<p>Looking at the latest UC admissions statistics this year, it looks like UCSB has dropped behind both UCI and UCD academically.</p>
<p>Look at these numbers:</p>
<p>Looking at UCI and UCD's sudden gain and overtake of UCSB, do you guys think UCSB is not as "up and coming" as schools such as UCI, UCD, and UCSD are?</p>
<p>Sh-t. This really upsets me, because I really want to go to UCSB, and yet I don’t want to go to the “easy-to-get-into” school.</p>
<p>WHY did UCD and UCI accept me?? YOU BASTARDS. NOW I HAVE TO CHOOSE.</p>
<p>Ugh.</p>
<p>Uh no, this is just a single year. Both Irvine and Davis were slightly more selective this year than Santa Barbara, maybe next year Santa Barbara may “overtake” Irvine and Davis as well. Anyways, this doesn’t really say that UCSB is stagnating academically.</p>
<p>Seriously same here. I could go to schools like UCSD but I liked UCSB the most. </p>
<p>I’m just wondering if this is some one year trend or if UCSB is going to get toasted by Davis/Irvine/San Diego in the near future. Hell, even Santa Cruz is getting close!</p>
<p>Who said ucsb was easy to get into?</p>
<p>Its just that the budget cuts affect irvine and davis more than it did to ucsb.</p>
<p>any college can start buckling down on admissions, accepting even more qualified students to “pad” their admissions statistics.</p>
<p>Part of this may be because of UCSB’S location. Most people who apply for colleges live in no cal or so cal. Ucsb is closer to the middle. Of the “middle” UCs, most people choose UCI and UCD because they are closer to where they live, so cal and no cal, respectively. They need to accept more so it can be easier to fulfill UCSB’s target incoming freshman class.</p>
<p>Funny thing is, last year, UCD had a 52% acceptance rate, with UCI and UCSB about the same at 48-49%. So does that automatically make UCI and UCSB better? you look at how strong of a program a school offers you in your field of interest, not a bunch of statistics on freshman admissions. Did you think UCD AND UCI suddenly “pulled away from the pack” in one year? Have you thought about the recession?</p>
<p>^Choosing schools based on acceptance rate is one of the worst ways to chose a college. (Edit: to post #2)</p>
<p>As for the first post, I’m too tired to dig out statistics now (but I will tomorrow!), but let me just say that year-to-year variance is so wild that I don’t know how you can possibly detect a trend based on one year.</p>
<p>
Look at the trends. UCSB went from 54.7% to 48.4%. UCI went from 55.6% to 42.8%. And UCD went from 58.5% to 46.2%. UCI and UCD both started higher, and ended lower.</p>
<p>Moreover, each of these trends was consistent over three years.</p>
<p>
Tell that to an employer who judges a university by its selectivity.</p>
<p>And in 2004, Davis’s admission rate was 54.7%. In 2005, it was 60.8%. In 2006, it was 67.8%. This trend was consistent over 3 years. So of course, Davis’s admission in 2009 must be something in the 80% range, correct?</p>
<p>Haha thanks rc251 that makes me feel somewhat better.</p>
<p>yawn… </p>
<p>then stop choosing… choose uci already because it has the lowest acceptance rate of all 3!</p>
<p>if you made it to ucla or berkeley and are majoring in business, you should just stop thinking and go to ucla because it has a lower acceptance rate even though ucb has the best business school in the uc system</p>
<p>
I’m pretty sure Haas has a lower acceptance rate than UCLA’s Business Economics program.</p>
<p>Snowc1b: Basing your education on the amount of people the school rejects is not the best way to choose your school. If your assumption is right, then Berkeley is a vastly inferior school to UCLA because their admit rate increased to 29.5% while UCLA’s admit rate decreased to 22.1%. This is obviously not true and your logic is incorrect. Even if it were true, how would the minimal differences affect how your professors and TAs teach.</p>
<p>The reason why several UCs have decreased their admissions is due to the significant budget cuts by the University of California as a whole. These adjustments are different for each school and are based on the schools current population and future growth. None of this affects your individual major or education.</p>
<p>Ugh, you guys drive me crazy with your armchair statistics. First of all, UC Irvine and UC Davis’s higher drop in admittance rate (proportionally) was due to the fact that their enrollment cuts were proportionally large than UCSB’s. See here for details:</p>
<p>[University</a> of California - UC Newsroom | UC Regents approve plans to trim enrollment, freeze senior management pay as part of response to state budget challenge](<a href=“http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/19314/]University”>http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/19314/)</p>
<p>Also, let me let you in on a little secret…</p>
<p>UCSB’s growth is governed heavily by the California Coastal Commission because of it’s location on the ocean. As a result, UCSB has to jump through LOTS of hoops in order to increase enrollment. As of now, UCSB has a hard cap of 20,000 total students set by it’s previous long range development plan. In the 2025 LRDP, UCSB plans to eventually increase enrollment to 25,000 people, after much compromise with the city of Goleta, County of Santa Barbara, and CCC. </p>
<p>As of now, the proportion of graduate students is 13%. UCSB plans to increase that to 17% with it’s 2025 LRDP. By the law of math, that means that 83% are projected to undergraduates for a total enrollment of 20,750 by 2025, up from 17,400 (using those same percentages) in 2008. So UCSB is planning on adding 3,300 undergrads.</p>
<p>Compare this to Irvine and Davis, who intend to grow a lot more. For example, UC Irvine plans to grow to 23,725 undergraduates by 2015 according to their documents, from 19,051 currently. So that’s 4,674 undergrads they plan to add.</p>
<p>UC Davis plans to enroll 5,300 freshmen per Fall class in 2020 according to documents I found on their website. What does this mean? While Irvine and Davis will grow, UCSB will stay small, decreasing the pool of possible students creating lower admission rates.</p>
<p>The point is, there are so many factors that can modify admission rates, looking at a couple years trends and taking it at face value without considering all the variables is crazy.</p>
<p>Or, you can just go to the school and be happy!! </p>
<p>PS: The year I chose to attend UCSB, it’s acceptance rate went up 3% to 53%.</p>
<p>I’m a little worried about UCSB being the weaker of the middle-tier UC’s as well. But I’m not paranoid about it. Looking at those numbers, Davis and Irvine simply had less space than UCSB; they could only take in 18.1k and 17.5k respectively, while UCSB admitted 19.6k students. To me, this is definitely a budget issue rather than anything signifying academics, and pushes UCSB apart from UCI/UCD in terms of “selectivity.” Also, UCI had a slightly higher number of applicants than UCSB, contributing to their lower admission rate.</p>
<p>So there’s my armchair statistics contribution :P</p>
<p>^Actually, their freshman enrollment classes, as posted in my regents link, were larger than UCSB’s. However, UCSB has a lower historic yield rate than those campuses, hence the higher admission rate. Again, there are MANY MANY variables to admission statistics that you guys have to consider.</p>
<p>What do you think are the reasons for the low yield rate?</p>
<p>^ Traditionally, not alot of people choose UCSB because of its location (Irvine is closer to SoCal while Davis serves NoCal).</p>
<p>Maybe the “party” reputation throws them off.</p>
<p>One of the main reasons I want to go to UCSB is specifically because it’s “out of the way”. I live in Irvine, and UCI is the last UC I’d want to attend.</p>
<p>One theory I have is the cascading-ranking effect. Unlike myself, heh, many people choose to go to school in their area of the state. So Southern Californians will rank their UC choices as</p>
<p>1) Schools in Socal
2) The best UC possible
3) The closest UC possible</p>
<p>So lets say that a Socal’er applies to all the Socal UC’s. Lets say they get into all. They will likely choose UCLA, yield rate of 37.4. They don’t get into UCLA but they do in the rest? How bout UCSD then, yield rate of 22.7. They don’t get into UCSD? Hmm, well now you have some options. Irvine or SB? Well, if they are equivalent academically, why not stay closer to home and choose Irvine, yield rate of 22.2.</p>
<p>I think this ends up biasing UCSB’s yield rate, which drops down to 18.9%. Now, this is less of an issue in Northern California, where there aren’t really UCs of equal rankings (Berkeley tier 1, UC Davis tier 3, UCSC tier 4). This also explains why UCSC’s yield rate is higher than SB’s.</p>
<p>Of course, this is all anecdotal evidence. Just my observations, hope that makes sense!</p>