<p>^ I appreciate the stats you've provided, midd, but can you also post the GPA and SAT scores of the students admitted at both schools?</p>
<p>L2GOOGLE
UCLA is 4.15 UCBerkeley is 4.18</p>
<p>middsmith, you might say Cal is harder to get into in general. However, to a particular student, it really depends. Many who got in Cal but not UCLA and vis versa. And that is not uncommon either.</p>
<p>3.96 uc gpa. :) u got hope</p>
<p>For those who wish to compare UCLA vs. Cal on SAT scores, GPA, % of ELCs among admits etc. see:</p>
<p>^^Interesting; LA is improving at a much faster rate than Cal.</p>
<p>Your numbers are from 2007.
Last year UCLA had over 55,000 applications. The most in the country. UCB had the second most of the UC's (and San Diego had the next). There tends to be very few students admitted to both schools, you get into one and not the other and in both cases, there are many who DO get into Stanford, and do NOT get into Cal or UCLA. (oh my, is that possible? Why yes!) Both UCLA and CAL are the only UC's to use a "holistic" review where the application is viewed as a whole package rather than ranked in each individual section of GPA, Tests, achievements, essay, etc as the others schools do. This year, CAL and UCLA did not reduce their class size goal of around 4,700 incoming Freshman, but since their "takes" (SIR's) have been higher, they reduced the total number they will be admitting. UCLA has admitted about 1,000-1,500 less students for this Fall 2009 than in 2008. (closer to around 11,000 this year, still aiming for an entering class size of 4,700).<br>
Stats from Fall 2008:
Berkeley: Applications: 48,462 Admitted: 10,387 Rate: 21.4%
Averages:
HS W GPA: 4.18
ACT Composite: 29
SAT Reading: 665
SAT Math: 696
SAT Writing: 674</p>
<p>UCLA: Applications: 55,406 Admitted: 12,574 Rate: 22.7%
Averages:
HS W GPA: 4.15
ACT Composite: 29
SAT Reading: 653
SAT Math: 686
SAT Writing: 664</p>
<p>So I got into UCLA engineering and computer science... and I'm going to get rejected at Berekeley then? :(</p>
<p>^ No, you have a good chance of getting in</p>
<p>^Ok, thanks. :)</p>
<p>At my school, usually around 10-12 students get into UCB, and around 15-20 students get into UCLA. There were only about 4-5 guys that got into UCLA this year (me included), and I received the "You're a top applicant" from UCLA (the UCLA likely letter). I really hope I get into Cal. I have an undying passion for computer science and program/HTML coding that I believe will be fostered at Cal. :( </p>
<p>I'm shaking everyday and refreshing CC every 30 minutes (of which 15 minutes is spent trying out new Java code, and another 15 minutes is spent developing new hobbies) and I tend to babble and babble when I get nervous, as evident in this post.</p>
<p>So, yeah.</p>
<p>
[Quote]
UCLA has admitted about 1,000-1,500 less students for this Fall 2009 than in 2008. (closer to around 11,000 this year, still aiming for an entering class size of 4,700).
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>I'm wondering where you're getting those numbers from...?</p>
<p>^
where. yes. where.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Berkeley: Applications: 48,462 Admitted: 10,387 Rate: 21.4%
Averages:
HS W GPA: 4.18
ACT Composite: 29
SAT Reading: 665
SAT Math: 696
SAT Writing: 674</p>
<p>UCLA: Applications: 55,406 Admitted: 12,574 Rate: 22.7%
Averages:
HS W GPA: 4.15
ACT Composite: 29
SAT Reading: 653
SAT Math: 686
SAT Writing: 664
[/quote]
</p>
<p>See? This is what I'm talking about. Berkeley asks for higher entry GPAs and SAT scores than UCLA does. It implies then that Cal is more selective than is UCLA, which asks for lower GPAs and SAT scores, although the difference is minute. But still, the data proves that I was correct. Even by anecdotal experiences would suggest that Berkeley is more selective than is UCLA, in general. Cal's eng'g dept is more selective than UCLA's eng'g. Cal's comsci is a heller -- gets only the creme of the crop, whether in-state or OOS, and more so, international. Even Cal's science is more selective than is UCLA. And although I don't have any data to back it up, I would surmise that Cal's pre-med and pre-business (as haas is quite famous) are more selective than UCLA's too. There may be some courses that UCLA are more selective than Cal, but as a whole, Cal is more selective than UCLA is. I don't even need to tell you that. Just look at the data so you would know.</p>
<p>If your definition of "selective" is "most demanding of GPA and scores," then your claims are tautologically true almost. I'd never have denied that Berkeley students likely would be more grade/SAT hungry than LA students on average. </p>
<p>I prefer to consider selectivity in terms of the many dimensions this word can have, rather than just look at raw numerical data, and say "4.18 > 4.15" -- after all, students who get into Berkeley and not into LA PROBABLY didn't get rejected from LA because their GPA was too low, given Cal likely wouldn't have let them in. In my heart of hearts, yes I lean towards Cal being somewhat more selective, but I've seen enough that I think it's simply not useful to consider a black and white definition of selective.</p>
<p>RML, your point well taken. However, it means nothing to a particular student who is anxious about his/her admission status. My friend last year got into Cal and UCI but was rejected by UCLA. She end up going to UCI.</p>
<p>So HS W GPA is not the UC GPA, right? It's the regular HS weighted GPA? 10-11 HS weighted GPA?</p>
<p>Why isn't selectivity solely based on acceptance rate, which is a composite measure of all the factors?
So what if college X has average GPA of 2.5 and average SAT of 1500(out of 2400)? If college X has acceptance rate of less than 20%, I'll say it's more selective than Cal and UCLA.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why isn't selectivity solely based on acceptance rate, which is a composite measure of all the factors?
So what if college X has average GPA of 2.5 and average SAT of 1500(out of 2400)? If college X has acceptance rate of less than 20%, I'll say it's more selective than Cal and UCLA.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Because the applicants to that school may be self-selected, and not as many top caliber applicants may be even considering that school. My friend was applying to graduate school, and was considering these percentages, and apparently based on them, UChicago (one of the top 5-6 programs, and arguably harder to get into than some of the other top 5-6) was less selective than many schools that're WAY easier to get into by common knowledge. This is why I wouldn't say MIT is a more selective school than Caltech. It is possible to get into one and not the other, and I've seen it happen both ways.</p>
<p>Basically, admissions is an art, not a science, and we can't gauge many subtleties based on very broad statistics -- we need very, very specific ones (e.g. percentage of so and so specific kind of applicant who made it to school X vs. to school Y) to make meaningful contributions to the anxious posters on CC waiting to find out about admissions.</p>
<p>For instance, I do make a definitive statement here (as I have before) that I think Berkeley engineering is more selective than UCLA engineering.</p>
<p>Well, you may argue with me mildly or violently, but whether you would agree with me or not, the stats would show us that Cal is more selective than UCLA. I cannot imagine a school that asks for lower GPA and SAT scores -- the two main components of college admissions -- would claim equally as selective to the school that asks for higher entrance requirements. I'm not belittling UCLA as I believe it's a fantastic school. I just would like to correct the statement that UCLA is as selective as Cal. The stats have already showed us that it isn't. Even USNews ranked Cal at number 14 or several places ahead of UCLA's for many years running now. Was there a year that USNWR ranked UCLA's selectivity equal or higher than Cal's? I can't recall that it did happen. </p>
<p>You've already made a bold statement that Cal eng'g is more selective than UCLA's. I suppose Cal comsci, physical sciences, premed courses and pre-HAAS (Economics, etc) are also more selective than UCLA's equivalent courses. Which program then would you say that it's tougher to get onto at UCLA than at Cal? </p>
<p>Let's do this on a per program basis:</p>
<p>Cal engg vs UCLA engg
Cal prelaw vs UCLA prelaw
Cal premed vs UCLA premed
Cal physical sciences vs UCLA physical sciences
Cal languages vs UCLA languages
Cal busines/econ vs UCLA bus/econ</p>
<p>cal engy
cal physical science
cal business/econ
4 sho</p>