<p>^ Well, the way you worded it you said you would choose between schools, when you can only do that if you get into them all in the first place. :P</p>
<p>As much as I love Michigan, I would also have to say UVA. 2 of my friends from my high school got into Michigan back in November but got waitlisted at UVA.</p>
<p>Whats the order of difficulty out of: UCLA, UCBerk, UVa?</p>
<p>My guess is, from what I’ve heard, the UCs are easier OOS now, so in this order from most to least selective: UVa, Cal, and UCLA.</p>
<p>[University</a> of California: StatFinder](<a href=“http://statfinder.ucop.edu/statfinder/default.aspx]University”>http://statfinder.ucop.edu/statfinder/default.aspx)</p>
<p>Cal class of 2012.</p>
<p>Everyone
GPA(UW) SAT(min) Total Apps # Admits #Enroll #rate yield
4.0 2100 2,144 1,747 347 81.5 19.9
3.8-3.99 2100 2,208 1,463 485 66.3 33.2</p>
<p>CA only
4.0 2100 1,386 1,267 264 91.4 20.8
3.8-3.99 2100 1,576 1,186 418 75.3 35.2</p>
<p>As you can see, it’s harder for students out of state.</p>
<p>Assuming you’re a 4.0 student with a minimum 2100 on your SAT,
if you’re a CA resident, your chance of getting in is 91.4%
if you’re a non-CA resident, your chance of getting in is only 63.3%</p>
<p>Assuming you’re a 3.8-3.99 with a minimum 2100,
CA resident, rate 75.3%
non-CA resident, rate 43.83%</p>
<p>
Stop spreading lies.</p>
<p>
Average stats at UVa and UNC are 100-150 points lower than Cal/UCLA. How is it any easier to get in OOS since OOS stats are actually higher than at Cal/UCLA? </p>
<p>UNC-CH
Middle 50% scored between 1180 and 1380</p>
<p>Middle 50% ranges for the three subscores:
Critical Reading: 590690
Mathematics: 590690
Writing: 620700</p>
<p>^Because UNC and UVa are known as being extremely hard to get into OOS.</p>
<p>middsmith:</p>
<p>It’s much easier to get into UVa and UNC instate than OOS. Unlike Cal and UCLA where the in-state and OOS numbers are not too dissimilar, the OOS unhooked acceptees at UVa and UNC tend towards the top quartile of the scores.</p>
<p>btw: the numbers in your post #25 for Cal need to account for the fact that some OOS’ers don’t complete a year-long VAPA course and in effect, are automatically rejected regardless of test scores and gpa.</p>
<p>^^also, middsmith, it’s really important to finely parse the numbers to compare apples to apples. (Of course, the schools refuse to release the data so we can!)</p>
<p>For example, that 91% acceptance rate that you reference is comprised of both low income and high income kids – more of the latter, I’m sure. But, the OOS applicants are almost all high income, full pay kids (since the UCs have poor finaid). However, UC also gives big bonus points for low income applicants. Thus, that 91% instate acceptance rate could be comprised of 99.9% of low income applicants with those stats, but only ~80% of wealthy applicants (just a guess to make a point). Thus, the differential between instate and OOS is not that great as it first appears – unlike UVa and UNC where the differential is huge. And, we need to be cognizant that UVa treats OOS legacies as instaters for admission purposes, but reports them (correctly) as OOS’ers. Thus, unhooked OOS’ers are even worse off when applying to Charlottesville!</p>
<p>
No. Applicants can’t get pass step 5 or something if they don’t have the art course. So they can’t even complete their application. </p>
<p>
I don’t think so.<br>
Also, to clarify the minimum 2100, it means each section is 700-800.<br>
The number does not account for those who have 2100s but with 650, 750, 700 breakdown.<br>
Do you agree high SAT students = wealthy? Remember it’s minimum 2100 with all section >700. </p>
<p>How can those two schools with massive score difference be harder to get into compare to Cal/UCLA. I think the average stats for OOS at Cal/UCLA might be slightly (not much, perhaps 20-40 points) higher than the instates, and should be 50-100 higher than the OOS at UVA,UNC-CH.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is not correct. Anyone can apply with any record. Indeed, many instaters plan to complete a required a-g course during senior year. But if they don’t complete the course (drop it mid-year) or pass it with an appropriate grade, any conditional acceptance is automatically withdrawn after the transcripts arrive. It appears as a “rejection” for reporting purposes on the CDS, but in effect the applicant was not minimally eligible to apply in the first place. (Indeed, this is how some are “rejected” by Merced.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which part don’t you agree with? That UC gives bonus points to low income applicants? That some low income applicants might have great stats? That most OOS applicants to Cal are full pay, i.e., top ~5% income earners in the country?</p>
<p>
That’s because they actually listed the course on the app. I remember it was one of the check box when I applied. You don’t need to “complete” it. If you have it on the app saying you’re taking it during your senior year, you should be able to complete the app.
Deadline is at the end of Nov, so if you’re taking it, it should be on the app. I really doubt a significant number of OOS put down they’re taking the art course when they don’t.
Just because A is true, B is true, C is true doesn’t mean A&B&C is true.
Since we’re talking about the tippy top, most come from well to do families. Even if there are a few ragamuffins in the mix, it wouldn’t change the number in any significant way.
What I said was:
- OOS acceptance rate is harder than IS. (don’t look at the aggregated 22% IS vs. 28% OOS, because at the lower end, there is no OOS)
- OOS at Cal/UCLA should have higher stats than at UVA/UNC-CH since average stats at Cal/UCLA is quite higher than UVA/UNC-CH. </p>
<p>If SATs for OOS at UNC-CH are 150 higher than IS, then they’re just average at Cal/UCLA.<br>
It’s incredibly hard for OOS to gain admissions at Cal/UCLA if their stats are at the average.</p>