<p>From my friends who got the talent or EC supp questionnaire, it had nothing to do with being borderline. It was just verification that they weren’t puffing up the talent or ECs.</p>
<p>Thanks, Watermark. He is very excited to be going to Cal. I finally understand the questionnaire which is good. You are right. There really was nowhere on the UC application to go into detail about his athletic accomplishments, and the questionnaire enabled him to not only highlight those but explain some of the challenges that exist when pursuing a sport at that level. As to the lower stat admissions, I was just so surprised to read the earlier comment about those admitted with a GPA of 2.9-3.1. That seems pretty low to me but I wasn’t thinking about their high school rank, lower income family, etc. Bottom line is acceptance at the top universities can be a bit of a crap shoot. Everyone just needs to do their very best, apply, and then just wait and see where the chips fall… It all works out in the end.</p>
<p>Congrats Momfirst3 to you and your son! It’s nice to hear about good scholar/athletes. The kids I was referring to from a private school with the low stats are definitely not low income, nor are they in the higher rankings. At their school they are in the bottom half. That’s why it was so surprising when they were admitted. At the public high school, the same stats apply to the kids I mentioned. There were a couple of kids with much higher stats who got into some UC’s, but not UCLA or Cal.</p>
<p>Hmmmm. I guess that just confirms my whole belief that admissions to the top schools really is a crap shoot. I have three children and I still haven’t been able to figure it out. This year was so very difficult with regards to admissions. I am just thankful that my youngest was trying to get in this year. He had the best stats of all my kids and he needed them!</p>
<p>I don’t believe any of these stories of kids with 3.0s and 1700 SATs getting in to UCLA, Berkeley, heck, I wouldn’t believe it for UCSD, UCSB, UCD, and UCI. The only way a student with stats like those to have a chance with any of those schools I listed is if they were a top athlete and were getting a scholarship, especially for UCLA and UCB. I know UCSD, UCSB and some of the other UC’s do their admissions based on a point system were they give points to your application based on GPA, tests scores, extra-curriculars, special achievements, ect. They also give points to students who have achieved in spite of bad life circumstances but the amount of points awarded for that is not great enough to put a student with mediocre stats over the top Then they set a cut-off and anyone who gets below the set amount is rejected and anyone who meets it is accepted. So there is no way a kid with mediocre stats could get in any of those schools because they wouldn’t meet the cut-off, unless they were going in an athletic scholarship. I had a friend with near a 3.7 GPA and over 1900 in her SAT’s and she was rejected by UCSB, UCI, and waitlisted at Davis. I know plenty of people with 4.0s and SAT scores higher than 2000 rejected from UCLA, and UCB so It’s hard to believe kids with mediocre stats get into those schools.</p>
<p>
I disagree. Let’s do some math here. According to UCSD’s point systerm -
GPA points = GPA x1000
SAT points = total SAT x0.8
Also,
Education Envioronment 300 pt
Low income 300 pt
First generation 300 pt
Special Challenge 500 pt
Total for the special points is 1400 pt (300+300+300+500).</p>
<p>Say student A is 3.0 GPA/1700 SAT but get all the 1400 special points. For simplicity, let’s apply
1000 point to boot GPA, 1000pt/1000 = 1.0 GPA increase
400 point to boot SAT reasoning score. 400pt/0.8 = 500 in SAT increase
This would bring student A with 3.0/1700 to have the same total points with a 4.0/2200 student without the above special points.</p>
<p>Hopefully, my math above is correct. It might be hard for any student to earn the total 1400 points and I didn’t take SAT II into consideration. (Most likely, low SAT I will accompany w/ low SAT II), but it’s enough to illustrate those points are significant. Once you do the math, you won’t be surprised anymore.</p>
<p>so this is off topic a bit but do any of you know of a student who was accepted to a UC but got a D in the second semester? What happened to them? Rescinded? Accepted?</p>
<p>there seems to be a lot of misinformation (borne of frustration and disappointment) circulating about admissions to UC–especially after this highly competitive admissions cycle (fall 2010). thanks alamemom for helping to dispel the myths and insert some facts and basic realities. </p>
<p>accurate information is readily available to anyone who’s willing to do the necessary research (which is what i’m assuming the person who started this thread would do), rather than accepting some of the blatant inaccuracies stated as ‘fact’–more like high school rumors–presented on this thread.</p>
<p>i know alamemom already cleared this up but i think it bears repeating: NO, being a “minority” does not get considered by the UC system. prop. 209 helped see to that years ago. please get informed!</p>
<p>@Watermark
After you put it that way, I should have applied to UCSD. I might have had a chance to get in and get those 1400 points.</p>
<p>@3down
I got a D second semester of junior year in Pre-Cal and got into three UC’s. I explained it in my personal statement. One failing grade will not automatically cause you to get rejected. One of my mom’s friend son got a D in class and still got in UCB because he still had over a 4.0 despite the D and good SAT scores, but that was a few years ago. I am sure that if your GPA and SAT scores are high enough, even with a D, you could get in any of the UCs. I am not aware that any UC has an admissions policy to reject anyone who has gotten a D or F in a class (unless its senior year, but that’s another topic).</p>
<p>Yes, they most definitely rescind with a D or an F senior year…</p>