<p>well...tell him to call ucsd himself!</p>
<p>i don't know why everybody doesn't just call them. it'll take away a lot of the stress and questions people have about why they didn't get in.</p>
<p>Well, calling them really isn't fun. I know my mom waited 20minutes to talk to a guy at UCLA, although UCSD was a lot more friendly. She was asking about whether they got my SAT scores or not.</p>
<p>i'm sure he'd be willing to wait 20 mins...it's obviously kinda of a big decision.</p>
<p>The thing is, it's me trying to give him advice on what to do next. He's kind of moping around after the rejection and I'd like to know whether or not it's worth a shot to get him out of this emo-ness. </p>
<p>Anyways, someone's bound to post it. If this year's SAT really is 1975 average, then the point total should've gone up 28pts from last year (it was 1940 last year I think?) If we use 7468 as the number for last year, which I think thats what it was, then the new total is ~7500. Ouch.</p>
<p>i think i read somewhere it was 7580</p>
<p>the exact number is somewhere in this ucsd forum...</p>
<p>Found it in the winter admit part. 7421 for normal, 7356 for winter.</p>
<p>Eh.. it just doesn't seem right. Ah... I can't stop pondering about it.</p>
<p>How do they know how many points they're supposed to award in each section, like leadership? From the max of like 5 words we could give them?</p>
<p>actually from what peppers is doing is actually smart, he's taking numbers and figuring out the pattern. Therefore not bsing it. Its easy statistics, if thats the trend then thats what they are going with.</p>
<p>they are not going with anything...</p>
<p>they calculate all points for each section...add them up, find the cutoff point for all students, and accept those who make the cutoff point</p>
<p>i got 2300+ and got in
i didn't post in the decisions thread, though</p>
<p>it's bs
i know quite a few people myself that don't fit that range</p>
<p>I didn't exactly pull it out of nowhere... I read through the threads and picked up on a trend. Obviously this trend doesn't pertain to everyone, otherwise this forum would be drowned with the anguished cries of overachievers who got rejected, but I'm disinclined to say that something isn't amiss here.</p>
<p>it's all quantified. it's pretty easy to find out why you didn't get in.</p>
<p>there's nothing "amiss"</p>
<p>It doesn't matter how arbitrarily they assign the points as long as they keep everything relative to each other. At the end, they look at the point layout and draw the line such that they accept enough people to yield a full freshman class. It's not really that complicated. More people applying = higher cut off because they only have so many seats to fill.</p>
<p>Well obviously the numbers didn't add up for some people, ergo why people are finding it curious that they didn't get in. Do I attribute this to the fact that some of these people have low credibility (due to low post count and such) and the failure to disclose any ECs whatsoever? Yes I do, but I do see a trend based on available information of people who were otherwise shoo-ins from the upper reaches of the applicant pool who were rejected. </p>
<p>I honestly don't care whether what I said was right or not, because I know those numbers are fuzzy and I know there are exceptions. What I am saying is that, based on what the people in this forum have been posting, there is a disproportionately high number of over-qualified applicants within the general range of stats that I posted who were denied admission.</p>
<p>Peppers, I hate to be cynical, but if these people really did make the cut off I think they'd call admissions and get things sorted out.</p>
<p>Just tossing this out there, but let's say there's an imaginary student, 'A'.</p>
<p>A's stats:
2000,700,700
3.8 UC GPA
Upper Middle Class
Non-minority
Typical leadership positions, ECs, fluffed awards/accomplishments</p>
<p>Hard academic points: 7200
This year's cut off: 7580</p>
<p>Point deficit: 380</p>
<p>Up to 2000 points can be awarded because of personal circumstances (I got this number from the adcom on the phone)
I got approximately 150 points (I took my total score gotten from the adcom and subtracted by my calculated academic score) with average essays talking about my personal medical challenges. My friends floated between 100 and 300 points.</p>
<p>It's easy to see how some very qualified students can fall through if the adcom reading the essay is biased enough to discount special circumstances.</p>
<p>I think so too. I can't help but have this feeling that a lot of the people might be exaggerating their rejections...</p>
<p>more along of what cbf and peppers were saying, UCSD uses a bell curve when regarding the point system. They take it at the cut off range. I'm sure there are people that dont fit the range but im sure there are explanations lol</p>
<p>"there is a disproportionately high number of over-qualified applicants within the general range of stats that I posted who were denied admission."</p>
<p>disproportionate?
you would have NO idea about the proportions since the posters here are an exteremly small percentage of the applicant pool.</p>
<p>Also, you seem to forget the fact that people who have had a bad experience or feel dissatisfied with something tend to be MUCH more vocal than others. It's for this reason also that the posters here aren't exactly a reliable representation of the admissions decisions as a whole</p>
<p>So unless you have the data for the entire 40000 applicants or find a way to get an unbiased collection of data, you say much about proportions</p>
<p>
[quote]
actually from what peppers is doing is actually smart, he's taking numbers and figuring out the pattern. Therefore not bsing it. Its easy statistics, if thats the trend then thats what they are going with.
[/quote]
no, it's not "easy statistics"... it's invalid statistics.</p>
<p>if I walk right outside my house and see a blue camry, a red tacoma, and a green avalon... it would be incredibly fallacious to say that all economy sedans are blue, all pickup trucks are red, and all luxury sedans are green.</p>
<p>and from what I've seen... most of the people screaming OMGZ HOW DID I GET REJECTED!!1! are substantially below average in at least one area.</p>
<p>not to mention, as the poster above me said... people who think they should have gotten it yet didn't will be far more vocal than people who think they should have gotten in that did.</p>