<p>I found them rather easily for Berkeley (15% Resume, 35% Essays, 50% Grades)
but I just can't seem to find them for Columbia.</p>
<p>International student transfer btw.</p>
<p>as much as i think this isn't accurate, this is all you've got:</p>
<p>i highly doubt Columbia would publish as explicit a breakdown as Berkeley. i'd say if any factor is exemplary it'll stand out more than the breakdown allows. Like if you went crazy volunteering at a reputed organization and lead significant projects, it'll probably become an important or very important factor in an acceptance. on the other hand it might just contribute heavily towards character/qualities which is already very important. this is only what they publish, not necessarily what they actually practice. I also think test scores are not as important as they say.</p>
<p>None of the Ivies have a breakdown but:</p>
<p>From Most Important to least:</p>
<ol>
<li>TRANSCRIPT (GPA + Difficulty of courses)</li>
<li>SAT/SATII Scores</li>
<li>Teacher Recommendation/Essays (both are equally important although I'd give the edge to the essay. A Godly essay can get you in. A godly recommendation from a teacher is almost expected at this level)</li>
<li>Extra-curriculars</li>
<li>the mood of the admissions officer</li>
<li>Interview. </li>
</ol>
<p>Yes the interview doesnt matter much at all.</p>
<p>Berkeley is a UC, admissions are actually determined by a formula.</p>
<p>Things at private institutions are way more wishy washy.</p>
<p>Admissions are not determined by a set, calculable formula at Berkeley or UCLA any more. They do have a stated list of "criteria" but they are not quantified. Other UC campuses actually do follow a formula, as far as I can tell.</p>
<p>
[quote]
1. TRANSCRIPT (GPA + Difficulty of courses)
2. SAT/SATII Scores
3. Teacher Recommendation/Essays (both are equally important although I'd give the edge to the essay. A Godly essay can get you in. A godly recommendation from a teacher is almost expected at this level)
4. Extra-curriculars
5. the mood of the admissions officer
6. Interview.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I would think recs/essays would be above the SAT/II score</p>
<p>Recs/essays above SAT scores?</p>
<p>Really?</p>
<p>Yes, I'd agree with that. Columbia doesn't necessarily need fantastic scores but they do need to see that you're a fantastic person. This usually shows in how others evaluate you. Of course, it might be different for transfer admissions.</p>
<p>I agree with the above because most kids have great scores. Something in addition to the great scores has to be at play. That something could just be that you're a nice kid, theoretically.</p>
<p>It's really not that easily defined.</p>
<p>Basically, if they like you enough and you're qualified enough you'll get in.
But you need both of those. Being overly qualified but unlikable won't get you in, nor will being extremely likable but less than qualified.</p>
<p>Essentially, a 2100 3.6 GPA with personality and a story has a better chance than a 2300 3.9 GPA that doesn't show personality. </p>
<p>It's like that for any top school with the exception of Caltech and Duke. And maybe WashU, although that's not a top school.</p>
<p>wait, SAT scores being more important than essay?
since when?</p>
<p>as far as im concerned, the SAT doesn't speak that much as the essay/rec do</p>
<p>Very few kids write essays that actually influence their admissions decisions. Most are just average.</p>
<p>ses is right.
But those "very few"...maybe 5% of all essays. That's like half of Columbia's accepted class.</p>
<p>There's no difference between an average essay, good essay and a very good essay. Neither will get you in...you'll have to rely on stats and luck.
But a great essay can, and often will, change that.</p>
<p>Guys check this out</p>
<p>Columbia almost beat Harvard for Hottest for Rejecting YOU!</p>
<p>I have no clue how cornell got the cake as hottest Ivy</p>
<p>yea, i saw that too...but you can tell there is a bias there since they mention GS and SEAS as affecting columbia's admission rate but make no mention of harvard extension school....odd</p>
<p>Exactly! Columbia is always taking Columbia college's admission rate to make the school look good and tough to get into. It shouldn't be that way. They should accentuate the school's admission rate as a whole. As a University. not just one division.</p>
<p>Penn doesn't go vaunting Wharton's acceptance rate only. so yeah, it is kind of bias in a way</p>
<p>Penn students love to talk about Wharton's admit rate, though.</p>
<p>And the overall admit rate this year of 10.4% really isn't anything to sneeze at.</p>
<p>If you ask me, I'd say Columbia is just a little pompous when it comes to percentages. You hardly here of their 10% admission rate versus the 8.9% that CC holds</p>
<p>Yes, but from a purely business perspective, why would you advertise a less selective number.</p>
<p>And the majority of undergrads are at CC, not SEAS. So the lower admit rate will apply to the majority of applicants.</p>
<p>Personally, I think it's silly to toss around percentages anyways, the differences between most top schools are negligible.</p>
<p>But I don't fault Columbia's admission staff for flaunting what they do have.</p>
<p>I know. I Love my future school and I think they should boast all they want but don't you think that the low numbers are a little intimidating to future applicants</p>
<p>Common sense should tell them that if they want more applicants, they should stop intimidating others with low percentages.</p>
<p>Thats exactly what happened to Yale. If you look at their statistics, it shows that their number of applicants dropped by 2,000 or so from last years because students saw the low acceptance rates and decided not to apply.</p>