UCI - Acceptance rate lower than UCD and now lower than UCSB

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Irvine
21

<p>No ShoeFactory, UCI needs to improve their API and ELC acceptance rates to rise in ranking. It is simply a fact. It is one of the ranking criteria.</p>

<p>And as for your difficulty comparison, we will just have to disagree. My kids go to a top high school and it was very competitive. I however realize the HUGE difference for a kid growing up poor in a crummy high school. The amount of motivation it takes to succeed in that situation is 100 times what it takes for a student with wealth or even a student from the middle class.</p>

22

<p>hey collegemom16, is ur kid going to UCI?</p>

<p>apparently not.</p>

23

<p>Guys, please lay off the flames against Collegemom. She's been a great user here at CC such that I seriously doubt she has any bias against UC Irvine.</p>

<p>It's okay to argue, but something like a post above is just immature.</p>

24

<p>Collegemom read the link that I posted, UCI IS ranked 4th for SAT combined unless you include BK (whatever the hell that is) in which place it would be 5th, it's above Davis and UCSB. Same thing with ELC, look at the data.
Low API means it's easier to get a good GPA, high schools that have low API's are BAD schools, therefore it should be EASIER for exceptional students to stand out, maybe become valedictorian or something.</p>

25

<p>If that post above was an insult against me, had I had such large influence in average SATs for my university, then mine would've placed it higher. </p>

<p>COMBINED [Critical Reading + Math + Writing] of Fall 2008 </p>

<ol>
<li>UCB: 2014</li>
<li>UCLA: 1988</li>
<li>UCSD: 1935</li>
<li>UCD: 1851</li>
<li>UCSB: 1845</li>
<li>UCI: 1834</li>
</ol>

26

<p>Going to a mediocre school DOES NOT MEAN that your kid is facing socio-economic barriers. My family is well off, and had i stayed in my district (I transferred out to a better school), I am confident I would have gotten at least nearly straight A's and been top 3 at my local high school. (My friend from middle school is valedictorian from that school, and I beat him on SAT and test scores. And we both agree I am smarter than he is.) And had I went to that school and been valedictorian, I would've had a huge advantage in admissions to other schools without the disadvantage that you claim people go to low API schools have. Thus low API does NOT mean that people that go to that school are poor. It means students are less studious.</p>

<p>If your school has low API scores, it does not mean you are facing socio-economic barriers. Correlation does not imply causation. It is a logical fallacy to assume that if you go to a low API school that you need 'more motivation to succeed.' On the contrary, you need less motivation to be at the top of such a school.</p>

<p>If people don't have the motivation to be at the top of their crappy high school, there is NO WAY they will do well at competitive public colleges like the UCs. It is ridiculous to give admission to someone who did not try very hard in HS at a crappy school over someone who tried their hardest, but had a hard time pulling top grades because they went to a highly competitive high school.</p>

27

<p>First off, let’s consider the rankings everyone pretty much relies on – US News. Below is a link to their Undergraduate ranking criteria and weights. If you notice, there are no sections that are related to “accepting students from different socio-economic backgrounds”. Think about it. The top private schools don’t exactly do much of that.</p>

<p>America's</a> Best Colleges 2008: Undergraduate Ranking Criteria and Weights -- U.S.News & World Report</p>

<p>We already know that every UC takes into account socio-economic disadvantages. UCI does this just like every school. We can already see US News does not even factor in something like this. Why are you pulling out a small detail to put down UCI among the other UCs? Low API scores definitely doesn’t always determine the economic background of a high school. I came from a district that had NO school meet the California target API. California’s grade school public education system is pretty bad, and we all know it. High schools with worse economic backgrounds in other states can beat a high school in California with better economic standing.</p>

28

<p>"Why are you pulling out a small detail to put down UCI among the other UCs?" </p>

<p>This was never my intent. I was only pointing out the much larger array of critera for rankings.</p>

<p>This relates directly to ELC. US News does count this as very important.</p>

<p>High school class standing. The proportion of students enrolled for the academic year beginning in the fall of 2006 who graduated in the top 10 percent (for national universities and liberal arts colleges) or 25 percent (master's and baccalaureate colleges) of their high school class.</p>

<p>UC admissions highly value socio-economic diversity. This Peer assessment rating is 25% of the schools ranking position.</p>

<p>Peer assessment. How the school is regarded by administrators at peer institutions. A school's peer assessment score is determined by surveying the presidents, provosts, and deans of admissions (or equivalent positions) at institutions in the school's category. Each individual was asked to rate peer schools' undergraduate academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished). Those individuals who did not know enough about a school to evaluate it fairly were asked to mark "don't know." A school's score is the average score of all the respondents who rated it. Responses of "don't know" counted neither for nor against a school. The survey was conducted in the spring of 2007, and about 51 percent of those surveyed responded.</p>

<p>Sorry shoefactory but once again I respectfully disagree. Your information while intersting is anecdotal. Low API means a lack of tax base to fund the school. On the whole it means the school is located in a low income area. Sure there can be exceptions, but overall this IS true.</p>

<p>"Thus low API does NOT mean that people that go to that school are poor. It means students are less studious."</p>

<p>This statement is outrageous.</p>

<p>"If people don't have the motivation to be at the top of their crappy high school, there is NO WAY they will do well at competitive public colleges like the UCs."</p>

<p>Except that it happens all the time. What it takes for a poor kid from a low performing school to succeed translates into a very motivated student. The UC's know exactly what these students are up against and provide them with a great deal of educational support.</p>

<p>"If people don't have the motivation to be at the top of their crappy high school, there is NO WAY they will do well at competitive public colleges like the UCs."</p>

<p>We are talking about low API and ELC. Where did you get the notion that these students did not perform well at their underfunded and low performing schools?</p>

29

<p>Because a school is in a low income area does not mean all the students that go there are poor. It's not uncommon enough to find middle class students in a poorer area that you can call it an 'exception'. The criteria is just too rough to make a judgment based on API.</p>

<p>How does low API mean that students are NOT less studious? Studious students get higher scores.</p>

<p>The thing is that it doesn't take much for a poor kid from a low performing school to succeed in terms of academic achievement. Admissions cannot infer hardship from the API of their school, only the essay so low API shouldn't even be considered. If a student wants to claim hardships then they can do so on their essay, but getting an extra benefit from going to a crappy school is ridiculous.</p>

<p>The circumstances of students are SO DIFFERENT that you cannot judge them all the same from API. You make a very gross and rough connection between low API and financial situation; there is a correlation, but it would be untrue for many students.</p>

30

<p>ShoeFactory,</p>

<p>I don't know numbers on top of my head, my guess is that the correlation between low API scores and poor financial situations is very high. Sure, there are exceptions like case, but that's why they are exceptions. Most kids do suffer hardships when they attend a bad school. Have you ever ask why your parents took you to a different school? I'd guess it's because they don't want you to fall into the bad crowd. </p>

<p>It is harder to be motavated when you go to a school where no one studies. This is normal human behavior. Most of the time, you are who you hang out with. It is always true? no, but it's often the case. It takes a lot to stand out from a low API school, it may not be as easy as you suggested.</p>

31

<p>Collegemom16,</p>

<p>Sorry, but I don’t see how admitting students from a high socio-economic diversity increases rankings by a large factor. Somewhere in the messy vines, it makes a difference, but it seems negligible sometimes. Rankings are, as you’ve read, 15% contingent on the selectivity of admissions. If schools were to accept students for the sole reason of them being in a disadvantage, that portion would definitely drag them down in rankings. How do you think private universities do such a good job in rankings?</p>

<p>Also, I still don’t understand the fuss about ELC. ELC is granted to the top 4% of every high school. If you make it and finish the paper works, you basically get a huge boost in admissions. As you know, collegemom16, your favorite college UC Davis grants a fat 1000 points for ELC. This is like turning a 4.0 GPA into a 5.0 GPA. UCSD, as we know, also grants 300 points (like a 0.3 gpa boost). UCI does something along those lines also. In fact, 95% of ELC students who apply to UCI get in while 98% of ELC students who apply to UCD get in. The percentages are very close. UCLA and UCB have the lower percentages for ELC students too. They do this because they do recognize that it may be easier to qualify for ELC at some schools rather than others so they reserve less of their comprehensive admissions process towards ELC. Most of the schools in California participate in ELC, even the ones that are not economically challenged. In essence, the top 4% of any school basically have guaranteed admissions into mid-tier UCs (not including the automatic acceptance program). This also brings up another point. I believe your ELC rankings are off. If you look at the introducing the university PDF files, you can see that UCI has a high acceptance rate for ELC students as opposed to the other schools. Once again, the percent differences are very negligible.</p>

<p>Worriedsenior,</p>

<p>I totally agree with you when you say it’s harder to stand out from a low API school because they are more likely to be economically challenged as well. You have to take into account California makes notice of this. We have programs like AVID and MESA here in southern California that help boost admissions. Just being in these programs allows students to have an automatic boost in admissions since UCs recognize these. MESA, a program only offered to schools that are economically challenged, has been promoting students from allover SoCal to get into college. I’ve been volunteering for MESA for the past year, and, let me tell you, it’s such a great program. I’ve dealt with many students particularly from the Compton area. Not only have many of these students been accepted to UCI and are also volunteering for the program, these students have shown a great deal of interest at the high school level. Many have 4.0+ GPAs while taking classes at UCLA, USC, or community college for free. This is all the work of California by the way. I used this to my advantage during my years in high school. It’s free community college courses! Anyone can do it =].</p>

32

<p>ELC % of CA. admits</p>

<p>UCB 58.2
UCLA 57.0
UCSD 42.4
UCD 32.6
UCSB 29.8
UCI 27.4
UCR 11.1
UCSC 8.9
UCM 8.5</p>

<p><a href="http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2008/freshman_admit_profile_2008.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2008/freshman_admit_profile_2008.pdf&lt;/a>
"If schools were to accept students for the sole reason of them being in a disadvantage, that portion would definitely drag them down in rankings. How do you think private universities do such a good job in rankings?"</p>

<p>I agree, BUT UC's do things differently than private schools and always will. As public institutions they have a different mandate. The disadvantaged students who gain admissions have proven themselves to be motivated and successful within the context of their opportunities. </p>

<p>Your volunteer work with MESA is very admirable Jason. AVID is also a fantastic program.</p>

33

<p>Collegemom16:</p>

<p>I would like to point out a discrepancy in the way information has been provided. Looking at the footnote below the ELC charts, one can read: </p>

<p>“Represents the proportion of ELC applicants in the total admitted pool.”</p>

<p>This footnote explains that the percentages listed in the ELC table of the Fall 2008 California Freshman Admit Profile represent the percent of admitted students who are ELC students. For example, UCI’s Fall 2008 stats lists 27.4%. This means that 27.4% of the 20,000 students admitted into UCI are ELC students. Please refer to the following table below for more information.</p>

<p>ELC % of CA. admits || # of Apps Admitted || # of ELC Students Admitted</p>

<p>UCB 58.2 || 10387 || 6045
UCLA 57.0 || 12574 || 7167
UCSD 42.4 || 19010 || 8060
UCD 32.6 || 21256 || 6929
UCSB 29.8 || 23166 || 6903
UCI 27.4 || 20587 || 5640
UCR 11.1 || 16816 || 1866
UCSC 8.9 || 20267 || 1803
UCM 8.5 || 8544 || 726</p>

<p>(In case one does not believe this correction, I would like to emphasize the choice of words in the footnote and in the Introducing the University PDF files. In the PDF files, it specifically says "ELC Student Admit Rate." This obviously means the admit rate of ELC student applicants. Please refer to the following link for the ITU PDF file. <a href="http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/admissions/ITU.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/admissions/ITU.pdf&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p>

<p>It is true that the University of California have a goal of trying to accept students from various socio-economic backgrounds since it is a public institution. All of the UCs are still under one office and try to create an equal field for all students when it comes to admissions. It is a goal of America to provide everyone with equal opportunity hence disability programs and such, although not all are perfect. In fact, there are many projects inside each school trying to reach out to certain communities. I’ve personally glanced at documents of strategies and plans to recruit applicants from certain areas. (There are even comprehensive plans for recruiting NorCal UCI admits since there is a noticeable difference in socal and norcal students!) If you Google and search around, you can find the plans for any UC.</p>

34

<p>UCI and UCSB (great school btw) have basically one reason why their acceptance is a bit lower than UCD:</p>

<p>The population density in SoCal is hugely different from NorCal. Most SoCal children stay in SoCal for college, and same for NorCal. </p>

<p>No arguments needed here. Diversity/ELC/ etc has really nothing to do with it. The SoCal schools are just receiving more applications because simply there are more people there.</p>

<p>I mean that's basically the same reason why UCLA can have a lower acceptance rate than Berkeley (even though Cal is arguably higher ranked)...</p>

<p>So same reasoning.. even if acceptance is lower for UCI by a bit, UCD is also arguably higher ranked.</p>

35

<p>when my 1st D went to UCB in 2004, we had a tuition/fee increase of 7%...now UC is talking about another 7% increase and it will affect my 2nd D. Nice going-:((...so we have a case where the middle class becomes poorer and the poor becomes more amd more desparate.</p>

<p>Pretty soon ranking doesn't matter because the price to attend becomes unreachable and you folks can debate about ranking all you want.</p>

<p>what is the point about debating ranking?.... so someone feels superior. </p>

<p>IMHO, I say all UC campuses can provide a quality education. Please end this unproductive debate. Thanks.</p>

36

<p>Compare the price of a UC to a private school and you're still getting a great education at a great price.</p>

37

<p>Why is AVID seen as something nice to have on your transcript? Nearly every student I know believes that AVID is for 'tards. Yeah, that sounds really blunt, but it's true. Who would have known taking something as obscure as AVID would actually help you?</p>

<p>It doesn't make sense, really. Even with a 7 period schedule, the most determined kids will take all AP and Honors courses with subjects that actually matter. I think AVID should not be taken in high regard by the UCs.</p>

1 Like