<p>I’ve been looking for, but cannot find, a table of matriculation with cross-admits between the UC Campuses.</p>
<p>An example of such a table is found here at the New York Times.</p>
<p>[The</a> New York Times > Week in Review > Image > Collegiate Matchups: Predicting Student Choices](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/09/17/weekinreview/20060917_LEONHARDT_CHART.html]The”>http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/09/17/weekinreview/20060917_LEONHARDT_CHART.html)</p>
<p>Anybody have any links to such a table for the UC’s?</p>
<p>Never seen such a thing, and don't think it would be of any value to the Univ of California to even analyze the data in that way. (Incidentally, that Avery study is statistical junk.)</p>
<p>I don't think it would be of any value to the Univ of California to even analyze the data in that way.</p>
<p>If the data are obscure it that the information is too valuable, rather than valueless. Don't you reckon, for example, that UCLA Admissions officials are hardly disinterested in the percentage of Berkeley co-admits matriculate as Bruins?</p>
<p><a href="Incidentally,%20that%20Avery%20study%20is%20statistical%20junk.">i</a> *</p>
<p>This paper? It has a lot of statistics, is the whole lot of it junk, or just parts?</p>
<p>SSRN-A</a> Revealed Preference Ranking of U.S. Colleges and Universities by Christopher Avery, Mark Glickman, Caroline Hoxby, Andrew Metrick</p>
<p>
[quote]
on't you reckon, for example, that UCLA Admissions officials are hardly disinterested in the percentage of Berkeley co-admits matriculate as Bruins?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, individual campuses do survey acceptees and ask where else they are going. But, its still a numbers game with the UC campuses, given their size. Plus, the cross-admit data is rather useless info unless you know why a student chose a particular campus -- in some (many?) cases it could be purely economic, or family-related reasons. In either case, there is absolutely nothing an adcom can do.</p>
<p>Since you are good searcher, search cc and you'll find where many have posted about statistical self-selection of the applicants in Hoxby's work. GIGO is the operative word, IMO.</p>
<p>I find the first table a little hard to believe...THAT many more people chose Virginia over Berkeley? Isnt Berkeley a higher ranked school in the first place?</p>
<p>I find the first table a little hard to believe...THAT many more people chose Virginia over Berkeley? Isnt Berkeley a higher ranked school in the first place?</p>
<p>If you look at the paper from which the table is derived, it operates like a chess player ranking system (or probably too like the Sagarin index in sports). The cross-admitted student chooses a school at which to matriculate, and that school "wins" that match vs. the other schools. The number of applicants accepted at both Berkeley and UVa is probably fairly small, but the study includes those that were admitted to Berkeley, Stanford, Pomona and USC, but not UVa, and extrapolates from other match-ups involving such schools with UVa, but not involving Berkeley. </p>
<p>If you look at the paper, you'll see the rankings comport informed CC opinion, as well as other measures such as how many posts for each school are found at CC.</p>
<p>hmmm, that still doesnt explain why so many people would choose UVA over the option of going to Berkeley</p>
<p>Also, if you look at the paper you'll find that it over-sampled east coast kids. Thus, the the public college closer-to-home is logical, as is choosing an Ivy over Stanford.</p>