<p>Um...Icarus I think that the major is factored in...definitely for EECS at Berkeley.</p>
<p>From Post #14</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>As awful as this is going to sound, I feel a little guilty for having an intact, stable, no big dramas, no issue family life for my Ds, no crisis, everybody is healthy and together.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>I know--it made it difficult to do essay #3 for the UC application.</p>
<hr>
<p>Is essay #3 the "open ended" essay? </p>
<p>My son just wrote a whimsical essay on why he loves fly fishing for that one....</p>
<p>Must have been an OK response. So far, he's received all acceptances from the UCs</p>
<p>Has anyone done an outcome study on the diversity students who were admitted to UCLA and Berkeley with lower scores and GPAs that are mentioned in the above referenced WSJ article? I saw the WSJ article when it first came out and wondered what the retention rate would be for these less-prepared students. Also, I was wondering how these students who are less-prepared would fare when their classes are full of high acheiving students. Do they go to special classes? </p>
<p>I couldn't figure out why these students did not start at less competitive schools in the UC, Cal State or community college systems and then work their way towards UCLA and Berkeley. If it turned out that they are not staying and graduating from UCLA or Berkeley, then the schools are not doing the students any favors by putting them in schools that they are not ready for academically.</p>
<p>Thanks to anothercollegemom for starting this great thread. We were amazed when going through this process last year just how much not having hardship worked against UC applicants. I can't help but wonder how they do things in other states. Maybe it's just a California thing, but I'd love to hear from others in different states about the criteria for admissions to their state schools. Hopefully this thread will help prepare others who will be going through the UC admissions process in the years to come.</p>
<p>I am one of those students who took a heavy load in their sophmore and junior year thinking that by taking 6 AP's and all a-g requirements would give me an extra chance at the top tier UC's. All it did was lower my gpa and my fellow classmates that only took two to three AP's are ranked significantly higher and were ELC. They were able to maintain their high gpa and were accepted to the top tier schools. I did apply to a highly impacted major: engineering, but I have completed 12 semesters of math. I have taken every math course at my school including AP Calc. and AP Stat. My senior year I'm currently taking Calc II at a CC. I have taken over 40 semesters of a-g required courses. If I were to do it all over again I would of kept my AP courses at a max. of 4 by junior year and I would of been able maintain a high gpa. By taking 6 AP's my 10/11th, my gpa dropped from a 3.83 to a 3.67 UC gpa because of the cap. I did get accepted to all the mid tier UC's school of engineering, but I guess I am just a little bitter because of the course load, 300+ comm. hrs, and the educational programs I attended during the summer (UC sponsored) didn't seem to make a difference at the top tier schools. I am still keeping my fingers crossed for Berkeley.</p>
<p>SoCalGirl - sorry, but Engineering, by definition, is a numbers game...but, do the math -- if you took 3 AP's each year and earned a B, that would be a 3.0 + bonus point = 4.0 for UC gpa. If your colleagues took a college prep course and earned an A, they still would only have 4.0, but you would have strength of schedule. AGAIN, UC elc is uncapped.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Honestly, that is what we were told at an advising session at our HS.
And it definitely didn't seem correct, and it seemed in the end that the opposite may have been true...but I certainly meant 'seemed' and 'may'. I stress, this just anecdotal info!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No I understand - I'm sorry for coming off a little mean. But I do know (from several sources, including an adcom member) that your declared major has no impact on your admissions to UCLA (and I would be willing to bet most other UCs) - now granted, this information was true when I was admitted 3 years ago, so its possible its changed, but I would doubt it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Um...Icarus I think that the major is factored in...definitely for EECS at Berkeley
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sorry, see the above reply. EECS is a completely different thing entirely, since it is a completely separate school. So its not so much that major is factored in with EECS as the fact that you aren't applying with the rest of the students.</p>
<p>Essay #3 is the open-ended essay--and is designed to bring out obstacles that the applicant has overcome--learning disability, poor background, first generation college, you name it. If you don't have a story, whimsy is good!</p>
<p>Some of the UCs give admission points for first generation to go to college, participation in an outreach program or AVID, etc. Doesn't affect the kids at the top end of the application pool, but for a kid on the cusp, those points can be tip factor to getting in (or not getting in).</p>
<p>
[quote]
I disagree with most posts on this thread. It sounds to me like sour grapes thread that really comes down to the fact that the UC system favors kids with higher GPAs. The comprehensive review process provides an avenue for kids with less than stellar stats to explain the reasons -- it doesn't undermine or negate the chances of kids with strong stats.
[/quote]
Well, according to the article I posted earlier, "At the Davis campus, a combination of outreach and attending a low-ranked high school counts for 1,000 points toward 7,000 needed for admission. That's equivalent to the difference between a 3.0 and 4.0 grade-point average. Signing up for an 'educational opportunity program' adds 500 more points." 1500 points out of 7000 sounds like a little more than an "avenue to explain reasons"; it sounds like the difference between admit and deny.</p>
<p>collegialmom -- the UC system has a minimum set of requirements to be "eligible" for admissons. The comprehensive review process doesn't change the requirements for admission - which requires either a certain combination of GPA/SAT scores or top 4% GPA at the student's high school. </p>
<p>The UC system also requires very specific course work to be completed in high school.</p>
<p>Thus there are no students at UC who could be considered unprepared -- by definition every student has completed required high school course work with a minimum GPA. All that comprehensive review does is provide a way for students who come from less than optimal backgrounds to provide explanatory material -- in a way to level the playing field between kids from disadvantaged backgrounds and those who have the good fortune to attend better quality high schools. </p>
<p>The vast majority of criteria considered under comprehensive review are academic, including: </p>
<ol>
<li> High school grade point average in UC-required courses</li>
<li>Standardized test scores</li>
<li>Number of, content of and performance in academic courses completed beyond the Universitys minimum eligibility requirements</li>
<li>Number of, and performance in honors and AP courses</li>
<li>Being identified as eligible in the local context by ranking in the top 4 percent of the high school class, as determined by the Universitys academic criteria</li>
<li>Quality of the senior year program, as measured by the type and number of academic courses in progress or planned</li>
<li>Quality of academic performance relative to educational opportunities available in the applicant's school</li>
<li>Outstanding performance in one or more academic subject areas</li>
<li>Outstanding work in one or more special projects in any academic field
<ol>
<li>Recent marked improvement in academic performance</li>
<li>Special talents, achievements, and awards in a particular field, or experiences that demonstrate unusual promise for leadership or ability to contribute to the intellectual vitality of the campus</li>
<li>Completion of special projects that offer significant evidence of an applicants special effort and determination or that may indicate special suitability to an academic program on a specific campus</li>
</ol></li>
</ol>
<p>Only two factors are nonacademic, or allow consideration of factors that are not related to achievement or ability: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>Academic accomplishments in light of an applicants experiences and circumstances, such as disabilities, low family income, first generation to attend college, need to work, disadvantaged social or educational environment, difficult personal and family situations or circumstances, refugee status or veteran status</p></li>
<li><p>Location of the applicants secondary school and residence, to provide for geographic diversity in the student population and to account for the wide variety of educational environments existing in California</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Each campus uses its own procedures for comprehensive review, but of those that do use a fixed numerical score system, there are far more points available from items 1-12 on the list than 13 & 14.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I couldn't figure out why these students did not start at less competitive schools in the UC, Cal State or community college systems and then work their way towards UCLA and Berkeley.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The Cal State system is NOT a feeder to the UCs - there is no transferability from Cal State to a UC, or from a UC to Cal State. There are community colleges that are feeders to UC, but not Cal State.</p>
<p>awh is correct. It is extremely difficult to tranfer from a Cal State to a UC, since those transfer spots are designed/planned/saved for community college transfers.</p>
<p>elemenope: all UC's give credit for the social items you mentioned. Indeed, to our credit, the UC's accept the highest proportion of low income kids in the country (Pell Grantees =~33% of all students). Contrast that with another top public, UVa, which, until recently, only had 6-7% Pell Grantees.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, I think it is a mistake to beleive that one needs to have faced adversity to be accepted to Cal or UCLA -- it just ain't so. All of the top gpa kids in our suburban HS (little adversity in this town) were accepted to UCLA (including several into Engineering) but one student -- likely his essay, but no one knows and he's not telling.</p>
<p>The article posted earlier about University also requires a little background....UCLA is sending Uni HS a Tufts-syndrome message, IMO. For years, UCLA would accept 60+ students from Uni HS each and every year (it's one of the top public, non-magnet high schools in the state), but less than half would matriculate to Westwood.... </p>
<p>However, University HS is the top feeder to USC (high stat kids wooed with their merit scholarships), and Uni kids tend to prefer Cal over UCLA, when admitted to both, so a couple of years ago, UCLA accepted less than 20 Uni kids....</p>
<p>I'm a student. How do UC's know that you're low income? UCLA rejected me(i have a very low UC-capped GPA) and had no idea we're very very low income. Could that be a compelling reason for appealing?</p>
<p>^ Um, not so much, hideANDseek - financial need is definitely not a part of the UC's admissions process.</p>
<p>Actually,if you look under UCSDs comprehensive review it outlines the factors considered for admission and states specifically that consideration will be given to family size and low income. Whether that is a factor for appeal at UCLA ? I guess it is worth calling and asking.</p>
<p>Actually in the UCSD review, you get 300 extra points for low family income, 300 points if neither parent is a college grad, 500 points for personal challenges ( special circumstances), and another 300 points for educational environment ( attending a low performing high school).
If these issues apply to you and weren't apparent in your application, then maybe you should call.</p>
<p>My husband has a friend teaching at CAL who said that he has participated in admissions and that these types of factors are absolutely points of consideration at CAL ( and would also be at UCLA). So, I'd check.</p>
<p>One of my child's best friends that is attending UCLA got in with nearly the same GPA and lower SATs than my child ( Had the same two significant ECs). The major difference : 5 kids in the family, neither parent graduated from college, dad came here from a seriously war-torn country and works very very hard...lives in another city because his job is far away and the kids were settled in their schools. He comes home on weekends. Great family, great kids. And those factors most likely tipped the scales.</p>
<p>Socaligirl,
Thanks for the response, that is also the situation in my child's case. The only non-honors/AP classes she took in HS were the 3 classes she was required to take that did not have honors options...other than those 3...evey single academic class all 4 yrs was honors or AP>
Her friends who took a limited amt of honors/AP fared much better because it really helped their GPA. </p>
<p>Can you tell me ( or anyone else?), are the 'regular' classes tremendously easier at your school as compared to the honors classes?
At our high school it was really effortless for my child to get an A in those 3 regular classes. The honors classes were very tough. I remember in the frosh honors english ( about 60 kids), only 2 kids got As. ( My child was one of 2 the teacher told us).</p>
<p>The black graduation rate at UCLA is 73% (for whites is 88%) and black graduation rate at berkeley is 70% (for whites is 86%). I don't have fugures for Hispanics or Asians. Is it possible that in its zeal to make these two institutions "more like California", they are actually making it harder for students to succeed who are not as prepared, ie if 30% don't make it through? In those cases, wouldn't it be better to get some finishing touches at the CC level, or go to less competitive schools, then to not get a degree at all?</p>
<p>You know,anothercollegemom, last year my D and some of her friends gave a talk to our church's youth group about their college admissions experiences. Their anecdotal conclusions were the same as yours, and flew in the face of conventional wisdom - getting higher grades in less-rigorous courses seemed to give their classmates an advantage in college admissions. This wasn't "sour grapes", by any means - each of these girls was admitted to excellent schools. </p>
<p>On the plus side, my daughter's AP and college course credits gave her sophomore standing at her UC.</p>
<p>And, Icarus, for at least some schools, the choice of a major DOES matter - my D applied to UCLA as a Musical Theater major, an impacted major which requires an audition as well as excellent stats. I strongly suspect she would have had a better chance applying as "undeclared", as friends with stats similar to hers applying to other majors were admitted to UCLA and she was not.</p>
<p>I still advise my younger children to take the most challenging classes they can handle, but NOT because it will give them an edge when it comes to college admissions. And particularly with my highly-motivated youngest, I'm going to make sure she doesn't bite off more than she can comfortably chew.</p>
<p>anothercolegemom - are the "honors" classes you're referring to approved (i.e. weighted) by UC? Our high school has both - some honors classes are UC weighted and some aren't. Both types, of course, are tougher than the mainstream ones.</p>
<p>You know, the thing here is that we're not discussing whether a kid gets into college or not, or gets to attend UC or not. This entire discussion really revolves around which UC our kids get into. For the students being discussed who don't get into Cal or UCLA or UCSD, it's likely that they'll be accepted into UCSB, Irvine, Davis, UCSC, Riverside or Merced. I can't speak for Merced, as it's new, but they'll get a 1st class education at any of the rest. What they may miss is some of the prestige of UCLA or Cal - but undergraduate prestige of the UCLA/Cal nature isn't really all that big of a deal. A graduate from any of the other UC's will be just as prepared for postgraduate study, employment, or whatever. I can't get too exercised about a thumb on the scales in favor of kids from less favorable backgrounds getting whatever prestige boost comes with going to Cal or UCLA over a similarly talented kid who may have been born with other advantages.</p>