<p>Is it true that you’re less likely to get into UCLA if you get accepted to UCB?
-or vice-versa?</p>
<p>Because, I applied to both, I did not get into UCLA, but got into Cal. </p>
<p>My friend got into UCLA, and not to Cal. </p>
<p>Someone I know applied exclusively to Cal and NOT to UCLA because he heard it would be harder for him to get in to Cal if he applied to UCLA-- and didn’t get in-- but my pt is, this rumor/fact affects ppl.</p>
<p>So-- is this true?</p>
<p>I applied to both and got into both, but im going to Cal. They do sometimes pull some whack decisions that make no sense sometimes, but the rumors are just some people's self-justification as to why they didn't get into one or the other. For anyone who asks, say apply to both. Decisions are independent of one antoher, and you only hurt your options by NOT picking one or the other.</p>
<p>Oh-- I know people who got into both too-- 2 of my peers did, but they were ranked #1 and #3, one was offered a regents and the other a Cal Bear Scholarship.</p>
<p>But for borderline kids, like me (im guessing), ranked #8, with 1 1250 SAT score (and ultimately a 1330 after January--which I sent to UCLA and UCB even though they say they only want up to Dec) and asked supplement questions by berkeley.</p>
<p>cuz the guy who chose to only apply to berkeley went to a very selective outreach program during the summer (Quest Scholars-- if you know what that is)-- so-- maybe they told him this?</p>
<p>I dont think the difference in admission when you are borderline is a function of some mutually-exclusive arrangement so much as its harder to get into either, and the decisions are a lot more unpredictable. And i wasnt 1 or 2 i was 130 out of 500, a hard school sure, but still.</p>
<p>I was admitted to both UCLA and Cal.</p>
<p>I don't think there is this conspiracy to not take students if you applied to one or the other; sometimes, the university is not seeking your "type."</p>
<p>Although they may not be linked, the UC system analyzes every possible quantifiable statistic. Be it GPA in A-G requirements, number of completed A-G reqs, SAT I verbal score, SAT I math score, ect . . . and UCLA knows that Berkeley has a greater yield, even though UCLA has the most applicants out of any school in the nation, if not the world. Sometimes other UCs fear that their class spots will not be filled if Berkeley lets in too many students, UCLA included . . .</p>
<p>I know about 3-4 people who will be Bruins because they got into UCLA and not Berkeley. I got into both, and i thought that these people would, too. I didn't expect to get into either, per se . . . i saw it as "up in the air." I was happy, and will be at Berkeley this fall. Good luck to you.</p>
<p>it would be too inconveniant to select students based on the other UC's that they applied to. i'm pretty sure they do everything in admissions independently. i got into both from out of state.</p>
<p>I figured that they had independent graders and anything-- and I didn't mean to make it sound that UCLA and UCB discriminated against "my type." (meaning being borderline if you didn't read my earlier post).</p>
<p>My friend's friend (who supposedly works w/ admissions-- iono if this is true or anything) told her that UCs decide to not admit students sometimes if they're qualified enuff, but also qualified for a better UC campus, but the UC they got into didnt make them qualified enuff to get a Regent's or anything.</p>
<p>But this is all speculation-- and again, I don't kno if my friend's friend is reliable or even a real person, so...</p>
<p>Hehe-- and I bet I sound bitter about my UCLA rejection huh?</p>
<p>I'm actually pretty cool w/ it -- Can't wait to go to berkeley!</p>
<p>I mean-- in one of my earlier posts, I mentioned I didn't get into UCI-- and I'm ok w/ that too-- Cuz in the end, it's all about Cal. =]</p>
<p>I got into both. In my class, everyone that got into Cal got into UCLA except for one girl.</p>
<p>I am a transfer, so probably don't count, but I also got into both UCLA & UCB out of state. I'm not sure that the gig about lower UCs not accepting you if you are likely to be accepted elsewhere is true, either, because I also got into UCI. Haven't heard from SD, but i'm psyched about admission to Berkeley! </p>
<p>-A</p>
<p>Maybe i didnt aim high enuf but i did get rejected anywhere so i wouldnt exactly know :) but i got in the school that, as i found out later, i really wanted to go to, and i couldnt be happier about how it worked out. Don't worry about the blips where it just doesnt seem to make sense, just be happy were almost done with high school and on to something greater.</p>
<p>Yeah-- Admissions is just based on how 2 ppl think of ur 20 pieces of paper vs. everyone elses-- so not getting in, doesnt make u dumb or anything.</p>
<p>At my skool, ppl resorted to lying about wat skools they did and did not get into--its kind of sad.</p>
<p>Anyways, I was always on the side that the rumor was a means of justification to a lot of kids -- and even after i got rejected from UCLA, i didnt believe the rumor -- and after getting in to Berkeley, I was pretty happy -- and hten i heard my friend didn't get in (who got into UCLA) and i was lik-- huh?---tats weird.</p>
<p>my final conclusion on this-- is tat mebbe they just look for different things (LA and Cal that is)</p>
<p>It's just a rumor. I was accepted to both, and I've found that the decision between Berk and LA is a very common one.</p>
<p>Admitted to both. I found people that HAVE gotten in for Cal but not UCLA. This happens more with L&S. I'm an engineer. Haven't heard of such a case, but definitely lots who get into LA but not Cal.</p>
<p>I think in the case that you get in for Cal but not LA, it's because you were on the borderline, or you applied for a more competitive program at LA. For example, ECON is where LA can be very good, so that's why...</p>
<p>I got into both but only me and the val at my school got that. Other "top" students got Cal, but not UCLA....which instead took a bunch underqualified minorities....hmmm</p>
<p>Hmm . . . that sounds more like USC's approach at my school.</p>
<p>I got into both Berkeley and UCLA.
The only reason I considered UCLA was because it was closer. Berkeley offered me the Regents & Chancellor's Scholarship and the Alumni Scholarship, while UCLA offered nothing...I'm just glad I got it so it wasn't very hard to convince my parents to let me go to NorCal.
~a couple people in my school got into Berkeley who did not get into UCLA, but this had a lot to do with Spring Admits, otherwise most got into both if they applied.</p>
<p>You scholarship hoarder. I didn't know that one could receive both the Regents & Chancellor's scholarships. Tell me about it. Congrats, though. So many scholarships is impressive.</p>
<p>i got into both.........</p>
<p>Lets take a look at it analytically.</p>
<p>Berkeley and UCLA have to process about 38,000 and 42,000 apps respectively. If they spent every single minute of an 8 hour day (including saturday) from Nov to March processing apps, they would still have to process roughly 40 applications an hour. They simply dont have enough time to work out a conspiracy. Logistically, it wont work.</p>
<p>Berkeley and LA are competitors. It's highly unlikely they would divide the best applicants. Logically, it doesnt work.</p>
<p>And, there are lots of people who made it to both. So observationally, it doesnt work.</p>