<p>Sakky,</p>
<p>I don't think Berkeley is harder to get into from out of state. Whether it's harder or not depends on who is applying. A person with all the top numbers (scores, GPA, class rank) are gonna find Stanford harder (unpredictable) to get in than Berkeley. A person without the numbers are gonna find Berkeley hard to get in whereas he/she may have an outside shot to get into Stanford if his ECs/recs are amazing.</p>
<p>The admit rate for Berkeley out of state is over 20 percent. The admit rate for Stanford is around 12 percent. I don't think the applicant pool for Berkeley oos is any more self selective than the applicant pool for Stanford (cmon it's STANFORD).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Sakky, you amaze me! I love all your "you know and I know" stuff. I can always get a smile from that. Now, as far as your response, you dig yourself a whole. You say that apps to HYPSCM also aply to Cal because they need to ensure that they get into "at least one," Implying that Cal represents "at least one." Fine, but in your post a few days ago you say that getting into Berkeley as an oos might even be harder then getting into Stanfurd. So if its that big of a crapshoot, how can they count Berkeley as a safety?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Did I say that Berkeley was a safety to these particular people I'm talking about? Really? Please point to the quote where I specifically said that these particular people are treating Berkeley as a safety. Oh, what's that? Can't do it? That's because I never said it. </p>
<p>What I said is that these people are looking to widen their pool of schools, including taking a flyer at getting into Berkeley out-of-state. There's no guarantee that they'll get into HYPSMC and there's no guarantee that they'll get into Berkeley out-of-state. However, by applying to all of them, you increase your odds of getting into at least one of them. Maybe you'll get into Berkeley out-of-state, but not any of HYPSMC. Maybe you'll get into one of HYPSMC, but not Berkeley out-of-state. The point is that the strategy is to increase your odds of getting into something by applying to a bunch of schools. </p>
<p>
[quote]
As far as the admit numbers, I can only go by the data provided, which I believe states that % are similar for in state and out of state. If those numbers are correct (can someone look them up, please) then we have to take them at face value. You are always so ready to look for a conspiracy, but if those numbers didn't represent the type of students then why wouldn't Cal make note of that to let us know. It would only help their reputation if they said, "while the % are roughly the same for both groups, the SATs, GPAs, and ECs are all much, much stronger for out of state students." You and I both know that you are grasping at straws.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't think Berkeley is harder to get into from out of state.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh really? And what is this quote that I see here from the official Berkeley website that details the procedure for determining admissions:</p>
<p>"Preference is given to California residents in the selection process."</p>
<p>So are you guys saying that this website (which is an official Berkeley website) is dead-wrong? If so, maybe you ought to tell Berkeley that they're wrong and they don't understand their own admissions procedure.</p>
<p>Another way we can solve this issue is that you, gentlemenandscholar, and I together can simply email the Berkeley admissions office and we'll ask them whether it is more difficult to get into Berkeley from out-of-state than from in-state, such that those out-of-state admits to the Berkeley undergrad program tend to have stronger test scores, gpa's, etc. etc. than in-state admits. Then whatever answer we get from them, we will just post it here. Sound like a plan? Hey, if you're really sure that I am just 'grasping at straws', then you have nothing to fear, right? You're going to be proved right, and I am going to look like a fool, so why not do this? So why don't you join me in writing this email to them? </p>
<p>
[quote]
Ok, if Cal is harder to get into as an oos than stanfurd, then why are any student who are also appying to HYPSMC add Berkeley to their list to "ensure that they get at least one?" Don't they know that its harder to get into Cal then most of the rest of those schools? Wouldn't they instead apply to all of the big guys (HYPSMC) and then add, say, Northwestern to the list to ensure that they get "at least one?" And if its so darn hard to get into Cal, not to mention the tuition, why are these people even applying there? Sakky, any thoughts?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course they are. They are applying to all of the above, and to Berkeley also. Remember, these are people who want to maximize their chances in getting into at least one good undergrad program, and Berkeley is a good undergrad program (maybe not a great one, but definitely a good one). To give you an example, I know one person who applied to all 8 Ivies, Stanford, MIT, Caltech, Duke, NW, Chicago, and also to UCBerkeley, Michigan, and Virginia, despite not being a state resident of any of those 3 states. He ended up (I think) at Caltech. </p>
<p>The point is, you cast your net wider in order to maximize your chances of getting something. That doesn't mean that people are treating Berkeley as the safety school, but just as another school to apply to. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Wait, but Sakky says "self-selection plays a tremendously strong role." So doesn't that mean the they DO know how hard it is so only the best of the best even bother to apply? So what I would like is for Sakky to answer the question of why these people are even applying there?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>For the most part, they are well aware of it. But that doesn't deter them. They apply anyway in order to get another chance of getting into a school. Yes, they are aware that it is hard. But you might get in. If people never applied to anywhere where they thought it was hard, hardly anybody would ever apply to Harvard. Hence, people apply to Berkeley OOS because it gives them another chance of getting in somewhere. That doesn't mean that Berkeley is a safety to them, but rather just another school that is difficult to get into.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Sakky says "self-selection plays a tremendously strong role."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you don't know what I mean by something, then just ask. What I mean is that the pool of OOS Berkeley applicants are much more self-selective than the pool of in-state Berkeley applicants. A Californian who is applying to a bunch of UC's might just apply to Berkeley just for the heck of it, even if he doesn't really think he'll get in, just by checking the box on the UC form and paying another app fee. He figures, yeah, I probably won't get in, but there's a chance, so why not take a flyer, especially since I've already filled out the UC app, so it's not a lot of extra work to apply to Berkeley? OOS applicants have to fill out a whole new app, and this tends to deter them, because it's n walk in the park to have to complete an entirely new app.</p>
<p>Sakky,</p>
<p>Sorry to confuse you. What I meant was I don't think Berkeley was harder to get into from out-of-state than Stanford. I wasn't comparing it to in-state.</p>
<p>Sam Lee, I don't know if it is for sure either. I am saying that it is possible that it is harder to get into Berkeley from OOS than getting into Stanford. In any case, at the very least, we can say that the difference in difficulty is certainly a lot smaller than the difference in difficulty of getting into Berkeley from instate compared to getting into Stanford. I don't think anybody (well, maybe one person) will seriously dispute that.</p>
<p>I know from Hong Kong, it's easier to get into Berkeley. One of my former classmates got 6As and 3Bs on O-level and he got into Berkeley. His verbal was in the 500s. I also saw a group of 4 or 5Hong Kong students working on what I believed EE problem set while I was in one of their libraries--so that's already 5 people for one class whereas at Stanford, the total number of undergrads from Hong Kong is around only 6 and I have not heard of anyone getting in Stanford without straight As on O-level and great ECs.</p>
<p>Though it's a bit old, an AEPE report states, "If residency status were not taken into consideration in the admission process, one could estimate from present patterns, even after taking into account of the smaller yield rates for non-resident freshmen admits, that perhaps about 18% of our student body would consist of non resident students."</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://academic-senate.berkeley.edu/committees/pdf/AEPE_report.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://academic-senate.berkeley.edu/committees/pdf/AEPE_report.pdf</a></p>
<p>Since the current proportion of non-residents in the student body hovers around 10 percent, and after taking in consideration the lower rate of enrollment for non-residents, it is roughly twice as difficult to be admitted as an out of state or international student. This assertion, albeit not entirely empirically rigorous, would suggest that out of state admissions are much more difficult than most people think. Additionally, as seen on Table 37 of the Moores Report (which, as some of you may know, caused quite a furor over UC Berkeley's admission practices), accepted OOS students had an average GPA of 4.44 as opposed to the Californian 4.25. Also, OOS students had an approximate average SAT score of 1440, while residents had an approximate average SAT of 1325.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/compreview/mooresreport.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/compreview/mooresreport.pdf</a></p>
<p>Though the data is a little dated and a few loose assumptions are made, it does certainly lay credence to Sakky's argument (never thought I'd say that!).</p>
<p>Gamma57722, thank you for the support. I think the ball's now back in gentlemenandscholar's court to back up his assertion with data that in-state and OOS Berkeley students are equivalent in academic qualifications. Either that, or the point has to be conceded.</p>
<p>To SamLee, well, what I can tell you is that I know several people who got into Stanford but not Berkeley, and all of them are OOS. </p>
<p>The point is, I think it's unclear as to whether it is more difficult to get into Stanford or to Berkeley OOS. Nevertheless, this is really not the issue. The issue is that it has been reported that 1/3 of Stanford students did not get into Berkeley, and I believe that much of that can be explained by people trying to get into Berkeley OOS. I think that most of us (except for apparently one person) can agree with that.</p>
<p>No Sakky, its YOUR job to disprove the stats, not mine. I'm just going by the admission statistics, nothing as concrete as your gut feeling, but I'll stick with it anyway. You are the one trying to disprove something, so the impitus is on you, not me.</p>
<p>And now the point has been proven. The Berkeley admissions website said so. The statistical data says so. </p>
<p>Again, if you still want to dispute it, then perhaps you ought to contact the Berkeley admissions committee and tell them that what they have on their website is wrong and that they are not showing any admissions preference to instate applicants compared to OOS applicants.</p>
<p>Sure Sakky, but first could you post the percent accepted from oos and the percent of in state?</p>
<p>And if I do, are you then going to go talk to the Berkeley admissions people?</p>
<p>About what? Just post the %! If they are similar then I'm right, if there is a noticable drop off then you are right (not in your stanfurd 1/3 argument).</p>
<p>It's not that simple and you know it. The percentage numbers don't show that because of the self-selectivity that I talked about. The fact is, a better group of students are applying from OOS than instate. Hence, the admissions percentages are not directly comparable. </p>
<p>I'll put it to you this way. The chances of admission to MIT undergrad is about 16%. The chances of admission to MIT graduate school in engineering is about 25% or so. So that means that MIT grad school is easier to get into than MIT undergrad, right? No. Only the very best engineering students in the world are going to apply to grad school at MIT. It's a highly self-selective pool.</p>
<p>So does that mean that you're not going to post the %?</p>
<p>I don't have those stats. I thought you did. Why don't you post them?</p>
<p>And again, if the stats do get posted, and they show that the figures are similar, then are you then going to try to contact the Berkeley adcom and tell them that no preference is shown towards instate applicants compared to OOS applicants?</p>
<p>I don't feel like digging around for them, but I remember then being fairly similar (within 2-4%) so unless someone can find them then I'll assume I'm correct. Now, as for calling or writing the adcoms, thats not my job. Thats your job.</p>
<p>Are you saying that it is your official position that no preference is shown to instate applicants compared to OOS applicants?</p>
<p>And why would it be my job to contact the Berkeley adcom? I am not the one taking a position at odds with what they've been saying. What, so I am going to write to them and tell them that their website is correct? I think they would be more interested in hearing that their website is incorrect - but I'm not the one who believes that the website is incorrect. You are.</p>
<p>Not at all. All I'm saying, and I could very well be wrong but nobody seems to want to disprove it, is that the percentages are roughly the same.</p>
<p>I don't know if the percentages are the same. They may very well be. But that doesn't take away from the fact that there is still admissions preference shown to instate applicants, and THAT is the real heart of the matter.</p>