@ItsJustSchool, the points you raise make complete sense. I was speaking strictly about transfer admissions in my post–sorry for not being specific.
I think UCs would consider the distance between an applicant’s home address and their current college(s) as a factor in transfer admissions for the following reason:
Depending on the distance and duration of their commute, an applicant’s ability to participate in extracurriculars, devote time to volunteering, and/or take a heavy course load may be restricted by the distance of their college from their residence, even more so if they have to also manage family responsibilities or a job close to home.
I believe a student that has to commute a decent distance to attend school (I’m talking about 30+ miles), and does so successfully by maintaining a competitive GPA, displays motivation, commitment and time management skills. Such a student may get a slight “pass” by the UCs for lacking in the extracurriculars and/or volunteering department when compared to a student who lives close to their college.
Well, anyhow, I just want to end my part noting that I was only addressing the numbers that I think get misconstrued and the overwhelming push that OP had to go to SMC because nothing comes close. I’m not slamming SMC, but comparing 500 admitted to UCLA against another campus that admitted 75, or another that admitted 60, it can definitely look like more than it is.
I did that myself when I first saw the numbers. It was someone somewhere who told me there was more to it and it related to number of applicants. So that’s all I’m saying. If I lived in LA, I would go to SMC for sure. But I wouldn’t relocate to improve my chances.
@anothertransfer, that is another way to think about it for sure. I can see that as being something they would take into account. I had heard the interpretation I gave verbally from a staffer at the CC transfer center, and it is parallel to the Freshman scenario, so I never considered any other interpretation.
@lindyk8, did you happen to look the other way, say SMC to UCB? Since UCLA and UCB had similar acceptance rates, it may be a fair comparison. It is pretty puzzling. It could be that we are looking at the wrong numbers. For each of those colleges, it would be interesting to know what the distribution of acceptances were for those students who were accepted to UC. It could be that SMC had a smaller percentage of students accepted to any UC, but that the largest percentage was accepted to UCLA, while a larger percentage of SJCC students matriculated to UC, but more were accepted to Berkeley than to UCLA. Puzzling.
As a side note, I think UCB’s acceptance rates are always overstated, since they accept to both semesters (i.e. some students are accepted to Spring semester, and it is suggested that they take a semester of classes through UCB extension and find off campus housing for a semester, if they wish), while other UC acceptance rates, I believe, are based only on current quarter acceptance.
It seems like one hears, anecdotally, of students being preferentially accepted from nearby, doesn’t it?
OP? Oh, yes, @lindyk8. The OP. Lest we forget. The OP is now in Florida and wants to go to a CCC for two years and then transfer to UCI to study the Public Health major. The suggestion is to go to OCC or IVC.
I think that has already been settled no matter which way you slice it as the best idea. What do you think?
@lindyk8
I got rejected from UCLA and Berkeley last year with a 3.8. Hence why I am still here.
Without a good understanding of the college admissions process, i.e. ecs and essays, I would say getting into a top school for a qualification applicant isn’t that easy.
btw I believe that article you linked uses Top 100 universities as it’s definition of “top.”
Lastly
isn’t true. People applying to the top are actually more self-selective.
Ohh goodness, thank you so much for all the help! I’m glad I spurred on some discussions and learned some new things.
To make things maybe easier, I really want to go back to the Bay Area as that was where I grew up. I have family and friends there that I can live with whereas I have not really anyone in SoCal.
So I was thinking of going to De Anza for UCIrvine and UCB but you guys mentioned the international transfers, and I’m not so quite sure anymore. Maybe I can go for City College of San Francisco? I know that you all mentioned that the transfer rates should be taken with a grain of salt, but these two were on the list of high transfers on one of the California.edu sites. I have school in a bit so I’ll supply the resources later. But yeah, I have a distant cousin currently in De Anza who came from Hong Kong, so that’s true.
I don’t know, I really don’t want to come back to California from Florida without being sure of a transfer.
Yes, it is looking recently like they may not lose their accreditation and may continue to grant usable degrees.
I think you will be OK, but you will want to double-check the TAG programs to help feel secure about transferring. Any CC will be fine. Differences are minor, and not worth moving away from a support system. Plus, if it does help, you would need the help more at UCB, since acceptance is generally more difficult to UCB.
@bomerr, The part I found interesting is the way the universities, UCs included, will say, there were 1000 applicants, but only 100 got in, hence a 10% admit rate. What they don’t tell you is 500 of those applications were tossed instantly as they didn’t meet the minimum req, hence it was 500 eligible with an admit rate of 20%.
Haas does it that way. It bases the admit rate on eligible entrants. The rest of the UCs don’t. It’s all part of creating the impression of higher selectivity for the rankings, etc.
@ohshizsharon, both DeAnza and SF city are great options, as are foothill and Skyline. But @itsjustschool is right. City college has been having some big issues. Make sure it’s still on track. All things equal, I’d go with deanza.
@lindyk8
That is the way all colleges do admissions rates. Regardless from what I have seen, the people with realy poor grades, like sub 3.0, typically don’t even apply for transfer. Haas specifically is really competitive. It’s 5% with the toss-out applications but 18% without. So more than 4 out of 5 qualified applicants gets rejected.
@bomerr
Haas undergrad bases its admit percentage on eligible applicants.
2014:
1637 applicants
Of those, 512 eligible
91 admitted
The published admit rate (all that matters) is based only on the eligible pile of 512. That don’t calculate the 1637.
Yes, all the others do it the other way - basing admit figures off of total applicants - which is what I and the the article said is a misleading stat. The end point being the odds are actually higher than one is led to believe, assuming you’re an eligible student.
And ineligible isn’t just minimum UC GPA. Ineligible is also missing pre-requisites, IGETC, breadth, unit problems, major GPA, whatever.
@lindyk8
Uhm not, illegible is simply pre-reqs. So someone who is missing Calc 2 is ineligible. IGETC isn’t accepted by Haas. Breadth is optional and not required. Unit issues are interesting because from what I under Haas does not disqualified for being over the unit cap so only people under 60 total units would have this issue. Major GPA isn’t a factor that disqualifies an applicant. So again it’s 18% for people who have completed all the pre-reqs. So over 4 out of 5 eligible students–82%–are rejected. That is really competitive.
For some reason, Haas cannot be used as an example because it is highly selective. ???
Why is that relevant? Haas could recalculate its admissions rate to 5% but instead chooses to base the rate on eligible applicants, after tossing the immediate reject pile. That’s the point.
As an example, UCLA Comp Science has a 5% admit rate (equally selective to Haas), but chooses to publish an admit figure based on total # of applicants. That’s the point.
I actually don’t think it really matters what community college you attend, too much. The data from SMC, CCSF, and De Anza, probably just means the schools are geared more towards getting students to transfer than other CCs.Therefore, there are more people specifically at these institutions who are there to transfer to a UC. And on the other end, there are CCs where most people who attend them likely do not to apply to the UC system at all, thus lower transfer applicants from other CCs.
Therefore, you can go to any community college as long as they have classes for your major prerequisites, and you create an educational plan to transfer. More than likely you will have the same chances of getting into the UC of your choice as someone from any other CC in California, as long as you maintain a high GPA and have solid ECs, work experience, etc.
Ok, adding more to this murky mess.
I was viewing a UC Berkeley toolbox on transfer admission and about 2/3 down, saw this regarding location:
“Other Factors Considered in Transfer Admission
•If a school or major is impacted, other factors are considered beyond the 4 factors mentioned:
–Special talents, achievements, awards, skills, interests, experiences that demonstrate unusual. promise for leadership, other significant experiences, or achievements that demonstrate promise for contributing to intellectual vitality of a campus.
–Academic rigor
–Academic accomplishments in light of life experiences and special circumstances
–Location of college and residence (for CSU)”
That seems to imply they use the location criteria for transfers not from a CCC, meaning CA college vs OOS.