<p>i heard from someone that they didn't use SAT scores last year in admissions...and that berkeley is the reason that the SAT reformatted the test, because they didnt believe it worked......... so they completely didn't look at SAT scores last year. sounds rediculous, but it kind of makes sense, because everyone i met at CalSO had lower sat scores than me and mine are prettyy bad (1260).....thoughts, feelings, reflections, anyone?</p>
<p>uhhh, i dunno where you got your info from, but berkeley DID use SATs last year...and i had the completely opposite experience when i went to calso, everyone had 1400+ SATs in my calso group :-</p>
<p>I think it's sad that you guys asked what SAT scores the kids in your group achieved, and 2vulgar4cc, you're only making it worse by making examples out of them and basing your theory on them. I have to say again, it's darn sad. Just read the Moore Report and you'll see that Berkeley accepts many students from many different backgrounds whose SAT scores range from to low to perfect; it has always been like this and it's like this at all UC schools.</p>
<p>Wow.. while I was at CalSO no one brought up topics about SAT scores and the like. That is the past and will stay in the past :)</p>
<p>2vulgar, you're probably just hearing a lot of nonsense. It's true that Berkeley and the UCs devalue the SAT in favor of the SAT II's and other factors, but they use them somewhat. Very few things have changed completely because Berkeley wanted them to. The SAT isn't one of em.</p>
<p>Yup, now we're all heading toward the GRE, MCAT, LSAT, or GMAT tests. wooT!</p>
<p>And these scores count much more for admissions to grad school, medical school, law, . . . what is the gmat? haha than the sat for undergrad. Good times, eh?</p>
<p>GMAT is for business school, for MBA</p>
<p>Haha yay for standarized, LONG LONG tests, regardless of the subject. I think there should be more.</p>
<p>hahah dont get so uptight. just a question. RELAX and stop jumping on ****...i hope putting me down makes you feel better inside. to everyone else, thanks i guess, jw.</p>
<p>Sorry if it seemed like i jumped on you. I'm not sure if your post above is to me or not, but i took it as a legitimate question.</p>
<p>Just censoring myself is all...</p>
<p>TTG</p>
<p>SATs were used for Fall 2009 Freshmen Admissions. And yes, University of California (as in the entire system) is the largest customer of ETS/College Board. Since UC threw a hissy fit about how unfair the SATs are and what not, and threatened to get rid of SATs all together (and replace them with ACT or equivalent) ETS/College Board made a business move to bow to the demands of the UC and hence changed the SATs.</p>
<p>And students with lower SATs then yours could've had extenuating circumstances, high GPAs, great athletic skills, etc.</p>
<p>Since the writing is already included in the SAT, I think the essay should be optional.</p>
<p>The essay is not meant to just see if you can write, it's to have you discuss about yourself and try to give yourself a 3D aspect, instead of an SAT score and GPA.</p>
<p>It should be weighted less, then. I've read a lot of books about why the essay has risen in importance and much of it has to do with people not being able to write. Of course there's the personal aspect, but that should be ranked lower, like it used to be.</p>
<p>Here's how Berkeley and UCLA admissions work: they send these applications out to people. Your application is read by four people, and all four must give the stamp of approval. They don't sit together and discuss it, it's just four people who are usually high school counselors. They get a stack of these applications and read it at home or in their office on their own spare time. They don't know who the other 3 people are reading the app.</p>
<p>They read these applications just by scanning SATs and GPA and a few other factors (school, classes taken, activities, etc). They barely even glance at the essays if you're a strong applicant and they decide to let you in or out. All four must approve, yet they don't get to convince the others.</p>
<p>Those essays that are read tend to be borderline applicants, or if the essays during the scan show difficult circumstances, then a closer look is given.</p>
<p>Most college admission guide books don't apply to UC because UC's tend to set their own trends. It's not the typical admissions committee (there's not even one) and they look for differenth things, besides grades and scores.</p>
<p>UC continues to rank personal life in its review of applicants in what the call "Comprehensive Review" which is weighted higher.</p>
<p>eiffelguy87 is providing false information. the four person thing is how UCLA admits people. berkeley does have readers, but they are allowed to consult with each other and act as a body in the final decision for borderline applicants.</p>
<p>Yeah, the four person thing is for UCLA. I should not have included Berkeley on there.</p>
<p>But all UC's have the Comprehensive Review (that part was for both Cal and UCLA).</p>
<p>At the UCLA board, someone had a counselor who did read the apps for UCLA and described the process his counselor went through of glancing at things.</p>
<p>Finemeal: Those links you provided regarding the information is the official stance of the universities. However, just looking within CC alone, there are students who met every single criteria on that list and still failed to be admitted, while other students failed to meet every criteria and were admitted (the admission officers must have seen something that the posters didn't let put on the threads).</p>
<p>Hence during March/April of this year, there were a fury of threads on the "randomness" of the process and the lack of any sense of order. Those admission standards which Berkeley and UCLA publish still don't provide the aspect of having humans reading it.</p>