<p>Can anyone explain how OOS kids are evaluated in the UC system? It seems like they must be at a huge disadvantage, since the in-state representation is so high. I get this for UCB (>85%), but how does this work for places where the median scores are not so high (e.g. UCSB: SAT 1850, 93% in-state)?</p>
<p>Here is a chart from UCSB website:
California Residents
"a–g" GPA Minimum UC Score Total
3.00 – 3.04 223
3.05 – 3.09 210
3.10 – 3.14 198
3.15 – 3.19 187
3.20 – 3.24 175
3.25 – 3.29 165
3.30 – 3.34 157
3.35 – 3.39 152
3.40 – 3.44 147
3.45 & above 143</p>
<p>Non California Residents
3.40 – 3.44 147
3.45 & above 143</p>
<p>So basically, the MINIMUM for a non resident is a 3.40 UC calc'ed grad. If you go to the website you will find the formula for calcing the grade and for the index number. It is done by a specific formula. The median SAT score is only a part of the number. And yes the OOS kids are at a disadvantage because the UCs are already overenrolled and impacted.</p>
<p>I don't know the answer but according to UCSB's website, only 2% of the students are from other states (another 2% are international and 1% unknown). The higher-end the UC it seems the more OOS applicants. </p>
<p>I checked UCR's and UCSB's websites. UCR states it gives not relevance to OOS or IS. UCSB weights them the same but seems to have a cutoff for OOS (as ebeee stated). UCLA does give priority to in-state so I assume the requirements for OOS are higher than for IS. The following is from UCLA's website:
[quote]
While, as a state funded public institution, UCLA gives priority to applicants who are California residents, we also admit hundreds of other students from all over the country. Since UCLA receives a large number of applications (from both in-state and out), admission is highly selective and far exceeds the University of California's minimum eligibility requirements for out-of-state applicants.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The reasons for the low OOS numbers may not be due simply to admissions decisions, it's likely due in part to lack of applicants. The UCs are more expensive for OOS and due to that, many OOS students will simply either pick a state college in-state, a state U that doesn't charge such a high premium for OOS, or a private. </p>
<p>If you're interested and are willing to pay the tuition, then go ahead an apply.</p>
<p>"The reasons for the low OOS numbers may not be due simply to admissions decisions, it's likely due in part to lack of applicants. "</p>
<p>It doesn't seem like this can account for 2% OOS. Compare, for example, to UW, which is 23% OOS despite high OOS tuition and lots of rain.</p>
<p>I guess my question is, given these low numbers, how can an OOS applicant assess their chances? The in-state stats are almost irrelevant.</p>
<p>I haven't seen a breakdown of average SAT by OOS and IS for each UC. I think that's what you're looking for. I know the high-end UCs have a higher threshold for OOS but UCR, for one, states that they don't take it into consideration. Also, the UCs are a bit different from many U-State schools in that they have many campuses that each have their own admissions criteria. </p>
<p>The theory I was trying to state (only a theory) - the higher-end UCs are more desired by OOS and therefore more OOS students are willing to pay the higher tuition to go there because they may be values higher than their in-state Uni's. Many of the lower UCs aren't as desirable, don't have quite the rep, and there are probably far fewer OOS students willing to pay the hefty premium to go there versus their in-state Uni's. In other words, the extra tuition hit may seem worth it to an OOS for UCB/UCLA/UCSD but maybe not for UCSC/UCR/UCM for example.</p>
<p>UCLA received the most applications for the freshmen class for the upcoming school year..I highly doubt that it lacks OOS applicants. It depends on the school too (Cal and UCLA) are such name schools that they're considered public ivies, and UCLA merchandise is sold everywhere around the world.</p>
<p>I think Santa Cruz and San Diego get OOS applications, along with Berkeley and UCLA. Maybe Davis, too, to some extent. But I haven't heard much about OOS applications to Riverside, etc.</p>
<p>All the UC's get a significant number of OOS applicants. It is more difficult to be admitted as an OOS to any of the UC's. The UC's are required by California law to favor in-state residents. Moreover, the UC's have a stated policy of trying to admit as many California residents in the top 12% of their class as they can. There was a controversy a few years back because someone showed that the UC's were rejecting many with 1400 and higher SAT's while accepting those with much lower. The controversy lost its luster when it was pointed out that a high percentage of those 1400 and higher rejections were OOS.</p>
<p>drb:</p>
<p>If you read the Milwaukee press, you'll find that Wisconsin purposely accepts OOS kids for the extra money -- much to the chagrin of many Wisconsite families. Also, UW-Madison is still a relatively good deal relative to other state public unis -- it is about $10k less for OOS than the UCs, where Cal is approaching the mid-40's.</p>
<p>Actually I meant U Washington, not U Wisconsin, but its basically the same issue: both schools get alot and accept alot of OOS applicants willing to pay full freight (albeit less than privates, as you state). The point being that I doubt the low number of OOS in the UC system is due to lack of interest by highly qualified students (at least for UCB, UCLA, UCSD, UCSB, and UCSC).</p>
<p>I don't dispute the right and perhaps obligation of UCs to give preference to in-state applicants. Its just that with 2% OOS (and how many of these are recruited athletes?) and no information provided about admissions criteria, the message seems to be "OOS need not apply." If that is not the case, then a little consideration with regard to informing prospective OOS applicants about admissions review is in order.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>the higher-end UCs are more desired by OOS and therefore more OOS students are willing to pay the higher tuition to go there because they may be values higher than their in-state Uni's. Many of the lower UCs aren't as desirable, don't have quite the rep, and there are probably far fewer OOS students willing to pay the hefty premium to go there versus their in-state Uni's. In other words, the extra tuition hit may seem worth it to an OOS for UCB/UCLA/UCSD but maybe not for UCSC/UCR/UCM for example.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>I think uclaucsddad's theory makes a lot of sense. OOS parents may be willing to pay private school prices for a UC, but only the higher ranked ones.</p>
<p>I found this info from the booklet put out by the UC--Introducing the University 2007-2008. </p>
<p>Fall 2006 Freshman Admission Profile--</p>
<p>UCB 88% admitted were CA residents
UC Davis 94%
UC Irvine 95%
UCLA 87%
UC Merced 98%
UC Riverside 97%
UCSD 91%
UCSB 93%
UCSD 94%</p>
<p>Who in their right mind would pay the $40K/yr for oos for a lower UC? Less than 60% graduate in 4 years at the middle and bottom schools which means they are as expensive as a private and they only give aid to way over qualified oos students. If you can get in oos, you can get into a decent private which is a much better value.</p>
<p>Its not necessarily "OOS need not apply" -- its more benign neglect. The state is growing rapidly, and the system has all the in-state apps it can handle. But also concur with uc-dad...with the exception of Cal or UCLA, or perhaps SD for its specialized bio-sci program, the other UCs are just not worth $42k for OOS. U-Dub, and other state Unis are a much better deal in-state than any UC not named Berkeley or Los Angeles.</p>
<p>It's useless to use OOS enrollments as a measure of how many out of state kids apply to the UC's. (Do a search on <a href="http://www.ucop.edu/pathways%5B/url%5D">www.ucop.edu/pathways</a> and you'll find more detailed information on actual applications and admit rates) The reason is that that financial aid is extremely limited for OOS kids at all of the UC's. While full need may be met, OOS FA packages are almost always heavily dependent on loans and work study, not grants. Berkeley does have some merit scholarships that OOS students are eligible for, but getting them is very competitive. (Of course, there are always exceptions. I am sure the next response will be from someone saying they received a "great" OOS FA package from the UC's. But, for most kids, that won't be the case). Therefore, many OOS students go elsewhere, even if they get in, because they're likely to get much better deals elsewhere. And, wealthier families tend to come to the conclusion that Bobby and Blue allude to: Why pay private school prices for a public school?</p>
<p>In response to the above ... it's not that UW-Madison intentionally accepts lesser qualified OOS students. It is that the OOS students often come from competitive, more wealthy schools, and may have a lower class rank. As a matter of fact, the differences are very small (4 percentiles lower in class rank that Wisconsin residents) but that should be expected by the number of prep school, ULTRA-competitive suburb schools in Minneapolis/Chicago, etc.</p>
<p>I DO agree, though, that for an OOS public, Wisconsin is a better deal.</p>
<p>Wisconsin is somewhat of a unigue situation and its supposedly high OOS numbers really have nothing to do with taking lesser qualified OOS applicants. First, UWisconsin happens to be fairly close to the northern and northwestern suburbs of Chicago and as a result it gets a significant number of very qualified students from that area which has many of the best high schools in Illinois. Second it has a reciprocity agreement with Minnesota -- students from Minnesota can go to Wisconsin and pay in-state tuition (and vice versa) and that results in many highly qualified Minnesota students applying.</p>
<p>My son, who's now an OOS junior at UCLA, received a better financial aid package from them than he did from either Carnegie Mellon or Boston University (although it was still admittedly modest.) In addition, OOS tuition and room and board at UCLA was about 7K less per year in 2004-05 than at the two other schools. UCLA has had tuition increases in the last two years, but I suspect BU and CMU have had them as well--so attending a UC school as an out-of-stater can make financial sense, at least in some circumstances.</p>
<p>flatbush:</p>
<p>did your S receive a Regent's scholarship from LA? (If so, that would make a big difference.)</p>
<p>A friend of mine has two OOS kids at Berkeley. She says that the reason that she thinks that they both got in was because they are half Hispanic (they are also half Asian but she thinks that would have been a minus if they weren't also half Hispanic).</p>
<p>jlauer: of course anything is possible, but after Prop 209, race & ethnicity are no longer a factor in admissions. Last year I saw several top 10% (but not elc) hispanic students rejected by both Cal and UCLA from our HS, whereas the top ~8% (of all races-ethnicities) were accepted at one or both.</p>