<p>Coureur is absolutely correct. The bonus points given to EC activities are dwarfed by the weights given to the scholastic scores. Again, the objective of posting the article was simply to provide a small insight on how certain schools measure the value of EC activities. It is obvious that a student who "maximizes" the bonus points will not undo the effect of inferior scores. I think that is fair to assume that the EC are, more or less, tools to separate equal students. In this regard, it seems that a judicious choice of EC is still important. </p>
<p>Here's an excerpt of the application criteria:</p>
<p>Application Criteria for Freshman Selection Process</p>
<p>Applications from UC-eligible applicants are reviewed comprehensively using the following selection criteria:</p>
<p>High school grade point average, capped at 4.5 (HSGPA)
Required admissions exam scores (two SAT-I + three SAT-II exams)
Achieving UC Eligibility in the Local Context (ELC)
Number of ?a-g? courses beyond 35 semester units
Individual initiative demonstrated by achieving eligibility in a low-performing school
Membership in the Educational Opportunity Program (EOP)
Completion of a pre-collegiate motivational program
First generation of university attendance
Nontraditional university applicant
Veteran/ROTC scholarship
One or more special (extraordinary) talents
Demonstrated leadership promise
Having a significant disability
Demonstrated perseverance or persistence in unusually challenging personal circumstances
Marked improvement in 11th grade (Cs or less to mostly all As)
We thoroughly and carefully review all UC-eligible applicants' records. A score is then determined by assigning points for these criteria and multiplying the points by weights as specified in the Selection Process Scoring System table. Admission decisions are based on the ranking of applicants according to these scores, with higher-scoring applicants in each college, division or major being admitted.</p>
<p>Selection Process Scoring System Table<br>
Point Range Weight Possible Score </p>
<ol>
<li><p>High school GPA (capped at 4.5) 2.8-4.5 1000 4500 </p></li>
<li><p>Five admissions exam scores 200-800 each 1 4000 </p></li>
<li><p>ELC 0 or 1 1000 1000 </p></li>
<li><p>Number of ?a-g? courses beyond 35 0-20 50 1000 </p></li>
<li><p>Individual initiative 0 or 1 500 500 </p></li>
<li><p>EOP 0 or 1 500 500 </p></li>
<li><p>Pre-collegiate motivational program 0 or 1 500 500 </p></li>
<li><p>First-generation university attendance 0 or 1 250 250 </p></li>
<li><p>Nontraditional applicant 0 or 1 250 250 </p></li>
<li><p>Veteran/ROTC scholarship 0 or 1 250 250 </p></li>
<li><p>Special talent 0 or 1 250 250 </p></li>
<li><p>Significant disability 0 or 1 250 250 </p></li>
<li><p>Leadership 0 or 1 250 250 </p></li>
<li><p>Perseverance 0 or 1 250 250 </p></li>
<li><p>Marked improvement in 11th grade 0 or 1 250 250 </p></li>
</ol>
<p>And what's the point of the score? Once the scores are compiled, does anything less than a certain cumulative score auto-reject an applicant? Does a certain cumulative score auto-admit a student? Is there a target for merit aid?</p>
<p>ELC stands for Eligibility in the Local Context and is one of three paths to freshman eligibility to the University of California, along with Eligibility in the Statewide Context and Eligibility by Examination Alone. Under ELC, the top 4 percent of students in each California high school class will be designated UC-eligible based on the coursework taken at the high school.</p>
<p>The University implemented the ELC program to advance several long-held goals:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The ELC program increases the pool of eligible students and is expected to return UC to the guideline set by the California Master Plan for Higher Education, which is that the top 12.5% of public high school graduates will meet the UC eligibility criteria.</p></li>
<li><p>The ELC program gives UC a presence in each California high school and serves to stimulate a college-going culture at those schools that typically do not send many graduates to the University.</p></li>
<li><p>The ELC program recognizes and rewards individual academic accomplishments in the context of the student's high school and the opportunities available to the student.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>At the risk of making people mad, I have to say that the UC guidelines are the very reason I wouldn't want my kids to apply to huge "factory" schools. The difference between a points-driven set of criteria and the individualized admissions scrutiny one gets applying to a small school - especially an elite school, ED - is like night and day. Where my kids ended up, the head of admissions and the president of the school greet me by name and know who my kids are. To me this whole thing is like Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, where the judges have no discretion but must mete out sentences according to the weight of the drugs sold (so why have judges at all? Why not computers?).</p>
<p>Xiggi, believe me, I realize you are not supporting that list, only providing it to posters, thanks! I just still find it disconcerting (as Carolyn agrees also having a son in a varsity sport that takes countless hours each week) regarding varsity sports and no points unless captain or on state championship team. As mentioned, two teams my D played on all four years of high school had no designated captain (and even it if had, it is mostly a title). Rather, she achieved in her sport and was able to show that, plus there was a heavy duty long term commitment to these areas of passion. If under that UC system, it is hard to believe that would not be thought of as garnering "points", almost as if she were just in some bi monthly little club. Weird. </p>
<p>I agree with neDad that it is really a bunch of numbers and stuff and de-personalized. I think it is good to have criteria at any college as a point of reference and as a guideline for each admissions officer but then after one meets some common denominator, I think there needs to be a look at the "whole child" and interpretation of the entire package, a little less rigidly. I think overall that lots of what was on that UC list are things most colleges consider but I cannot imagine they use such a "point" system to that degree for those line items like that. </p>
<p>Momsdream, I also got the impression upon reading the list that you could get points for improving rigor of courses or grades and no extra points for keeping to the 4.0 in the most rigorous courses right along but I'm sure that a student like that does fine under this system but it does give a different interpretation when reading that list. </p>
<p>I agree, momsdream. The "factory schools," as nedad put it, probably have no other choice but to do it by the numbers, but given the choice....it's not the kind of place I'd want to send my kids, either. </p>
<p>I can't think of enough bad things to say about choosing kids this way. It seems there would be way too many variables, and though they try to "formulize" (is that a word??) some of them, it's just deceptive to me: trying to make something "scientific" (ha!) that should be much more individualized. It gives the APPEARANCE of objectivity, but is not...kind of like schools that rank according to the thousandth of a percentage point (ours is one). It looks scientific, but in actual fact, many of the grades that went into the GPA were subjective to begin with (some teachers are far easier graders than others; some allow extra credit; English is notoriously subjective, especially when grading one paper a 92 and another a 91, etc. ).</p>
<p>I've written before about the issue I have with this concept of 'passion' and EC's. Both of my boys are, at heart, math/science types. They each have one science activity throughout middle & high school, some math competitions (which they don't win or even do particularly well on for the most part), and a few minor science things thrown in. One or both of them have won poetry, essay and speech contests, done Model UN, mock trial, youth legislature, DECA stuff, won locally at history fair, won foreign language awards, been on student government, done community service (not a lot), are well liked by their teachers and peers, and participated in recreational league sports for years. One's in the band, the other worked on the threatre tech crew. </p>
<p>All over the place? Yep. But to me and to them high school is a time to experiment and enjoy doing activities that they might not have time to do later. They're discovering new interests and new things about themselves all of the time. One is very active in student government but will probably never be elected as an officer. My shy student can now think on his feet and speak to a room full of people. They're learning about the world around them and the people who inhabit it. The oldest got accepted to a selective summer science program even though I know there were other more qualified 'science' kids applying. I believe it was because he can express his interest in life through his writing. </p>
<p>My oldest is now at MIT, which I doubt my other one will even consider. If colleges don't want him and his scattershot approach then he'll find one that does.</p>
<p>Over30, don't sweat it. I also have written on here in the past about my oldest D who is not someone with one major passion either. She has a varied EC list and is what I think of as the epitome of "well rounded kid" and not a specialist. I will admit that each of her ECs are passions she cares about a lot and are lifelong endeavors but they are quite varied. She even wrote one of her essays about the many sides of herself that centered on this well rounded-ness thing and the "balance" in her life. I have another kid who also was well rounded doing many of the same activities the other kid did for years and years but eventually one area stood out as a bigger passion over the others and she had to stop some activities to pursue this one passion she had had since preschool even more intensely. So, she is one of those kids with a profile or resume where everything on it relates to one area (performing arts). </p>
<p>While I read that the latest "trend" in college admissions is to have one area of passion, I cringe a bit as I do have this one well rounded kid and frankly, in my opinion, one of these "paths" is not better than the other but merely different choices. Both of these profiles would appeal to me as an admissions counselor. When my older D was applying and there were numerous discussions on CC about the schools wanting kids with one passion (oh, also it supposedly had to be "unique"), I worried a little bit that she was this well rounded kid with no one special "hook". However, she did just fine in selective admissions and so I really think that either profile does fine. Or at least I would hope so. </p>
<p>I do believe colleges WILL want a student like your second son....don't fret (not that you sound like you are!).
Susan</p>