UCSC Holistic Review Process

<p>
[quote]
COMMITTEE ON ADMISSIONS AND FINANCIAL AID
Policy for Frosh Admission – Holistic Review
May 27, 2011</p>

<p>Use of UCLA and UCB Holistic Scores</p>

<p>Students who have applied to both UCSC and either UCB or UCLA will not be read again by UCSC readers, saving substantial resources that would be considered duplicative in nature. UCSC would accept the read from UCB/UCLA to be equal to our own campus score. In the case where an applicant has both a UCB and a UCLA score, those two scores would be averaged. By adopting this method of using other campus' holistic scores, the work load for the Admissions staff will be reduced. More importantly, UCSC reviewers will then be able to concentrate on reading applicants who either did not apply to UCB/UCLA, or those who received a UCB/UCLA score that requires a UCSC tie-break review.</p>

<p>Once UCSC's admission target is set (this is the number of offers of admission needed to achieve the campus‟s enrollment target for any given term), a UCB holistic score and a UCLA holistic score would be considered exactly the same as the UCSC holistic score. UCSC readers will read all applications which will not be read at UCB or UCLA. The lower the holistic score, the higher the chance for admission. When the holistic scoring band would yield too many admits, UCSC will employ tie-breaking procedures (see below) that weight certain factors more heavily. These factors embody criteria that are highly valued by UCSC's faculty.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Source: <a href="http://senate.ucsc.edu/senate-meetings/agendas-minutes/2011-may-27-senate-meeting/CAFA052711scp1674.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://senate.ucsc.edu/senate-meetings/agendas-minutes/2011-may-27-senate-meeting/CAFA052711scp1674.pdf&lt;/a>, page 2.</p>

<p>
[quote]
COMMITTEE ON ADMISSIONS AND FINANCIAL AID
Annual Report, 2010-11
November 9, 2011</p>

<p>CAFA approved the use of UCB and UCLA reading scores to be used in the UCSC selection process. Data provided by the UC Office of President showed that the holistic scores from these two campuses already aligned with UCSC's admissions decisions, and by adopting this strategy, CAFA has sought a more cost-effective approach to implementing a comprehensive review model, namely Holistic Review. CAFA is open to the possibility of using other UC campus's holistic scores in the future, if the data from OP proves similar to that of UCB and UCLA.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Source: <a href="http://senate.ucsc.edu/senate-meetings/agendas-minutes/2011-november-09-senate-meeting/CAFAar1011-scp1677.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://senate.ucsc.edu/senate-meetings/agendas-minutes/2011-november-09-senate-meeting/CAFAar1011-scp1677.pdf&lt;/a>, page 7.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Minutes - Committee on Admissions & Financial Aid (CAFA)
January 11, 2012</p>

<p>Holistic Review Update</p>

<p>The Admissions Office has completed training for holistic review and begun reading applications. There are 21 readers this year. With the cross-over of UCSC applicants in the UCB and UCLA pools accounting for 56% of all applications, our readers still must read slightly more than 14,000 applications. While this is around 2,000 less than under the old quantitative (also Comprehensive Review) policy, the overall complexity of the reviews will be more time consuming.</p>

<p>It was brought to the committee's attention that issues have arisen with the UCB tool, and certain inflexibilities have led Admissions leadership to assert they would not use it again, unless they were addressed. While statistics on the reading would be premature so early in the process, Admissions plans to provide CAFA with both mid-stream data and reporting afterward on the scoring and outcomes under holistic review.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Source: <a href="http://senate.ucsc.edu/committees/cafa-committee-on-admissions-and-financial-aid/cafa-minutes/2011-12-cafa-minutes/CAFA%201.11.12%20Minutes.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://senate.ucsc.edu/committees/cafa-committee-on-admissions-and-financial-aid/cafa-minutes/2011-12-cafa-minutes/CAFA%201.11.12%20Minutes.pdf&lt;/a>, page 2.</p>

<p>Wait what? So if a student applied to UCB and UCLA those two scores were used by UCSC admissions officers so that they didn’t have to review those applications? How does UCB and UCLA come up with a score for the students?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Holistic review process.</p>

<p>What you need to know (information I got from UC Office of the President):</p>

<p>UCSC is using the scores from Berkeley and UCLA, but NOT using the decisions those campuses are making. So even if Berkeley and/or UCLA rate a student as borderline or not recommended for admission, that doesn’t mean UCSC will reject that student because the contextual evaluation is a little different at UCSC compared to Berkeley and UCLA. UCOP is going to come out with an official statement soon explaining the process and I’ll post it once I get my hands on it. A separate issue that is exacerbating the situation is that UCSC is reducing enrollment a bit this year because of budget cuts, so that explains why some students who would otherwise be well qualified for UCSC are not being admitted.</p>

<p>AskMsSun- I can see myself doing what you are doing when I am older. Sometimes when I call to ask about things I get completely different answers depending on who I talk to – even if they are in the same department. It’s nice to have solid information, and I think people are curious and have the right to know all the information that you have provided for us. Thank you.</p>

<p>I did want your opinion on something, if there is a program that only certain students are invited to apply to and one of the criteria is to have lower than a 500(maybe lower than that) on either the math or the reading section, (which is below average) then do you think that, for a UC, that is hypocritical almost.(?) If the student wasn’t “college-ready” shouldn’t they not have been accepted at all? I mean most students, including low-income first generation can get at least a 500 on each section (most actually score higher), and to exclude “average” students (who are also low-income/first generation etc) from a program with many priorities because they didn’t have low enough SAT scores seem questionable to me. Or do you think I am being a bit inconsiderate? I’m all for helping the students out (that’s not the issue), but what I am not for is providing these students (with low SAT scores) so many benefits and priorities while others who scored average get nothing.</p>

<p>vitaminR, thanks :)</p>

<p>I think the programs have good intentions but like all things in life, they are not perfect. The UCs are, honestly, trying the best they can to be inclusive while making sure the students they admit become successful academically. Nothing the UCs do will please everyone all of the time, and it’s not a realistic goal. </p>

<p>I agree with you that most middle-of-the-road and middle-class students are left out in the cold, but a lot of the programs (particularly the ones that still get funding, in this economy) are meant to help students with nowhere else to turn. Most middle-of-the-road and middle-class students have other options (maybe not their first choice, but options nonetheless) and they will do fine in life even if they don’t get into their first choice college.</p>

<p>I completely agree and I am happy that you responded. I have decided that I am going to continue doing research about this program, and hopefully my local newspaper will publish an article. I want to write about it (from my perspective) and submit it in September. I need the month of August to create a solid article before I submit it. This program excluded people who are low-income/low socio-economic status b/c they do not have low SAT scores, other prestigious universities manage to reward low income, first generation students and their average/high SAT scores, why can’t a UC that isn’t as prestigious as Berkeley do the same? </p>

<p>I know that I am being vague in my descriptions, by saying “this program” instead of the program’s name, etc. But for now I want to be as discreet as I possibly can and wait to see what happens in September.</p>

<p>Again, thank you so much AskMsSun for taking your time and responding I know you are super busy with all the work and research you do. Keep at it, your info is interesting and helpful. </p>

<p>Good Luck to all the applicants – for Fall 2013!</p>

<p>vitaminR, good luck with your article!</p>