<p>…approach to announcing admission decisions.</p>
<p>Irvine’s Decision Announcement Process does not befit its status as a great university. Irvine already knows its entire slate of admits. Yet, it has adopted a peculiar approach of releasing a few dozen, perhaps a few hundred decisions every night. This process stretches from the second week of March through March end.</p>
<p>Worse, the pattern of release is not explained. Is it by the ranking of applicant’s according to Irvine’s evaluation system? In the absence of any official explanation, through CC statistics it is clear that Irvine began with its " Top Ten" lists of regents and Honors, then it slowly encompasses ELCs, the those with UC GPA of 4.0 + , and then those seemingly it has grudgingly deemed as worthy of admit on March 28 or March 29… Worse, it does not tell those rejected till the very end. Why?</p>
<p>Nothing about this decision announcement process is transparent. Doesn’t a public university owe its constituents, its stakeholders, its 48,000 applicants who each paid the same application fee of $ 60, an explanation? Shouldn’t it treat each applicant fairly? Shouldn’t it not subject a large chunk of its applicant pool to undue, prolonged agony?</p>
<p>Someone in leadership at Irvine owes the applicants and the public an explanation of why it doen’t follow the excellent lead of UCSB which has in a straightforward manner announced that all 44,000 California applicants can access their decisions on line on March 16 at 3 PM. And UCSD, UCD, UCLA and even Berkeley announce all decsions on the same day at the same time. That is equitable, fair and respectful to ALL APPLICANTS.</p>
<p>Bravo Santa Barbara! Shame on you, Irvine! Step forward and explain!</p>
<p>Well, not to justify the process of stretching out admissions info, but many of the schools you mentioned do have at least a two-stage admit. Regents scholars for Cal, Scholars Day for UCSD, Chancellors Reception invitees for UCSB are all told prior to the official unveiling day. Even Ivies have their ‘likely letters’ to stagger notification even with a fiction that official news is all the same day.</p>
<p>Big difference between dining and wooing your Regents, Chancellors, Honors (about 1000 or 2 % of the applicant pool) candidates and what they do to the other 43,000 applicants. Treating 98 % of the applicant pool in a shoddy manner for some mysterious, unexplained rationale is just not acceptable. A public university owes its applicants fair, respectful treatment. </p>
<p>There is no good justification for Irvine’s approach. If there is, why not send an email to all applicant’s explaining the pattern of nightly releases? Why not respect your applicants?</p>
<p>Since you posted both here and in the UCI forum, I’m going to post my response here too:</p>
<p>First, since you don’t think the process is “transparent” enough, have you tried actually calling the admissions office and asking them about why decisions are being released this way?</p>
<p>Second, why do you assume the reason they’re doing it isn’t legitimate? There are a number of great explanations. Maybe they’re short staffed. Maybe (since they were ordered to cut 500 spots for the freshman class) they’re proceeding cautiously with whom they accept to avoid over enrollment. I’ve heard public schools may have a higher matriculation rate this year due to the economy. Maybe that’s affecting their decision making, too. Who knows?</p>
<p>So it actually seems quite probable to me that Irvine doesn’t know all of its admits yet.
The point is, you shouldn’t assume that it’s being done maliciously or even purposefully.</p>
<p>Oh, btw, why are you upset about the chp/regents? Don’t other UC’s and many other colleges do the same thing?</p>
<p>Snedbrosse: Since I am responding to you, I too am posting here. I understand as a current student, you are naturally defensive. But this is not a reflection on you or other existing students.</p>
<p>UCI is no more short staffed than others – in fact, it gets 44,000 students paying $ 60 = $ 2.64 million dollars to review and post admission decisions.</p>
<p>Secondly, how are they going to avoid over enrollment by dribbling out admissions at a few hundreds a night. None of those people respond to UCI confirming their attendance. So, there is no possible “information insight” Irvine gains from dribbling out admissions.</p>
<p>Third, the lack of transparency is disrespectful to applicants who expect to be treated with fairness and be well-informed. It is no shadow over the fine UCI student body, to call the Administration to task, as Brassring, has rightly done for a shoddy, ill-explained process which puts thousands of applicants in limbo over a three week period. If there is a logical explanation, they should blast out an email or post it on their website. It defies imagination to say they don’t know who they are going to admit overall. They had three uninterrupted months to do their review. And al least one source at another UC tells me that all decisions are locked in. So, why?</p>
<p>Because you posted this in the UC General, UCI, AND UCSB, forums, I’ll cross post and put my response in this thread as well:</p>
<p>I hate to be rude and un-gentleman like, but shut up already. This is at least the third post you’ve made just bashing UCI. We get the piont, you aren’t happy. You know what, everybody will know by the end of March. Settle down… patience is a virtue. I worry you might cry your tear-glands dry.</p>
<p>Besides, I never saw a regulation requiring colleges to send out 45,000+ emails in one day notifying all applicants at the same time. Here in the midwest, most universities don’t even give you a time table from when you will be admitted or rejected. You apply and wait. You should consider yourself lucky that you have a general two week period you know you will receive notification.</p>
<p>It’s not like this “odd” admissions notifications process is wasting billions of dollars, or killing the earth, or making people lose their jobs, or killing thousands of young men in a directionless war…</p>
<p>yeah its extremely stressfull to find no new change on your page everyday when people keep getting them. i kind of given up on it for now. anybody know my chances with 4.03 GPA 1860 SATI and 670 and 620 for SATII.</p>
<p>Well, UCSB does their admissions on the points system, along with most of the other UCs.</p>
<p>The only ones that don’t do the point system are Berkeley, LA, and Irvine. </p>
<p>That might be part of the reason that the admissions are scattered…</p>
<p>As you can see, Berkeley and LA have later decision posting dates than the other schools. </p>
<p>UC Irvine easily could have saved their admissions for a later date…but instead, they are sending them out in chunks, which assures that there will be no server errors or visitor overloads.</p>
<p>I know it’s SO hard waiting, but you’ll know soon enough. </p>
<p>…and really, they are not obligated to explain themselves to you; just as you weren’t obligated to apply.</p>
<p>This whole point system thing is weird… and its even more weird how some people got rejected from davis but accepted into ucsd, and both use point systems??? Maybe it depends on the major…</p>
<p>Well, an admissions staff at UCSD may feel like Student A was more disadvantaged than UC Davis though they were. Since the points are subjective in a lot of the areas, there is much room for variation…</p>
<p>…and yeah, it does depend on major, slightly, at UCD…according to what I’ve read on here, although, it isn’t the most reliable source.</p>
<p>The admissions department works hard to define a very specific rubric for assigning points, to keep it from being subjective. For example, at UCSD volunteer work from 0 to 99.999 hours earn zip. 100 to 199.999 earns half points. Anything over 200 earns full points. No interpolation, just specific rules. There must be a way to request a ruling for confusing or ambiguous situations, if you think about it. </p>
<p>Also, UCSD and UCD have different factors and different weightings of those factors. Davis gives points for having all As for 3 years in one of the academic a-g categories, while SD does not. UCD does not give any points for volunteer work, if I remember correctly, while SD does. </p>
<p>The various factors create situations where a student is accepted at SD and rejected at Davis, as well as the reverse. Depends on the situation for that student. These factors have such a large effect that you see what appear to be really high stats in the reject pile and sometimes really low stats as accepts.</p>