cutoff = estimation = 7600?? does this i mean i made it??
7662/7600</p>
<p>ok MiqueMaus, so you have much higher scores and grades than the OP, and you can't get in/it's a reach for you. So you're kind of peeved at the socioeconomic points, but do you think you would have gotten the same scores/grades that you do have if you were in the same situation as the OP? Go to a bad school, parent's can't help, no tutoring etc, all that junk associated with low income. Maybe, maybe not. More likly not, I'm not saying anything specifically towards you, like you're not as motivated or anything, but it'd be against the odds.</p>
<p>I went to an average school. My parents never helped me with homework. I never once had a tutor. I never signed up for SAT classes. Yet I managed a gpa above 4.0 and a 2040 SAT. </p>
<p>Please....don't use socioeconomic situations as an EXCUSE for bad grades. If a kid really wants to work hard and study, where they grow up doesn't matter. Many successful figures (big CEOs, etc) have come from difficult social situations....why? BECAUSE they work HARD.</p>
<p>Well, average would imply that the socioeconomic situations in question don't apply to you. Sure there are very successful people that come from bad neighborhoods, but you know what? There are a lot more unsuccessful people who come from those same neighborhoods. What I'm saying is that you don't know how you would have turned up in those situations. But statiscally you'd have failed.</p>
<p>Why then do you suppose that there are more college bound seniors in an upper class high school than a lower class high school. </p>
<p>Say you had to work 20 hours a day, would you still have time for clubs AND AP level HW?</p>
<p>That's because here, more kids in bad neighborhoods DON'T want an education. There are some that do, and they study hard. But most in that position simply say "What's the point of school?"</p>
<p>There's a lot of poor countries in the world, especially Asia, and if you look at the number of kids with high grades/IQ in these countries, there are a LOT...specifically a huge multiple of the number here. So this just translates that your social position doesn't always determine your academic accomplishments....</p>
<p>That'd raise the question 'why don't they want an education', I agree with you in that, yes what we make of ourselves is of our own doing. Because if 1 person can do it, then there's nothing stopping the other people. But for that 1 person it's harder, and wouldn't you agree that it shouldn't have to be that much harder? There are kids at my school, who in ANY other situation/tax bracket, would have dropped out. Take that same kid (the one who tries hard0, have him switch places (with the guy I know at my school) and he'd thrive.</p>
<p>I think that weight Should be given to socioeconomic problems and such but not to the extent that UCSD has. I'm low-income myself and I haven't had a tutor ever. My parents both work from sunrise to sunset and on weekends as well. I'm not some preppy rich white kid complaining. I go to a very very good high school, have decent grades, and got a 2330 on the SAT. I don't see how allowing students, who have shown even at their low API school that they do poorly, into UCSD over someone who has proven themselves at a good school. Alas, the world is not fair and any more skewing of Asians at UCs will lead to more complaining by URMs so <em>shrugs</em>. Doesn't affect me personally since I'm basically already into UCSD but as always, there are deserving friends who'll be passed over because they chose to attend a very competitive school rather than a low tier one for the points. Keep in mind that at a low API school, higher grades will be easier to attain, and ELC status as well. O well... Life ain't fair. :)</p>
<p>jesus christ, stop complaining, and LET ME IN TO UCSD already!!!!
haha just kidding.
My honest opinion is actually with you MiqueMaus, but thanks GlueEater for defending my low-income status.
MiqueMas, I believe that SOME weight should be given into socioeconomic problems, but not as much as UCSD, and I admit, that my stats are horrible compared to people who didnt even get into UCSD.
HOWEVER, its not that way, SO WHY SHOULDNT I TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT??
I really want to go to UCSD, and if this socioeconomic thingy lets me get in, then Im gonna use it, I'm not gonna just not apply because I dont believe that they should award major points to economic issues. </p>
<p>So lets stop fighting, and cross my fingers for me to get in, but it seems like MiqueMas and marstars wont join in, cause they seem to hate me. lol.</p>
<p>Sorry for the little troll fest there. Not an attack on you personally, moreso on how the system itself works. I'm sure you'll do fine considering you're going through the "Good God... If you let me into UCSD, I'll give up <em>body part</em>" so you'll certainly be motivated to do well. Good luck to you and hopefully UCSD won't be all that bad for either of us.</p>
<p>I don't hate you....
I hope you get in. From your non-academic stats, you obviously show that you are an involved, motivated person and someone who really wants to get in...I'm not against people like you. I'm against people who don't give a crap about school, get ultra low grades and get into a school like UCSD.</p>
<p>I guess I should have clearly defined my position (I was also thinking there is too much weight given by UCSD).</p>
<p>Gosh, it's just socioeconomic problems are different for everyone! Truthfully, i don't think the whole point system thing is great in anyway. I do think that socioeconomic problems should count a lot! i just don't believe there should be an assigned point value cause it more how the person has grown from those experience. It's about if the person would help the community or be a leader in the future. A low income guy who never had rough experience versus another low income guy who went through some crazy stuff are totally different. It just that low income people generally do worst. One smart low income guy don't mean **** when there are thousands who live a depressing life, making them not work as hard as the normal middle class guy with the same intelligence.</p>
<p>Is the point system we're talking about the UCSD Comprehensive one? if not, where is it? If so, wasn't that before the writing portion of the SAT came about ( it said 2004) and wouldn't that affect the points total?</p>