<p>^^ congrats on the interview. Yes, of course, merit aid schools use sophisticated enrollment mangagement techniques to build their classes; I would do the same.</p>
<p>But, where test scores matter more for USC is in admissions. For example, a NMSF with a 3.6 gpa would have a decent shot at acceptance to USC but not as likely to UCLA. In cc parlance, USC would be a high match-low reach, and UCLA a super reach, bcos the UCs wieght gpa more heavily than test scores. Colleges like USC are willing to overlook a lower gpa in light of high test scores.</p>
<p>ya but that's only national merit
I'm getting nothing from usc though I have a 35 and a 4.8ish GPA... though up for regents at UCLA
USC I now believe certainly does look more at the essays and accomplishments</p>
<p>
[quote]
UCLA a super reach, bcos the UCs wieght gpa more heavily than test scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is UCB not UCLA. Not all UCs are the same. UCLA weights SAT and GPA the same category. Also GPA from high school varies, at least USC recognizes that. 4.66 from a bottom ranked school vs 3.6 from top 4 ranked school is not the same.</p>
<p>at least USC recognizes that. 4.66 from a bottom ranked school vs 3.6 from top 4 ranked school is not the same.</p>
<p>That's what I like about USC. I go to a competitive Catholic school and many of our kids go to USC. They know about high rigorous our school is and that it is harder to get a 4.0 here than a bottom public school.</p>
<p>I do not think there are many NMF out there who have a low gpa. However, you can have a high gpa do to dedication and by being a conscientous student and not have high test scores. I believe more of these type of students get into the UC's then they would USC. The UC's have a program with schools in California called ELC where they take the top 4% of the HS graduating class. As long as the student maintained a 3.0 or higher, took the SAT and 2 SAT subject test and required courses they automatically get accepted into a UC. Some of these students are accepted into UCB and UCLA with lower SAT scores.</p>
<p>Yeah, believe it or not, some of us out here hate ELC. If you are at a very competitive high school, top 4% is pretty tough to crack, there are so many qualified students. Its been explained that ELC is designed specifically for the lower tier schools, to allow qualified applicants a shot at college.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I believe more of these type of students get into the UC's then they would USC.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This would be true for all the UCs except Berkeley and UCLA.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The UC's have a program with schools in California called ELC where they take the top 4% of the HS graduating class.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Berkeley and UCLA do not consider ELC.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As long as the student maintained a 3.0 or higher, took the SAT and 2 SAT subject test and required courses they automatically get accepted into a UC.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Er, no, you can have all of those and not get ELC.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Some of these students are accepted into UCB and UCLA with lower SAT scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Those with lower test scores were not accepted because of ELC, but because of other strong factors on their applications.</p>
<p>
[quote]
at least USC recognizes that. 4.66 from a bottom ranked school vs 3.6 from top 4 ranked school is not the same.</p>
<p>That's what I like about USC. I go to a competitive Catholic school and many of our kids go to USC. They know about high rigorous our school is and that it is harder to get a 4.0 here than a bottom public school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Er, the UCs do indeed take this into consideration. They don't just blindly consider GPAs without any sort of context. In fact, the UCs, particularly Berkeley and UCLA, emphasize a student's achievement within context -- it's a big point of their admissions.</p>
<p>I took the information directly off the University of California Website:
" To be eligible in the local context, a student must attend an eligible school that participates in the program(Which are most public HS), have his or her transcript submitted to UC with the high school's ELC submission packet, satisfactorily complete a specific pattern of 11 UC-approved courses by the end of the junior year and be ranked in the 4 top percent of his or her high school class according to UC ELC evaluation rules. Students who are eligible in the local context must do the following to complete their eligibility and be admitted to the University:</p>
<p>Maintain a 3.0 GPA
Complete all coursework requirements for freshman admission by the end of senior year
Take two SAT Subject Tests and either the ACT Assessment plus Writing or the SAT Reasoning Test - no later than December 2007 (for fall 2008 admission), and
Apply to the University by the November 30 application deadline. "</p>
<p>That is all of the eligibility requirement. EC's are not required for the qualification. The High Schools then send the information to the UC between junior and senior year and the students receive notification as to the ELC standings. </p>
<p>As far as UCLA and UCB I had not hear the the University of California System allows them not to participate. But who knows.</p>
<p>
[quote]
That is all of the eligibility requirement.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I wasn't say that wasn't a requirement. Certainly a 3.0, SAT/SAT IIs, a-g are required for ELC students. But they're also required to be in the top 4% of their classes. Notice that you said:</p>
<p>
[quote] As long as the student maintained a 3.0 or higher, took the SAT and 2 SAT subject test and required courses they automatically get accepted into a UC.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You didn't mention the top 4% there.</p>
<p>
[quote]
EC's are not required for the qualification.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I never said they were.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As far as UCLA and UCB I had not hear the the University of California System allows them not to participate.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's not that they're not "allowed." It's that they can't -- they're in demand, and if they accepted all the ELC students, then they would be far larger than they are now.</p>
<p>"The UC's have a program with schools in California called ELC where they take the top 4% of the HS graduating " It was there KyleDavid80 you missed it.
Personally, I like the ELC though my oldest D school does not participate and my youngest is only in 9th grade. It allows students that work hard to obtain a public college level education even if they did not go to the best schools. There are also students who like I mentioned before, work really hard for their gpa's that are just not good test takers. I know of a kid who has had a 4.8 gpa all through hs. And cannot get higher than an 1800 on the SAT. I think it is sad that this test limits his ability to get into the top schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
"The UC's have a program with schools in California called ELC where they take the top 4% of the HS graduating " It was there KyleDavid80 you missed it.
[/quote]
I think you're misreading the original statement. That statement means that the top 4% will gain acceptance into <em>a</em> UC -- but not necessarily the UC of their choice. Typically that will mean UCR and now UCM.</p>
<p>I never said a UC of their choice. Nor did I say it to start an argument. The point I was making was that I think the UC do take more students based on gpa not JUST high SAT scores than USC partly because of the ELC requirement. That being said USC is a private school and does not have that requirement so if you look just at the SAT test scores on collegeboard USC's are higher. As far as the original question goes. UCLA vs. USC. I think you have to go to both schools and see which one fits for you. I think they are both great schools and offer great opportunities. USC received between 36000 applicants and 41000 applicants with an acceptance rate of 20% this year. Highest amount of applications yet. This is according to their admission officer as of yesterday.</p>
<p>Some stats for comparison taken from USNWR and collegeboard.com (these are for students entering Fall, 2006, but I suspect that the comparisons have not changed much over the last year):</p>
<p>College ABC</p>
<p>Acceptance Rate: 26%
% In-State: 93%</p>
<p>SAT CR 25/75 Range: 570-690
% over 700: 21%</p>
<p>SAT M 25/75 Range: 610-720
% over 700: 39%</p>
<p>ACT 25/75 Range: 24-30
% 30+: 29%</p>
<p>% of Top 10% students: 97%
% with GPA > 3.75: 91%</p>
<p>College XYZ</p>
<p>Acceptance Rate: 25%
% In-State: 53% </p>
<p>SAT CR 25/75 Range: 630-720
% over 700: 36%</p>
<p>SAT M 25/75 Range: 650-740
% over 700: 50%</p>
<p>ACT 25/75 Range: 28-32
% 30+: 54%</p>
<p>% of Top 10% students: 86%
% with GPA > 3.75: 90%</p>
<p>If one were to look at the two colleges above-College ABC and College XYZ, I think most would conclude that the selectivity and incoming student quality is higher at College XYZ with equal or higher marks in nearly every measurement (save for Top 10% students). </p>
<p>College XYZ, of course, is USC. Old impressions and local resentments die hard, but the numbers would seem to give the edge in selectivity to USC. The problem is that Californians have long known USC as the University of Spoiled Children and many have yet to accept that its student quality has caught up to and passed UCLA (and perhaps even UC Berkeley). USC is a very good story in American college education and, after Stanford, is the most attractive (and realistic) California college option for students from other parts of the USA. The quality at USC has been on the upswing for quite some time and current trends continue to favor further increases in selectivity.</p>