<p>besides the fact that california has a huge number of public schools, we have to look at some other factors too:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>there are a lot of large inner-city high schools where only 20% of the class graduates and 10% goes on to college. overall, an underperforming high school. yet the top 4% (maybe 40 kids total per large inner-city high school) are qualified to enter into a UC because of Eligibility in Local Context (ELC), which is where counselors choose the top 4% of their high school students based on class rank and submit those names to the UC. many would argue that if it weren't for ELC, the kids going to schools in compton, inglewood, and most of LA unified would not be able to compete against kids who go to palos verdes peninsula or beverly hills high. by the way, LA unified is the largest school district in the United States... which means many UC-bound kids who are UC-qualified but might not necessarily have the SAT scores to show for it. </p></li>
<li><p>comprehensive review. this allows the UC's to take into consideration many other factors besides gpa and test scores. that's why one of the regents was complaining that berkeley was admitting so many sub-1000 SAT scorers. </p></li>
<li><p>but in any case, it was always known that the UC's did not place its emphasis on SAT scores. in fact, they were going to dump the SAT, and since the collegeboard did not want to lose its biggest customer, they decided to make the new SAT. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>anyway, top 10% of class is deceiving because it's relative. in most cases, top 20% at harvard-westlake is equivalent to top 4% at a random LA Unified public high school.</p>
<p>kfcu4 - I understanding what you are saying, and maybe that's the full explanation. But it doesn't really jibe with other states that have similar policies to California....Texas and Florida, for example. I'm supprised the demographics of Cal could be so skewed from what occurs in other large states. The University of Florida, which has a top 5% rule, as well as bright future perks, has "only" 81% of it's students in the top 10%, yet the 25/75 SAT is 1160-1360 (Source: Common Data Set). You'll find similar data for UTexas-Austin with it's top 10% rule (69% in top 10%, 1110-1350). The UC's seem to be an outlier in the data....</p>
<p>Maybe your argument is correct, but if so, I can't reconcile it with what happens in other states. Is cal really so different? Or is there credence to the statements I've heard that the "class rank" the UCs report is actually from a forumla that considers other factors? I wonder.</p>
<p>The UC's are designed to accept the top 12.5% of the high school gradutating class, and the Cal State's accept the top 1/3rd. So, by definition, every UC is gonna have ~90% top ten percenters.</p>
<p>Class rank is exactly that, and based on gpa only. BUT, only ~50% of Calif HS's actually rank kids, so the data is only half right.</p>
<p>Mini's point was relevant, in that the UC's accept the highest proportion of Pell Grantees in the nation; poor = lower test scores (according to CB website).</p>
<p>hey so i have a question. if im ranked outside the top 10% for 9-11 but I am in top 4% for 10-11 (our school ranks both ways) am i totally screwed over @ all UC's?</p>
<p>No, the UC's are merely obligated to take a certain percentage of a CA high school's class but this (by no means) means they must limit themselves to such.</p>
<p>stambliark, class rank is but one of many things the UC looks at when considering applicants. The only reason it's been brought to the forefront of recent posts is the UC's unique (vs. privates) obligation to take students ranked a certain way. I'm sure there are hundreds of students ranked outside of the UC's "obligation zone" that get in. A better guage of your competitiveness would be to compare your GPA with that of each UC campus as this has been shown to be what the UC places most of its emphasis on.</p>
<p>The UC's accept the top 12.5% of graduates across the state, and not just by HS. Thus, a top HS could have 50% of its students eligible for UC, whereas a poor performing school may only one student eligible -- even under elc, certain requirements must be met.</p>
<p>The UC's only use grades 10-11 for admission and elc purposes, so you'll be fine; (but, they may request senior grades for borderline cases). However, for purposes of ELC, the UC's recalc everything submitted by each HS, so your HS calc may be incorrect. For example, UC only weights UC-approved honors and AP courses. So, even tho your HS may give honors credit to Geom (and maybe a gpa boost), the UC will not. Also, UC calculates gpa only on academic courses on the a-g list, so PE, health, and basketweaving are out. LOL</p>
<p>ps -- the UC's guarantee admission to all elc apps, but not necessarily at your first choice school. According to a page on the UCOP, last year the elc gurantee schools were SB and Merced. In past years, Irvine has accepted all elc apps, even tho it was not a 'guaranteed' school; Irvine uses elc as a factor under comprehensive review.. </p>
<p>Other than ELC, class rank is not a factor in admissions; it can't be since half of the schools in the state don't rank.</p>
<p>"my UC GPA is 4.25. So as long as I have that # I still have a good chance @ all UC's (given my other stats/ec's are in line)?"</p>
<p>yes, you are above average in terms of GPA for all the UC's and slightly above average for berkeley and UCLA. </p>
<p>just because you AREN'T ELC doesn't mean you'll get rejected... remember, UCLA is only top 4% of high school students. the UC's draw from top 12.5%. all applicants are evaluated through comprehensive review anyway by each individual campus, so don't be caught up on the fact that you didnt get ELC. your GPA is fine and i'll assume your other stats and EC's are too.</p>