<p>I mean you make some very severe statements but for the most part you seem to be spouting any crap that comes to your mind. </p>
<p>And as for "Its association with the UC is the only thing that gives it any credibility." I would actually have to disagree. IMO its comparison with other UCs is the main reason idiots bash it. I am not saying UCR is actually the best college in america or something along those lines, but it is underrated.</p>
<p>bonus points if you can actually use anything other than the US News.</p>
<p>Collegeboard:
Student Body
1st-year students:
* 94% in top 10th of graduating class
* 100% in top quarter of graduating class
* 100% in top half of graduating class</p>
<p>Funny you post those figures (as I had anticipated you would) because they are the only figures that give Riverside some semblance of credibility. Let's examine them.</p>
<p>My suspicious are already aroused when I notice that the 94% figure places UCR above universities such as Stanford (89%), Dartmouth (87%), Duke (87%), Johns Hopkins (80%), Cornell (80%), Northwestern (82%), and on and on down the list. 94% places UC Riverside dead even with Princeton (ha, ha).</p>
<p>This absurdity of the 94% figure is confirmed when one takes a look the figures just a few lines below on the same collegeboard website which you extracted that information. Read below:</p>
<pre><code>* 22% had h.s. GPA between 3.0 and 3.24
* 5% had h.s. GPA between 2.5 and 2.99
</code></pre>
<p>That is 27% of the student body with a GPA below 3.25. Something is not adding up - only 6% of the student body in not in the top 10% of their class yet 27% had a GPA BELOW 3.25!! How could that be?</p>
<p>ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the class is allegedly within the top quarter of the class. What about 5% of the class that has below a 3.0? How could they POSSIBLY be in the top quarter of their class? Preposterous.</p>
<p>Do these figures even pass the laugh test? Do you really think that 94 out of 100 Riverside students were in the top 10 percent of their class? Completely outrageous.</p>
<p>So are you saying that the entire UC system is bugged? Because that 94% is the lowest in the UC system. As for the spread of GPAs between 2.5 - 4.0, it could depend on the GPA system used for the particular high school, and whether or not it refers to unweighted or weighted. Honestly when I saw that it made me curious as well, although for whatever reason i first compared it to yale (91% if i recall)</p>
<p>But anways, if u wish to ignore that then just look at numbers and lets compare it to the other institution in the title of the thread. </p>
<p>UCR:
* 24% had h.s. GPA of 3.75 and higher
* 21% had h.s. GPA between 3.5 and 3.74
* 28% had h.s. GPA between 3.25 and 3.49
* 22% had h.s. GPA between 3.0 and 3.24
* 5% had h.s. GPA between 2.5 and 2.99</p>
<p>Purdue:
* 31% had h.s. GPA of 3.75 and higher
* 24% had h.s. GPA between 3.5 and 3.74
* 14% had h.s. GPA between 3.25 and 3.49
* 18% had h.s. GPA between 3.0 and 3.24
* 12% had h.s. GPA between 2.5 and 2.99
* 1% had h.s. GPA between 2.0 and 2.49</p>
<p>Now, although you do see Purdue with an overall higher concentration in the 3.75 category (by 7%), it seems to also have a higher concentration in the lower end (including that 1% in below 2.5 category.) Does this make Purdue a bad school, because it would based on your conjecture (since standards typically dictate the lower threshold)? Hell no.</p>
<p>Btw the 10th percentile at my school was probably around a 2.9 uw GPA. That tends to happen at strong schools. And if you spent as long of a time here as I have, 94 out of 100 does not seem like that far of a stretch. Actually, my roommate was valedictorian. The numbers from the other colleges do make me curious however, but I think it has something to do with the competition at those private colleges that love to send kids to Ivys and have good reps with them, but that is another issue. (our 5.17 GPA rank 1 got rejected from that 94% princeton)</p>
<p>The whole top 10% of your HS think is blown out of proportion because it assumes all HS have the same quality of students which is clearly not the case. For example, my friend's cousin graduated ranked third in her class and went to LMU ( a good but not great school). Their validictorian went to UCD and their salutarian went to UCI. It wasn't a very good HS so they top 10% could still be a relatively sub par student. Now, another friend of mine was at the bottom of the top 25% of her HS and went to Cornell, even the 15% ranked student out of 350 aka at 50th in his/her class went to Duke.
I would be willing to bet that the students in the top 30% would be better than my first friend cousin's top 1% of her HS. But then, we are comparing a wealthy public HS vs a working class near "ghetto" school.</p>
<p>Coming from CA, UCR in terms of faculty maybe good in comparison to ALL colleges throughout the US, but it's student body is only slighter better than mid tier CSU's. Looking back on the students from my own HS that got into there and went, none were better than an average student by my standards.</p>
<p>Actually I agree with Mike (on his post above his last), I originally just posted numbers in that first response to sf because the numbers at least suggest that UCR is not crappy with admissions. There are obvious deviations such as at rank in your school do kids stop going to college, and at about what rank they go to a JC rather than a college/university. </p>
<p>Unfortunately exactly what those numbers from CB mean could take decades to interpret completely, or for that matter how to determine admission standards. Before this particular fight gets out of hand can we just cut it off at the idea that a college can both be good and easy to get into. (since the ease of entrance is hard to be determined and if we can agree on this, then whole number debate thing can die before it gets out of hand)</p>
<p>In the very house that my girlfriend lives are 4 girls that chose UCR willingly even though they had acceptances to UCB, UCLA, Princeton and various other colleges. Two are leaving the house with nice jobs at google. One is on their way to USC for law, one is still in school and failing misserably along with my gf. But then you have a girl that left the house last year who is working at hp, and another guy who is working for google. This is from one single house full of sorority girls and one frat guy. I cant even name the countless other success stories i have heard when talking to people when they come over for meetings</p>
<p>From the bio majors i know that have graduated, those that actually tried have all gotten into dental programs, medicine pharm, etc. Riverside is a crappy place until you get used to it as i have, and once acclimated, you start finding the little secrets here and there...in turn, it becomes quite likable. It is very easy to find hard working intelligent students, and i dont even go to this school. The faculty is great..albeit many as usual are hard to understand.</p>
<p>I have not been able to get an accurate picture of placement records though for their business program....their oci companies and career fairs are decent at best...this is their worst downfall, a better career center would do wonders at getting UCR out to the public as a quality name. Many of you are fooled by the rumors that float around, it is better than what many percieve</p>
<p>
[quote]
So are you saying that the entire UC system is bugged? Because that 94% is the lowest in the UC system.
[/quote]
Actually, yes. I think the UC's have a different way of calculating top 10% because things just don't add up otherwise.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Btw the 10th percentile at my school was probably around a 2.9 uw GPA. That tends to happen at strong schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Seeing that those students are in the bottom 10%, wouldn't that figure be somewhat typical?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Before this particular fight gets out of hand can we just cut it off at the idea that a college can both be good and easy to get into. (since the ease of entrance is hard to be determined and if we can agree on this, then whole number debate thing can die before it gets out of hand)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't mean to fight, but I have disagree here. Employers use schools as a screening tool. If the "screen" is extremely lax, that's not very impressive to employers.</p>
<p>With regards to difficulty in determining ease of entrance, I very strongly disagree. There are many tools at one's disposal - acceptance rate, middle 50% SAT, average GPA, and so on. When taken individually, they provide an incomplete picture but when taken together they can tell you quite a lot about a school.</p>
<p>by 10th percentile i meant that our 42nd ranked person out of 419 students has a GPA of about 2.8-2.9. </p>
<p>And although employers do use screening process, that is not necessarily applicable to universities. Although typically universities do have the correlation you speak of, some relax their admissions and instead use their curriculum to "weed out" the people who cannot make it. UC Riverside is comparable to that and Purdue definately is one of those. They both lose about 1/6 of every freshman student for one reason or another.</p>
<p>
[quote]
by 10th percentile i meant that our 42nd ranked person out of 419 students has a GPA of about 2.8-2.9.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's late at night and my brain isn't working quite right, but wouldn't that be the 90th percentile?</p>
<p>
[quote]
And although employers do use screening process, that is not necessarily applicable to universities. Although typically universities do have the correlation you speak of, some relax their admissions and instead use their curriculum to "weed out" the people who cannot make it. UC Riverside is comparable to that and Purdue definately is one of those. They both lose about 1/6 of every freshman student for one reason or another.
<p>yes that would be the 90th percentile, i misused the noun percentile by trying to make it mean the person at that particular class %. I was tired too I guess. I have to help orphans in Mexico in the morning so im prepping myself to sleep on a LONG bus ride.</p>
<p>as for sakky, he does make very good points but are those under the assumption that a universities main goal is to improve its name and rankings, rather than to educate? I briefly skimmed his first post and thats the idea i get, about how a college shouldnt do what I mentioned above cuz it reduces certainty.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In the very house that my girlfriend lives are 4 girls that chose UCR willingly even though they had acceptances to UCB, UCLA, Princeton and various other colleges.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you chose UCR over Princeton, I must assume it was either due to substantial financial aid (full ride) or family issues that would require her to be close to home. On the average, UCLA, UCB and Princeton admits DO NOT cross admit into UCR. Like Alexandre said, they are outliers. On a whole, I would not equate UCR's student body to be anywhere comparable to those at the forementioned schools.</p>
<p>If they are working for google then yes they may be outliers. However the Thomas Haider program at UCR attracts A LOT of people to UCR who got into berkeley, or even the ivy leagues and brought them here without any significant difference in financial cost. People come here for that program (basically 24 guaranteed slots in UCLA med school) thinking it will be easy 'cuz its just UCR' and then they get shot in the face by ass-raping bio program its created here. </p>
<p>and on a whole mike, if you do not come here how can you equate us with anything?</p>
<p>i can name out least 50 people accepted to schools UCSD or above going to UCR right now. When i said willingly, the girls in that house are extremely wealthy, coming from orange county, mainly the irvine/villa park area. The driveway is filled with $45k cars, The parents bought them the 600k house because apartments were to small and they recieve ( at least the two sisters who own the house) 3k a month for spending. The other people i know mainly picked this school because they felt it would create the best environment to study in since UCSB is a party school, UCLA, UCB, etc reside in close proximity to everything a college student would need, etc. These are people i have met without actually attending UCR. I am sure i would meet more i if i actually went, not to mention one should be assured if they attend the honors program. </p>
<p>The student body may not be up to par with other schools, that is the only fact, but in every other way, UCR is just as great an environment as the rest of the UC's with the added bonus of less competitiion, yet enough to keep you moving</p>
<p>Actually, i asked about how many people someone knows that have gotten into google over the past few years without any recruitment...15. A few years ago a frat guy first got his job at google after a one year job search. He has done well and has recommended 14 other people and they have all gotten jobs, from their corporate campus in nor cal to nyc. He has even offered to help when i graduate, independent of where i go. Hardwork....he worked hard during that year, but he got what he wanted</p>
and on a whole mike, if you do not come here how can you equate us with anything?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My cousin went to UCR and have visted the campus many times. Do you still believe even if Thomas Haider program does attract some very strong applicants, that your entire student body in your biology program is as talented overall as UCSD or UCB?</p>
<p>they are not as talented as a whole, but you can find plenty that are. There are smart people, those i would consider questionable, lazy and then average. From the people i do know, i would consider 50% of them slightly above average. If they worked harder in high school (many i know are from my high school, so i know their habits) they would be able to attend any UC besides the top 3, and many could have gone to pitzer, occidental or USC. About 15% are absolutely retarded and clueless about what lies ahead of them related to the working world and academics. They have set above standard goals but dont have the academic ability to reach them (at least they are motivated). Now these people i would also classify as the poorest, which for most part is true (most from downtown LA). Could that have a factor in any of this..no, but it is a nice coincidence. About 15% are average. They aren't the greatest students, but from the work i have seen them do when times are eminent and their grades are dependent on the upcoming test/project/paper, the outcome is still just average. They cant see beyond what is being required or seem to grasp the overall concept of a certain text. Then you have 20% who are just plain smart. The coincidence here is that you would never realize this unless you know them beyond their superficial facade. Party girls, frat guys, gaming nerds, etc. The one thing i have noticed with this bunch however is that they have come to this school with a goal. That should be obvious because you would really need one when choosing a school who's disparity is so great in comparison with other schools that have accepted them. </p>
<p>What have i noticed from the students i have encountered at UCR vs USC/UCLA? Most prominent is the hard work and time management i see from the last schools mentioned. I would not consider them necessarily smart, but every student does seem to have at least one specialty that they really understand. This is my generalization..take it or leave it.</p>