<p>guys, everybody knows northwestern is more selective than berkeley. there is no point to continue arguing this</p>
<p>by the logic offered even by conservative californians in this thread, berkeley is more selective than stanford. and the fringe opinion places it as more selective than harvard.</p>
<p>just let this thread die, don't let them draw you in, it's a waste of time</p>
<p>
[quote]
Anyhow, my point was just that GPA is not really that indicative of brilliance in many cases.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think colleges are looking for brilliance. They're looking for hard-working individuals who have intellectual curiosity. And sure, there are students who have to work much harder to maintain the same standard of excellence; they too will do well in college, because they work hard.</p>
<p>
[quote]
guys, everybody knows northwestern is more selective than berkeley.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, I guess everybody can just keep on thinking that, then. ;)</p>
<p>(By the way, no one, not even I, ever asserted that Berkeley was more selective than Stanford -- Stanford's CR+M+W is higher than Berkeley's superscored, and numbers are definitely not the only consideration in admissions, which is what I think you were basing that claim on.)</p>
<p>I agree that this thread should be closed.</p>
<p>
[quote]
guys, everybody knows northwestern is more selective than berkeley. there is no point to continue arguing this
[/quote]
</p>
<p>WRONG. Not everybody knows that and I'm part of that everybody. Yes, Cal is easier to get into if you ARE Californian. I think that is the only common knowledge we know of. But for OOS and IS students, Cal is more selective than is NU. This is the one that's a generally acceptable fact here. If you want to prove that wrong, provide evidences. </p>
<p>Now, if you don't want to believe me, visit all college counselors of possibly all high schools outside of California and ask them which school is more selective. You can start from your high school. Good luck!</p>
<p>Oh, I just checked out USNews Selectivity Ranking and even them don't seem to agree with you.</p>
<p>USNWR Selectivity Rank:</p>
<h2>Berkeley: 14</h2>
<h2>-</h2>
<h2>-</h2>
<h2>-</h2>
<h2>-</h2>
<h2>-</h2>
<p>-</p>
<p>Northwestern: 19</p>
<p>See? So, please be factual next time. Several high school students are lurking in this thread and you're giving them false statements.</p>
<p>I also don't agree that NU is more selective than Cal, particularly for non-California residents.</p>
<p>us news ranking may look like it's based on stats but it's really based on OPINION because us news needs to SUBJECTIVELY decide how much weight they should give to test scores vs % in the top-tenth percent..etc. </p>
<p>now let's see the real stats:
Average SAT of ADMITTED students:
Berkeley: ~1380 (2070 on 3 parts)
Northwestern: 1463
04.05.2007</a> - Fall 2007 freshman admissions data released
State</a> of the University: 2007, Office of the President, Northwestern University</p>
<p>Interpret anyway you want. </p>
<p>By the way, according to stats on Berkeley website, 54% of the applicants with score in the 700-800 range (average of M and V) got admitted in 2005. Maybe some of you can find comparable stats for privates though my intuition tells me that percentage is fairly high compared to most top privates. Most of the admits in that score range turned down Berkeley. Only a quarter of the applicants have that score range that year. </p>
<p>I will post more later when I have time.</p>
<p>
[quote]
according to stats on Berkeley website, 54% of the applicants with score in the 700-800 range (average of M and V) got admitted in 2005.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>link? ....</p>
<p>University</a> of California: StatFinder</p>
<p>60% of in-state applicants with 700-800 (average of M+V) on SAT got admitted in 2005. Notice only 22% of all applicants got that score range.</p>
<p>University</a> of California: StatFinder you can run the tables using different criteria (kinda fun...lol!).</p>
<p>^ Thanks...and where's the data from Northwestern and other top privates?...;)</p>
<p>.......................... L o L</p>
<p>I said SATs are not the sole criterion for the school's selectiveness.</p>
<p>Interesting...looking at the statfinder table, selecting generation of college student, parents level of education, and highest SAT:</p>
<p>Out of 8612 applicants to Berkeley that had 700-800 SAT, 2076 (24%) applicants' parents were college grads, and 5663 (66%) applicants' parents had postgrad study! </p>
<p>This info goes to show that students with higher SAT scores come from families that are more educated, and likely wealthier.</p>
<p>powergrid1990,</p>
<p>i think you missed the point which is to illustrate how berkeley has high tendency to take high scoring kids. specificly, the admit rate of those with 700-800 SAT (average of M+V) is more than twice the overall admit rate! top privates have more high scoring kids mainly because they have higher percentage of high scoring applicants, not because they put more emphasis on it.</p>
<p>UCBChemEGrad,</p>
<p>The only private that I found to have similar stats is Brown:</p>
<p>Brown</a> Admission: Facts & Figures</p>
<p>The admit rate for those with 700-800 on CR/M is 20%.
The admit rate overall is 16%.
Not a huge difference there, unlike those for Berkeley.</p>
<p>Some of you have talked so much about how Berkeley can raise its score by whatever if it puts more (not that it hasn't put much, as the data showed) emphasis. Well, Brown rejected over 70% of those with 800 and over 65% of those with perfect ACT! Imagine what Brown can do with its score if it puts more emphasis on test scores.</p>
<p>Granted, Brown is more selective than Berkeley and maybe that's a little unfair. Maybe someone can find similar table for Cornell or JHU..etc (though I doubt they would be <em>that</em> much different from Brown).</p>
<p>Northwestern used to have similar table like Brown's until 2 years ago. I can't find it now. But maybe someone that knows how to resurrect old webpage can.</p>
<p>By the way, this is new:
Freshman</a> Applications Soar at Northwestern - 54% in Three Years, NewsCenter, Northwestern University</p>
<p>^ True.</p>
<p>Cal has to take into account that a lot of the admitted students with the highest scores will likely go to Ivy League schools, Caltech, MIT, Stanford...and UCLA, USC. Berkeley competes with top private colleges as well as the large UC system that cannabilizes top students. Berkeley's applicants aren't as self-selecting. </p>
<p>That said, Berkeley did reject over 2,000 applicants that had top SAT scores.</p>
<p>^ I know what you're trying to say, Sam Lee. Believe me. You've been telling me that a lot of times already. And I do believe all the stats you provided. But like I told you many times before, I'm not a big fan of SATs especially when they are used heavier than high school honor/achievement ranks. </p>
<p>SATs scores are easier to manipulate than high school achievement ranks. Even if you won't believe this, this is a fact. Do you ever wonder why there is no such thing in other countries? That's because it has been proven in other countries that a half-day test is not a good indicator of one's future success (college life). </p>
<p>Let me tell you this again. A month's thorough reviews will give you better SATs scores, and sad to say, that gives us a false picture of the real level of stock knowledge that the student has. On the other hand, you would need more than one month -- obviously -- to become an honor student because becoming an honor student is a continuing process. And most if not all of these honor students have seen to have the correct character and right attitude to do well in college life.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, Brown rejected over 70% of those with 800 and over 65% of those with perfect ACT! Imagine what Brown can do with its score if it puts more emphasis on test scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sam Lee, did it ever occur to you why top schools (HYPSM, for instance) do reject students with near perfect SATs scores? If it is true that the SAT is the single biggest indicator of the student’s intelligence, then why would they keep on rejecting those students?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Imagine what Brown can do with its score if it puts more emphasis on test scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, "what can Brown do for you?".... ;)</p>
<p>I thought we were talking about Northwestern...:rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Berkeley's applicants aren't as self-selecting.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually, my belief is, Berkeley OOS and IS applicants are "self-selecting". I know many OOS and IS students with stats comparable to those at NU’s that did not apply to Cal because they knew they don’t stand a chance anyway. </p>
<p>But for in-state students, it could be the exact opposite. I don't know. I'm not from california.</p>