<p>It appears that most of the UC’s are using a strict point system for acceptances. If so, why are there so many applicants getting rejected from Davis, Santa Barbara and San Diego, while their friends with similar GPA’s, lower SAT’s, no AP’s and non-existent EC’s are getting accepted at same schools? </p>
<p>Other factors being equal, it seems like not qualifying for financial aid and having no perceived hardships may make a difference between acceptance and rejection.</p>
<p>There are many factors that have nothing to do with stats. Here are some of the examples: The school you go to (the lower the performance of the school the higher the points), your family's financial situation (the poorer the higher the points), first generation going to college, academic improvement trend, leadership (something hard to verify), special talents (something hard to verify), EC's and Communities Services (again something hard to verify or not verify at all), the number of additional "a-g" courses, attended certain special programs, etc. You can see there are many points that are not GPA or Test Scores related, some applicants might think some of the UC's are safeties and thus not paying enough attention in the application process by neglecting to put in all relevant information and found out now that because of a few points missing here and there that cost them a place in the acceptance group.</p>
<p>mpebbles the real key is that while all but UCB and UCLA use a point system, the point systems they use are all different. They weigh certain factors differently, but all use the same application.</p>
<p>
[quote]
There are many factors that have nothing to do with stats. Here are some of the examples: The school you go to (the lower the performance of the school the higher the points), your family's financial situation (the poorer the higher the points), first generation going to college, academic improvement trend, leadership (something hard to verify), special talents (something hard to verify), EC's and Communities Services (again something hard to verify or not verify at all), the number of additional "a-g" courses, attended certain special programs, etc. You can see there are many points that are not GPA or Test Scores related, some applicants might think some of the UC's are safeties and thus not paying enough attention in the application process by neglecting to put in all relevant information and found out now that because of a few points missing here and there that cost them a place in the acceptance group.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with the above post. Plus this year there are so many applicants that they are overwhelmed and screwed up. From the UCSD forum someone stated UCSD missed the leadership positions her son had, someone stated UCSD missed the volunteer hours, and someone said this person withdrew the application but was still accepted.</p>
<p>I know I (One of the people to get accepted with extremely low stats) owe almost everything to my essays and the fact that I am rural. On the point system, I don't believe that location and essays are worth very much, but sometimes an extra 700 point boost can make a huge difference. I think there are definitely aspects of luck in getting into heavily applied schools like the UCs, but I wouldn't go as far as saying it's a random process, as I have seen many people on these forums saying. Also keep in mind that this is the most applications the UCs have ever seen, so I imagine they are turing down quite a few great applicants to keep the admits diverse. They may not want as many from the same schools or with similar backgrounds as other incoming freshman.</p>
<p>would this trend of higher applicant numbers & harder admissions continue in the upcoming yrs? or impossible to tell?</p>
<p>Hey UC ADCOMS, curious about this situtation: Students with similar GPA's from the same competitive high school got rejected while their friends with SAT's 200-300 points lower, some with no EC's, got accepted. The school is a USNews top 100 Gold medal school, with economically disadvantage enrollment less thant 0.5%. So, what would account for the difference?</p>
<p>sports61kh: I have heard that this may be the worst time but it will get better in the next few years. Here's a link to something (hope it works):</p>
<p>mpebbles: Lets assume you have two truly identical students from the same high school, or as close to identical as possible. What accounts for the difference? Most likely you would only need to compare the two application to determine the answer. Even though the students identical, the way the student depicts and describes themselves and their activities on the application will differ dramatically. Remember we only have the information the student provides to us on the application.</p>
<p>This is just my guess on what the difference would be.</p>
<p>UCD Admissions: Thanks for replying. At this point students would really like to know reasons for their rejections.</p>
<p>Would not applying for financial aid, declining to state family income, and stating parent's occupation as president of their own business make you look "affluent" and expect you to do better than the next person with similar stats?</p>
<p>UCD Admissions: another question, please:</p>
<p>Do you set a different bar for different high schools? If D's high school's naviance system shows mostly people with over 3.9 get in, do students with GPA's of 3.8 or lower get generally rejected? Should they have transfered to a neighboring high school where people with 3.5 and above are generally admitted?</p>
<p>UCD: Last question, I promise:</p>
<p>Do you compare students within the same high school, so that if the majority accepted have above 3.9, then people who can't achieve the same GPA are considered less qualified, since they couldn't compete on par within that particular high school environment?</p>
<p>mpebbles, I'm sure UCDadmissions is pretty busy, but I think it's pretty clear that the answer to all three of your questions is no, except that the small number of student applicants from really low rated high schools do get a "bump" in admissions, as do the top 4% at each school (under ELC). The UC process is really not that nuanced - with tens of thousands of applications for each campus, it can't be. I think that if you looked at your "identical" students you'd find that one had taken a few more a-g courses than the other, maybe had a leadership position in school of some sort, or whatever. EC's *per se *really don't count for anything under the UC admissions standards. And remember one could be just above the cutoff, the other just below.</p>
<p>to what mpebbles was saying, yeah the same thing happened at my school, rarely anyone got into a UC (we usually have lots), and the people who did get in, are of lower stats... apparently two people got into UCSB with Ds but most didnt get in.</p>
<p>I have also heard, since college is getting so expensive and more people are applying to public schools (like the uc system), the schools tend to accept people who couldnt afford a private school.. but i dunno</p>