<p>I'm heading into my junior year, and just visited 8 calif. colleges (5 UCs, 3 private). I am from NJ.</p>
<p>Everyone always says how hard it is to get into UCs from OOS, which is intimidating.</p>
<p>However, on my tours, I made it a point to as each admissions officer that i met with (at UCB, UCSB, UCLA, UCI, and UCSD) how OOS students' applications were handled.</p>
<p>This is the general reply I received "OOS students are required to have a 3.4 uw gpa in order to be 'uc eligible'. Cal residents are required only a 3.0 gpa. Aside from this, the only "disadvantages" to being OOS are that honors courses don't get the extra weight towards your uc gpa, and being top 4% means nothing"</p>
<p>They said oos applicants are viewed equally to instate applicants, with the above restrictions.</p>
<p>Is this a lie?</p>
<p>EDIT: i should say, that the two sides of uc admission i have heard are very conflicting, can somebody clarify for me?</p>
<p>Well, there is no denying that out of staters have lower admission rates to these colleges. I see what you mean, but I still am pretty sure that you have to be a better applicant to get in. They may be looked at similarly, but cali residents will always take priority. Overall though, I don't think there is that big of a difference, and actually, I think UCLA had a higher acceptance rate for OOS than instate. </p>
<p>As for the privates, im sure the admissions rate is exactly the same, no worries there.</p>
<p>Thanks for the encouragement sparkle, i understand that "tie goes to in state", but from what I've read around here, oos is much more difficult.</p>
<p>Could it be that the difficulty in being accepted lies inherently in the lower gpa an oos'er would have for not receiving the gpa boost from honors classes?</p>
<p>for instance, i will probably graduate with somewhere around a 3.9 uw gpa, and even though i am taking max aps and honors, i wont be able to reach the capped gpa of 4.4?</p>
<p>The adcoms were more or less telling you the basics. It's definitely harder to get into, especially when the OOS acceptance rate is lower than the in-state one despite the OOS pool being more self-selective, and when only 9% of the total acceptances are OOS. (This is for Berkeley, at least.) I think it's safe to say that OOS is more competitive -- real examples show this, as in the 'actual results' thread and the stats profiles.</p>
<p>Plus, the adcoms aren't about to discourage possible applicants, now are they? =]</p>
<p>bigtwix- i think you misunderstood me. they do weight, but on their own scale which is: honors, ap, ib +1 point. oos does not qualify for honors because they do not qualify as certified honors courses in the uc system. oos gpa is only weighted on ap and ib.</p>
<p>Also, i was typing my second response when you must have replied bigtwix....lol</p>
<p>I completely understand eligibility too btw. </p>
<p>Its just the adcoms seemed so "sure" that oos was not at a significant disadvantage. </p>
<p>The reason for all of this is basically because I am debating on whether or not i should "go for stanford". That would mean a very high level of dedication over the next two years, while I feel that i could meet or slightly exceed the "average" stats of ucb/ucla acceptances without "working much harder than i am now". However, if an oos'er would need significantly higher stats to get accepted, then i am left no longer left with that choice of "strive for, or settle", it would just be "strive".</p>
<p>Just exceeding the average stats for Cal is not a sure way to obtain acceptance, especially from OOS. But, to answer your question: STRIVE for Stanford or other elite college. The UCs are extremely expensive for OOS students (>$40k/yr), with poor finaid, and top privates offer a better value, IMO.</p>
<p>And I can't put my hand on the exact figures right now, but it's much same story at UC Berkeley -- OOS and in-state have nearly the same admit rate. Out of state applicants need higher stats to be eligible in the first place, and they'll pay more when they get there, but that does not necessarily translate to lower admit rates in actual practice.</p>
<p>Depending on your schedule, the honors rating difference might be a big deal. If you are getting your weighted GPA up with AP and IB courses, then it doesn't really make any difference. The disadvantage you have is in California, if you are in the upper 4% they go on and count all honors, AP, and IB classes in the weighted GPA, while otherwise they only add points for 8 semesters. So you really can't compete with the California top 4%, but you are in direct competition with the rest of the California students.</p>
<p>Another thing the California applicants have going for them that you don't is the UCs look at California HS offerings and say which classes qualify for which categories under the UC requirements. And then the California guidence counselors can tell students which classes count, and which ones don't. You don't have that advantage, so you need to be careful to ensure you actually take all the UC requirements. (Including a year of performing or visual art.) The HSs here know which classes to count when coming up with your UC GPA, your HS probably doesn't, so you need to calculate it yourself. Note that only the UC requirement classes count in calculating your UC GPA. I think there may be some calculators on the University of California website that helps you figure all this stuff out.</p>
<p>"but it's much same story at UC Berkeley -- OOS and in-state have nearly the same admit rate."< this is because the OOS pool is extremely self-selecting. For example, at my hs in San Diego, probably at least 10 kids a year apply to Berkeley with absolutely no chance of getting in. This won't happen OOS because students know how much tougher it is. OP, you weren't lied to; OOSers need only slightly higher GPAs, etc. to be CONSIDERED, but accepted is an entirely different story. Keep in mind that many athletes come from OOS, especially at big sports schools such as UCB and UCLA. This narrows the quota even more. Most students accepted OOS to Cal and UCLA are the same ones getting into Stanford, Harvard, and Princeton (those are all overlap schools), so that's what the competition is like. According to an admissions officer at Cal, to have a good shot OOS, the applicant "generally needs to be in the top 15-20% of the entire applicant pool."</p>
<p>I agree with bluebayou here. For the 40K/year you'll pay as OOS tuition you can go to a school that has much smaller classer, more personal attention to undergrads, etc. If the OP is thinking that they'll suck up the cost for 1 year and then start paying CA resident rates, that's almost impossible to do.</p>
<p>yes, i was thinking about about getting ca resident rates after a year. Its not just me moving out there, my family is going to.</p>
<p>Also, even without your family, couldn't you declare yourself an independent minor or something like that? </p>
<p>I understand the gpa difference.</p>
<p>For instance, i know i get screwed because i will only have 4 classes that count as honors (only 4 <em>bonus</em> points) for the uc program, ap history x2, ap bio, and ap english. the rest of my classes are all honors, but do not qualify as such for the uc gpa. However, the admissions officer will definitely see that i did challenge myself as much as possible, and that my gpa was pretty much as high as it could possibly be coming from my school, so i don't think it will end up being a huge disadvantage.</p>
<p>my uc gpa will probably end up being something like a 4.2 out of a POSSIBlE 4.35 or something.... I'm not really worried about it.</p>
<p>Honestly, i want to go to a big college (stanford obviously is an exception), which leaves usc as the only other attractive private.</p>
<p>Also, when i look at the college board site, for berkeley calif residency is listed as *very important, while in ucla geographical residence is only listed as considered.</p>
<p>sorry for the long posts, but thanks for the help!</p>
<p>
[quote]
"Most students accepted OOS to Cal and UCLA are the same ones getting into Stanford, Harvard, and Princeton (those are all overlap schools), so that's what the competition is like. According to an admissions officer at Cal, to have a good shot OOS, the applicant "generally needs to be in the top 15-20% of the entire applicant pool."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I highly doubt that; the UCLA/Cal admittance rates are similar to the overall admittance rates. Self-selectivity plays a decent role, but do you seriously believe that the applicants to UCLA/Cal (acceptance rate of at least 20%+) are MORE self-selective than Harvard (which had an acceptance rate of 8.98% in 2007)? </p>
<p>And to put the second part in context, this year the admit rate for UCLA was 23.38% overall and 23.1% for Cal, so in order to have a good shot at being accepted, you need to be in roughly the top 75% stat-wise of the accepted students (averaging 20% and 15% for 17.5%), which isn't that tough. For UCLA the top 75% has a SAT score of 1770+ and for Cal, the top 75% had a 1790+ (from CollegeBoard college profiles), however, this does not in anyway mean that just having a 1770 will cut it; admissions for out state are still undoubtedly harder, but not in any way like Harvard or Princeton.</p>