<p>It is random and it is not about who has the highest GPA (at least for transfers). The GPAs admitted are all over the place, and plenty of 3.5+ applicants have not heard from ANY UC as of yet.</p>
<p>I agree that the order is most likely random.</p>
<p>It would actually be less process intensive to deliver results randomly than it would to sort results into a specific order.</p>
<p>However, it’s difficult to say whether or not the results actually are random. There could be some sort of grouping algorithm in use with variables we aren’t aware of. This part of the process is very opaque.</p>
<p>What’s important here is not whether or not the results are random, but whether they seem random to you and I. Obviously they do, so from our vantage point we can probably consider them to be randomized results in that we recognize that it’s a waste of time to try and discern a pattern.</p>
<p>Can someone explain how it is random? Do they know who they’re going to admit but just release them randomly? I think that would be ridiculous, and leads me to believe it isn’t random. </p>
<p>They certainly come across applications randomly, but I don’t see what sense there is to notifying people randomly after decisions are made.</p>
<p>They are not insane.</p>
<p>@EmpathyInAnarchy: I think you are correct, they are not insane. But there may be a logic behind the apparent randomness and staggered release notifications. The reason could be as simple as just wanting to limit the workload of sending out notification letters in the mail.</p>
<p>my theory is that they select a group of diverse applicants that they really want in their college, low gpas, high gpas, excellent essays,interesting essays, unique essays. out there ECs or impressive work.</p>
<p>i got accepted to both UCSD and UCSB on the first day of the first day of transfer admission decisions.</p>
<p>if it was purely random for both schools, then i have great luck.</p>
<p>I agree, that is reasonable. Despite notifications not needing to be sent in the mail anymore, this makes sense for e-mail to some degree as well. </p>
<p>But even then, their admission portals can post decisions without having to email anyone. And regardless of getting a decision early or late, most people check the portals the 1st day of decisions, so admission servers are hammered anyways. </p>
<p>I don’t think resource management is the whole picture. Another thought I had was they send out some decisions to get data on who SIRs, so they know how many more applicants to admit.</p>
<p>If it wasn’t random, they would accept in the first round
a) All tagged applicants
b) All 3.5+ students</p>
<p>They are going to accept all the tagged applicants and most if not all the 3.5+ students anyways, so why not accept them all in the first round? Oh yeah, bc its random. Most likely, they have decided for the most part who to accept,and are just sending out in waves for whatever reason.</p>
<p>so then i am lucky. well i always have been.</p>
<p>i have no enemy in randomness.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Not necessarily. For example, if at a particular university they are staggering results every two weeks, then that makes 4 release batches between Mar. 15 and Apr. 30. Assuming absolute randomness in the results, you’d have a 1 in 4 chance of being notified. For two schools (assuming the same release schedule), a 1 in 16 chance of being notified in the same batch. It’s good luck, but not exactly winning the lottery. :)</p>
<p>ill tell you when UCLA lets me know on the first day hahaha (i hope i havent jinxed myself)</p>
<p>as for winning the lottery, i have one every lottery for adding classes at my community college.</p>
<p>Good point! Me too. Been pretty lucky so far on getting classes. Really hoping my luck doesn’t run out this summer.</p>
<p>I got my acceptance to UCSD and UCSB on the first day but still have not heard from UCI so the above explanation makes a lot of sense insofar as the randomness yet calculated chaos that is the admittance/rejection process.</p>
<p>Haha I submitted mine at around 12:10 on December first. I’m so lucky they extended the deadline! But anyways, it doesn’t seem to be affecting my acceptances.</p>
<p>Empathy, that is completely wrong. Many of us have way above average gpas, with pre reqs, that havent heard back. Then there are the applicants who are very borderline that have already been admitted, sometimes without pre reqs completely done. So basically…</p>
<p>I give up ! hahaha</p>
<p>My original point was that they admit some people without looking at the whole applicant pool, not that they release to people with higher stats first. Most people are pushing the view of either random/nonrandom, I’m pushing both. Not that it matters in any case.</p>
<p>i applied on Nov 30th at like 430am, I havent heard back from UCB, UCSD, or UCD, but I got into UCSB.</p>
<p>@VictoriaFelt- I’ve tried calling SJSU, I keep getting either a busy signal or picked up then hung up on lol</p>
<p>Really? Hmm I had no problem getting someone on the phone. There has to be something up because I got into an impacted major (social work) with neither of the two required classes completed with only a 3.7 gpa.</p>
<p>Cali Trumpet, by that logic you claim that all 3.5+ gpa’s necessarily deserve to be admitted. This is wishful thinking, seeing as many 4.0’s don’t even get in, or hear from the UC early. It is my suggestion that all applications are looked over equally, and that 4.0 does not mean that they just glance at your information and then automatically admit you. I would argue that many 4.0 applicants are borderline right now. Meaning, the adcoms are looking at the great numbers, but they’re trying to figure out why your essay was full of errors, or why you applied at the last second, or why your ECs don’t add up or make sense, or why you just didn’t put forth a strong argument for why you belong at that school. Perhaps a combination of all of these? </p>
<p>I would also theorize that the oldest, and the youngest applicants hear back first. For example, freshmen hear back first obviously, and after that they accept the highest quality older applicants to balance the age ratio of youngsters with more mature students to feed off each others energy. Maybe they go by life experiences, admitting the most closed off hermits with the most adventurous and outrageous transfer students first. They could admit the richest students with the poorest transfers first, all of these are valid. I heard back first from all schools so far and I don’t expect any different from UCLA or Berkeley. Perhaps it’s because of the fact I’m applying for certain type of housing (couples) , or perhaps it’s something else.</p>