<p>hi guys,</p>
<p>i was selected for the interview for berkeley's regent scholarship. today they emailed everyone with the official results if you got the scholarship or not (i know some ppl already know just from checking the status of their CAL acceptance decision online).</p>
<p>unfortunately, i was emailed today and told that i did not get the scholarship.</p>
<p>my question is this: how were ppl's stats/activities of those who GOT the scholarship as opposed to those who DID NOT get the scholarship?</p>
<p>here are my stats: 3.8 GPA; 2180 SAT I; 780 math2c, 750 ushistory, 720 biology; 690 physics; president of a few clubs, extensive volunteer work, 2 out of school jobs, 1 internship, science olympiad, church camp counselor, hospital/library community service, etc.</p>
<p>i thought my interview at the Grand Wilshire in los angeles went very well... i clicked immediately with my interviewer and even had her laughing.... even with my enthusiasm and humor, i didn't receive the scholarship. on the other hand, my friends who aren't even interested in CAL but got the interview anyways received the scholarship despite acting apathetic and unenthusiastic during the interview...</p>
<p>but then again, these are friends with much higher stats... like 2300+ and national and regional math/science/research recognitition... and acceptees to HYP, MIT, stanford, etc.</p>
<p>do you guys think it was the interview that was the difference... it seems to me that even if u do "well" at the interview... what matters more are the grades and test scores...</p>
<p>is it just me or does this seem true?</p>
<p>just for reference, can the accepted regents scholars who GOT the scholarship please post their stats? ...and the regent scholars invited to the interview but DID NOT receive the scholarship post their stats as well?</p>
<p>i'd like to test my hypothesis... please feel free to voice what you feel</p>