<p>@CSB111 as was stated by sarahchun, there were a few people with no ECs that got in to Berkeley with a 4.0. I didn’t think that was enough, considering the fact that even students with 4.0 GPA’s and strong ECs got denied, but I wanted to get a few people to weigh in on the decision, as this board was designed to garner a discussion such as this one. </p>
<p>@lindyk8 </p>
<p>Daaang. Semiotics at Berkeley?</p>
<p>WHAT DON’T THEY HAVE AT THAT SCHOOL?</p>
<p>@Cayton </p>
<p>I don’t know about this holistic process stuff, tbh. Don’t all universities use a holistic process to some degree? That would explain why students everywhere get rejected with magnificent test scores/academics (4.0 GPA, 2400 SAT, 35 ACT, etc)</p>
<p>@pragmatic23 </p>
<p>To be honest(And you should be flattered since you got into UCLA), I believe only the very best public and private schools do holistic admissions. The top 1% of all schools in America, I think. The rest just go off of your GPA, standardized test scores, and other numbers.</p>
<p>The people getting rejected from weaker schools probably were out-of-state or did not live close enough to the school they applied to to get in(The cal states operate like that; you could get into Berkeley and denied from CSULB because you don’t live close enough there). Or, your scores could be “too good” lol. That does happen.</p>
<p>The English department was all over semiotics @cayton. Probably still is - AS I AM ONLY 27!</p>
<p>When I was applying out of HS, I got rejected everywhere (every UC and private, I was on like 5 waitlists and didn’t get in either), and scrambled to apply to a few places that would take a late application. I had a weighted GPA near 4.0 (over 4.0 excluding my freshman year), a near perfect ACT after my 3rd time, heavy sports involvement, I worked, and some “hooks”. This didn’t do anything for me. </p>
<p>Simply put, it is a total crapshoot. I wish I knew what every school wanted but each reader is different, each day is different etc. </p>
<p>@lindyk8 </p>
<p>Only 27? Dang. </p>
<p>So you had your daughter when you were like, 6 years old? That’s a world record right there. :O</p>
<p>@Cayton I’m assuming UCSD, UCSB, and UCD fall into that category? If so, they were able to see through my “lac of personality” and admit me.</p>
<p>Just wanted to say @cayton, you’ve been really helpful and friendly not only in this thread but in other threads where I’ve seen you post, so thank you for that :)</p>
<p>@pragmatic23, you did not come off as complaining. You nicely asked for feedback. And you know what? We can all assume ECs, but who the hell knows?</p>
<p>@pragmatic23 </p>
<p>They do consider ECs, but not very much for transfers. </p>
<p>No problem! I love to help others where and when I can. I got a lot of help when I joined this board a couple of years ago and I like to think that that is the reason I am where I am today. </p>
<p>I read holistic at UCLA started two years ago, and now I just found an article - an actual UCLA press release - saying they started holistic in 2007. (???)</p>
<p><a href=“Newsroom | UCLA”>http://newsroom.ucla.edu/stories/080905_holistic-admissions_reed</a></p>
<p>Oh, OK @cayton, I see you knew this. So do you mean it has not been holistic for transfers?</p>
<p>Yeah @cayton and he wanted to go to UCB, but I thwarted that plan. 
</p>
<p>@CSB111 Applying out of HS is much more of a crapshoot than applying from a community college. When you’re coming from a CC, as long as you have a certain cut-off GPA, you have a very good chance or even a guarantee (in the form of TAG). From high school, a strong GPA guarantees you nothing. I have a friend that was a well-rounded student with good grades/scores to match and he was shutout from every UC he applied to and CSF. Either way, I’m glad everything worked out for you in the end.</p>
<p>@lindyk8
“Holistic” is just the name of the admissions system UCLA/UCB use and yes correct, it started in 2007 for UCLA. </p>
<p>@pragmatic23
Depends on the major. UC (LA?) said that 62% of the applicants apply to only 12 majors in Letters or Science so those majors are becoming more and more crapshooty and certain majors like engineering already are. </p>
<p>I think within 10 yrs applicants for transfers to UCLA and UCB will be in the same ballpark of difficulty as freshman</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be surprised about that @bomerr. </p>
<p>It’s just occurring to me now transfers are simply the people filling the spaces of those who dropped out. Keep those lower division classes hard, UC! </p>
<p>@pragmatic23 I agree re: freshman enrollees, esp. UCB and UCLA. I don’t want to say impossible, but nearly so. That’s the beauty of the CC system. My daughter got chances that simply would not have been there out of high school. I’ve seen kids go off to state schools, because God-forbid! they go to a CC for two years.</p>
<p>@lindyk8</p>
<p>“It’s just occurring to me now transfers are simply the people filling the spaces of those who dropped out.”</p>
<p>The CA master plan for education requires 1/3rd of UC graduates to be CC transfers so the UCs purposefully withhold spots from freshman to make room for transfers. This is primarily the reason that freshman competition increased faster than transfer admission. (the secondary is transfers apply to majors instead of colleges) </p>
<p>@bomerr @lindyk8 </p>
<p>Regardless of whether you get in at Berkeley/LA, a common trend in college admissions is for the standards to get tougher and tougher and alumni have of these schools have noted that if they had applied <em>now</em> to their schools with the stats and ECs they had <em>back then</em>, they’d be rejected in a heartbeat. </p>
<p>It’ll probably be the same with transfers in 10~15 years as @bomerr said.</p>
<p>@Cayton @Bomerr It’s nice to see that you guys have finally made up. It is also good that @UnsungHero1 is gone.</p>
<p>@CollegeDropout1 </p>
<p>This make-up period only lasts until the next thread where @bomerr says something I disagree with. :)</p>