UCLA has 112,000 applicants. How many applications did your school get?

Parents Forum
21

Xiggi,

UCLA was a easier to get into when all you needed was a pulse. :slight_smile:

Redwood High School used to publish a ranked risk.

Now they publish a top 100 student lost. I don’t like that as much. The top 50 kids are around 7 percent of the student body.

Now be careful Xiggi
 :slight_smile:

http://www.tamdistrict.org/cms/lib8/CA01000875/Centricity/Domain/125/Top100Colleges_2014.pdf

http://www.tamdistrict.org/cms/lib8/CA01000875/Centricity/Domain/125/2014CollegeTotals.pdf

Tam High doesn’t even publish the top 100 kids


http://www.tamdistrict.org/cms/lib8/CA01000875/Centricity/Domain/501/College%202014%20Accept%20Attend.pdf

22

“The UCs are hard to get into. Even for CA kids and even for transfers.”

“Hard” is the understatement. The picture has dramatically changed not only in the last 10 years, but especially perhaps in the last 5, and I have seen, in my business, significant shifts every year of the last 3. As one of many examples, 7 yrs ago --2008-- it was still possible to get into UCSC with a 3.3. Last admission cycle – 2014-- it’s difficult to get in with a 3.7 UW. Many such students are now opting for CSU’s.

As to UCLA and Berkeley, many of my VERY high-scoring, high-UW-GPA students with several 5’s on AP exams, great SAT Subject Scores & outstanding extracurriculars have been rejected from one or both of those campuses. Whereas just 3 years ago my good-but-not-outstanding candidates received offers from all UC campuses, the same category of applicant now is often lucky to get one or two offers.

The population pressures on the UC’s are enormous, as are the budget pressures. The latter means that many OOS’ers with mid to low scores are being preferred over CA residents with much higher stats and accomplishments. It makes one consider a cynical option: Reverse the scenario. Go OOS, get fab grades and apply to UC as an OOS’er. After all, UC loves all that high-tuition money. The same thing is happening with Internationals.

The mission of the University of California is to educate IN-STATE students. What’s happening (in that department) is a crime.

23

One thing that is very interesting after looking at the Redwood lists.

Students who are not in the top 100


There are 2 people who are going to Brown.

2 people going to UCLA.

1 person who is going to Harvard.

1 person who is going to UC Berkeley.

I have been out of the public high school information loop for a long time


But I don’t remember students outside the top 100 getting into any of those schools. There are more students at Redwood now than 10 years ago. Maybe 70 more? Students are probably a little more competitive now.

When my kids went to Redwood, maybe the top 35-40 kids had weighted gpas over 4.0 with the size of the student body around 265. I think I am close. It is probably a lot more now.

Brown was very difficult to get into for any Redwood student. My guess is the college counselor at Redwood High School has a better relationship with Brown than the counselor had 10 years ago.

One reason I brought up UCLA is
UCLA is a first choice school for many excellent students in Cal. If UCLA had early admission, thousands and thousands of students would apply to the school early admission.

24

These are 2014 numbers but likely still valid.

“About 16 percent of California students who applied got into UCLA, compared to 26.2 percent of out-of-state students and 17 percent of international students, according to preliminary admissions data released by the University of California Office of the President.”

(this is likely because OOS applicants had - on average - higher stats).

http://dailybruin.com/2014/04/28/nonresidents-more-likely-to-be-admitted-to-ucla-than-in-state-students/

25

Dstark, I appreciate the smiley when you go back to the comment. The pulse comment was hyperbolic in nature, but it somehow reflects the dynamics of an era that is gone. When listening to stories of parents, most of them will have accounts of how they could not get admitted in today’s XYZ school with their grades and ECs. My parents tell the same story!

Heck, the situation has changed for my extended peers. When I applied to CMC. the admission rate was in the 30/100 range with just over 3,000 applications. The yield was probably in the 30/100 range as well. Today, there are more than 7,000 application, a single digit admission rate, and a yield of over 50 percent.

However, the focus on a small number of “must get in” schools might mask the fact that there are still a great number of very good schools that, while “suffering” from the domino effect of multiple applications, still offer very reasonable chances of admissions. With the forced transition by Cal and UCLA to extend their reach OOS and abroad and lure full pay students, it is obvious that the spots are becoming dearer. Yet, it is a stretch to label the proposal 
 impossible.

The reality is that there is more to the California education system than solely focusing on the two better known schools. If schools such as SB or Davis can no longer be considered “fallbacks” for Cal, there are hardly impossible to get in. And how about San Diego, SC, Riverside, and Irvine. Here you have this dual image that a school that is listed among the best 25 public universities in the US and extremely high by the pseudo-scientists in China should have admissions at the level of a CC safety!

The bottom line is that, just as everywhere in the country, it has gotten more difficult, but that once somebody looks at options beyond the “impossible dream” the situation is not as dire as it might seem. The difficulty to reconcile different opinions might very well come from on the one hand wanting Cal to be named in the same breath as HYPS or Chicago or MIT and on the other hand wanting the admissions to be immune to what has happened to the other schools. If Stanford now routinely rejects 19 out of every 20 students, why would be expect that any kid with a decent ranking and decent score should walk into Cal or UCLA? What is wrong with looking at the remaining UC schools, the CSU system, and the before mentioned JUCO school system that has a dynamic transfer realm?

In addition, should we really expect the schools in the UC system not be keenly aware of the pecking order and participate in slotting the students according to an implied desirability ranking? Don’t the adcoms at Cal or UCLA know that this “close to admit” student will receive an offer at UCSD or Irvine if rejected? Same for SB looking at the “lower” UC schools. Again, in the end, more than 50 percent of all applicants end up with an admission. Not necessarily at the first choice, but a school that fits their profile better – in the eyes of the UC folks.

What If the UC adopted a medical school type of admission?

26

“The UC’s have not been at all secretive about the fact that they need the OOS tuition and it is taking spots away from CA kids.”

This has been the case in Colorado for years. At one point, more than 35% of the students at U of Colorado, Boulder – the state flagship – were Californians. Problem in Colorado is that there aren’t as many options for in-state kids as Californians have for theirs.

This is a direct result of states investing less and less money in their schools. With local tax dollars supporting a smaller & smaller share of state schools’ budgets, schools have to look for funding elsewhere. Many decide (rightly) that the easiest way to supplement their coffers is well-to-do OOS kids. Welcome to 21st century higher education in the USA


27

@ckm554 I should have read the article a bit more closely first! Turns out why the admit rate is considerably higher for OOS is because the decline rate among OOS applicants is much higher than for in-state kids. Which makes sense once they see the tuition costs!

28

@epiphany, UCs may be hard to get in for instate but I think the process is pretty predictable – it’s all about the GPA. You can’t compensate for less than straight As even with high SATs, lots of AP 5s, great leadership. A 4.0 from a poor hs will get in over a 3.7 from a super rigorous hs–I see it year after year. If you think about the total number of in state high schools where they need to take a kid or two at top UCs, there’s just no room to look at other strong students whose GPA is below 4.0.

29

Here are the last years of statistics:

http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2014/fall-2014-admissions-table2.pdf

Actually, the OOS admit number has been decreasing. The number of admissions not the rate has been pretty stable at UCLA. It has dropped more at Cal.

30

I don’t think this is true. The schools have their own admission departments and they don’t look exactly at the same things.

The admission rate is lower at Chicago compared to UCLA. Xiggi, do you think more students woukd prefer to go to Chicago than UCLA? I don’t think so.

There are departments at UCLA that are more difficult to get into than others. 17 percent is not the average across all departments.

Xiggi, why do you use words like impossible? Obviously it is not impossible to get into any school that is open. There is a thread about some school closing. Might be impossible to go there. :slight_smile:

31

The admission rate for engineering at Cal was a little below 10 percent in 2014.

http://engineering.berkeley.edu/about/facts-and-figures

32

^ Perhaps, I have pleasant memories of these lyrics:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfHnzYEHAow

33

@dstark‌ http://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php?compare=University+of+Chicago&with=University+of+California%2C+Los+Angeles

34

“But UC Merced is not UCLA so that will mean tears for weeks if it happens.” – So? Hey, a Hyuandai is not a Mercedes, but it will take you from point A to point B just the same.

Realities. Welcome to them, cmk554.

35

Xiggi,

lol!

36

Neweducation, I like that link.

The link is missing something.

There are people who would go to Chicago and would not go to UCLA and vice versa.

We kind of have to take that into account. :slight_smile:

People love to use cross admit information but that information is limited. I do like the info. How many people were admitted to Chicago and UCLA? Ten? I am kidding. :slight_smile:

How many students from Calif go to the Univ of Chicago? How many apply?

I posted a link to Redwood High School in Marin County because Xiggi mentioned Marin County.

It is just one school.

111 applicants to UCLA. 27 students were accepted. 14 are going.

5 applicants to Chicago. Zero accepted.

37

Fwiw, Parchment is the poster child for GIGO. For instance, here are the Stanford vs Cal numbers:

http://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php?compare=Stanford+University&with=University+of+California%2C+Berkeley

Total and utter BS!

38

Xiggi, :slight_smile:

39

hey xig, maybe those 16% recognize the value of a major, urban research university as opposed to a Junior University on a Farm


:smiley:

40

“@epiphany, UCs may be hard to get in for instate but I think the process is pretty predictable – it’s all about the GPA. You can’t compensate for less than straight As even with high SATs, lots of AP 5s, great leadership. A 4.0 from a poor hs will get in over a 3.7 from a super rigorous hs–I see it year after year. If you think about the total number of in state high schools where they need to take a kid or two at top UCs, there’s just no room to look at other strong students whose GPA is below 4.0.”

Predictable and not. Yes, you’re right about the GPA, but what doesn’t make sense is OOS-er’s with LOWER GPA’s getting in over in-staters with very high GPA’s (a UC a-g GPA of 3.9 vs. an OOS GPA of 3.7). That’s the distinction I’m talking about.

However, I do confirm your statement about the quantitative factors being determinative for In-staters – all other factors being equal. Unfortunately, those of us in education (I have pointed this out on other threads) know that a hyper-inflated public school GPA is often far less illuminating about the academic potential of a student than a 3.7 UW gpa at a quantitatively and qualitatively harder (private) high school. We have seen this syndrome for years at East Coast privates, where the curve is very difficult, the courses demanding, the student’s peers overall very fine.

However, from all the reporting about this on the East Coast, both publics and privates there know the sitch and have figured out the quality, and --at least for private colleges – have included that in the evaluation of the student. I can’t say the same necessarily for CA. There are a few private high schools in CA which mimic the academics and expectations at East Coast boarding schools. I’m not convinced that UC admissions knows (or cares) about that.

For this and other reasons I urge my students from such high schools, and from any high schools, to apply to private colleges in spades. Many of them (and their parents) are operating on 5-10 year old assumptions about UC admissions, however – which means that this year there have been LOTS of tears and LOTS of shock.

Also, the cognitive dissonance is still at play.