<p>Is it random... or simply the lower-end?</p>
<p>I think it's the lower-end. Does anyone think or have evidence that indicates otherwise?</p>
<p>I was browsing through the Accepted Thread and quite a few had Sats of 1400+ with good ecs, some even better than the fall, and got into spring. I highly doubt the lower end would be that.</p>
<p>it is random man. that's just life. but it's a FACT that spring students have a higher overall UCB GPA and higher graduation rate.</p>
<p>^that might be because they're trying to prove that they're not second rate</p>
<p>as far as spring admission goes. ive heard that they do it for people who they think will not get into a top private like harvard but are way better than most admits at lower UCs. it is argued that these UC admits will prefer UCB, even if it is in the spring. </p>
<p>about this lower-end speculation, i think its the exact opposite. for example, i know a lot of people who were lower end and and got in for the fall. nobody that was accepted from my school who had a 1300 or lower was accepted for spring. (8 people, all URMs). at the same time, nobody that was accepted from my school who had higher than a 1450 was accepted for anything EXCEPT spring. (12 people, no URMs)</p>
<p>this means that they are desperatly trying to diversify things and will stop at nothing to accomplish it. </p>
<p>sad, but true.</p>
<p>there is a berkeley website where you can query on the stats for admits going back for a number of years, both spring and fall. (sorry, I didn't bookmark it and don't feel like re-searching right now).Anyways, I did some queries last year, and it does substantiate the assertion that with respect to statistic profile, the spring admits have lower stats than fall admits. As I recall, it was ever so slightly lower. </p>
<p>I have 2 co-workers whose children were spring admits. My son was too. I don't know anyone at work whose child was admitted to UCB as a fall freshman admit. Maybe, spring admission is for children of high tech workers?</p>
<p>Finemeal, who have you heard "as far as spring admission goes. ive heard that they do it for people who they think will not get into a top private like harvard but are way better than most admits at lower UCs," from? Just curious- it's an interesting idea.</p>
<p>Youc conclusion's a very solemn but possibly true account of the practice, but because we only have these limited anecdotal bits of evidence, we should not say, "and THAT is why they do it that way."</p>
<p>Edit: This was written before the post above it was on the wall, so I am responding to the post before that.</p>
<p>my roommate told me that a similar thing happened at her school and then we were asking floormates and they said that though A LOT of times it wasn't the rule, they definetly thought that the admissions office wants lower-end people that increase economic and racial diversity in the FALL because otherwise those people might choose another university or none at all. someone then claimed to know that for a fact.</p>
<p>Lower-end, but looking at pure statistics doesn't really tell you anything. "Lower-end" essentially means those who were on the cut line. This can totally mean a 1500 SAT person. Why? Well, the rest of his/her application probably didn't stack up to regular admits. Just because one has a higher SAT score does not mean he/she is a better applicant, so how is it possible that anyone can arrive at the conclusion that just because the Spring Admits' average SAT scores were higher (which is, in fact, not the case) means that there is a randomness or even a Tufts Syndrome aspect (blah! I know...) to the admissions process. For those of you who are pondering whether Spring Admissions is for persons of high calibre and whom the UCB Admissions Office thought were not likely to matriculate, please let that thought out of your mind. For one, most students who manage to get accepted to top schools easily get through Berkeley's less stringent, less demanding admissions process (Disclaimer: only applicable to California residents; keep in mind that each school has a different set of standards and values that they look for in an applicant, so it is very difficult to compare a UC Berkeley admit to an admit from any other school, so please spare us your examples of 'I know one guy who got into Harvard but didn't get into Berkeley...'). Those who do (get into other top schools, besides Berkeley) are likely recipients of the Chancellors & Regent's Scholarship.</p>
<p>In the end, the most probable explanation is that while UCB can handle the number of Fall Admits + Spring Admits in the classrooms at one time, the University simply cannot accomodate all these students for dorm housing. So, UCB pushes back some admits ('lower-end' of the admit pool) to the Spring semester when a larger number of students travel abroad and vacate housing. Hope that answered some questions,</p>
<p>TTG</p>
<p>
[quote]
Those who do (get into other top schools, besides Berkeley) are likely recipients of the Chancellors & Regent's Scholarship.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know about that. If you read this link's page and the site in general, it says that 200 people get this award yearly, and 600 continue to receive it. Now, only 200 people a yeard at Berkeley got into other top scools? I don't think so. Depending on what you consider "likely" and how you define a "top school," you are either correct or incorrect.</p>
<p><a href="http://students.berkeley.edu/fao/Scholarships/RCSselct.html%5B/url%5D">http://students.berkeley.edu/fao/Scholarships/RCSselct.html</a> , it makes it</p>