<p>Major: Foreign Language
Needs:Financial aid
Study Abroad variety
Diversity of students
Urban
Scores: 1770 and 1750 SAT(!800 combines best scores)
CR:530
M:620
WR:650</p>
<p>My UC GPA is 3.9</p>
<p>CA:
SFSU
UCSB
UClA
Berkeley</p>
<p>Boston:
Boston Univ
Northeastern</p>
<p>Pennsylvania:
Univ of pitt
Temple
Drexel(Not sure of majors yet)</p>
<p>D.C.:
George Washington</p>
<p>New York:
NYU
Hunter college</p>
<p>^ You got some expensive schools on the list that aren’t too generous with financial aid. Your list looks reasonable though. UCs will likely offer best value, even though you want to go to school out of California.</p>
<p>Good luck!</p>
<p>Calpoly slo is a great school that is much cheaper than the ucs</p>
<p>I agree with Cal Poly SLO…great school.</p>
<p>And UCBChem is right…you have a lot of expensive schools on your list that aren’t good with aid.</p>
<p>How much will your parents pay? that will likely determine where you should apply.</p>
<p>*
Needs: Financial aid.*</p>
<p>Well take off all the OOS publics and take off NYU. Don’t think you’ll get great aid for Boston U and NEU.</p>
<p>You need to apply to some schools where your stats are high so you’ll get a better FA package. However, you still need to determine your EFC and how much your family will pay. You could get gapped.</p>
<p>Look to LACs in the Midwest like Beloit which I believe is big on foreign languages since they have a language summer program. I don’t know Middlebury’s FA, but great re FL; doubt that it is very diverse.</p>
<p>I doubt the OP is going to get much merit aid from Beloit since the SATs are low compared to Beloit stats.</p>
<p>OP, what is your cum GPA (non-UC) for the OOS schools?</p>
<p>Wrt to UC gpa and the UC’s to which you’re applying in general: you’re qualifed for UC.</p>
<p>Now, for Cal and UCLA, please list the following:</p>
<p>1) UW UC GPA, essentially, UW A-G, 10-11th.
2) Fully W GPA, without caps, A-G</p>
<p>I’m just trying to see what that 3.9 translates into for both at each end of the spectrum.</p>
<p>And how would you rank your hs? Top tier, middling or underfunded? Public or private? These are questions to see if the hs you attend will put you in the pure holistic pile wrt your scores and maybe even grades.</p>
<p>my unweighted is 3.7 and my school is a brand new public school, middle tier…top 5% though</p>
<p>Here’s what we know about your qualifications…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>3.7/3.9/1770 is what your pure stats appear to be. </p>
<p>UCLA is pretty transparent, so wrt each component:</p>
<p>1) Your gpa both uw and w suggests single-digit acceptance rates.
2) Your score suggests maybe ~ 17-19%.</p>
<p>Overall, not a good chance, but then your saving grace might be any hardship you encountered or if your high school were really underperforming – but ‘new’ doesn’t imply an historically disadvantaged hs. </p>
<p>If, say, you noted your interest in languages, and you backed that up with high subject scores, 750 and + in Swahili and Nahuatl, say, then admissions would undoubtedly look at you very seriously. So put together a great essay, esp, detailing your interest in the languages and what you plan on doing with this ability to learn these, and you should be back in the ballgame, especially if you’re good in the CR and W components. </p>
<p>You have a great chance at SFSU and a decent one with UCSB. Cal would be tougher of course because UCLA is more into holistics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Does that mean they are number driven? Would that apply to OOS as well?</p>
<p>Curleq94:</p>
<p>Correction…</p>
<p>I copied the component scores along with the totals, but I didn’t even address them. </p>
<p>I was hoping for your sake the math scores would be down, and your CR and W would be significantly elevated. As it is, if you play up your language-learning skills, I think you could still possibly get into UCLA.</p>
<p>iglooo:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No to the first question … it just means that admissions likes to show what it takes to gain admission to the U, and thereby publishes specific-stat based data for prospective students. UCLA is the most transparent of all the UC’s, and the UC’s are the most transparent collection of u’s in the country wrt publishing these things.</p>
<p>Often teh UC will downplay w and uwgpa as not to scare anyone off: show wgpa as capped a-g; show uwgpa as a-g. And SATI is not superscored and is deemphasized. The last thing the U wants is to scare someone off from not applying because he/she might consider him/herself a non-candidate for admission because the more that apply to the U means more diversity via the holistic angle.</p>
<p>UCLA is not about being numbers driven or about improving its rankings according to the USN measures, ie, SAT means/medians. UCLA of all the “top 30 u’s” dips the deepest into CA high-school classes for SATI’s: the 25th Percentile of scores if completely ‘merit’ and score driven would be easily ~ 2000 with no diminution of gpa w and uw, but is actually ~ 1750 because the U downplays scores and places a great emphasis on diversity … accepting those of less priviledged economic background with usually lower scores. </p>
<p>Wrt the oos question…</p>
<p>The pendulum has swung and it’s getting harder now for instate students to get into the U for the sake of oos and international.</p>
<p>The minimum standards are higher for non-residents, but these are just floor qualifications.</p>
<p>Someone rejected with a 3.90/4.40/2250 from instate would never be rejected from outside of the state.</p>
<p>And this doesn’t contradict my prior paragraphs becuase a person rejected with these stats would be from a well-performing hs, a ‘wealthy’ one. So we could say that someone with these stats would never be rejected if he/she came from a lower performing hs with mainly poor students within CA or if he/she came from outside of CA.</p>
<p>Is that too verbose for you, iglooo? If it is just ask…</p>