When I applied in l967 all you truly needed to get into any UC was a 3.0 and 1000 SAT..UCI, UCD, and UCR were nearly automatic and had no ceilings then. I had a 3.3..no weighted classes then, and 1200 SAT..I would get in nowhere now..although I did get into Claremont Men's and always wondered if I had gone there and UCSB, SLO..

pingpong2;735872 said:

---

I know what you mean, it definitely doesn't help that MSJ usually has about 30 valedictorians (read: 30 students with 4.0s unweighted) and at least 50 students attending Berkeley every year (God knows how many students are accepted and choose to go elsewhere).

Interestingly, my brother went to the same school, had a 3.7 unweighted, 2390 SAT, and the only ECs he had were Quizbowl and Model UN. He did get into Berkeley, but ultimately decided to bail out of the state to go to an Ivy, which kind of sucks since my parents and I had all gone to Cal. Sometimes admissions can be more mysterious than life itself.

---

That's because he nearly got a perfect SAT score which is amazing in my opinion. Dont they say that a higher SAT outweighs your GPA because it's the most standardized way to judge students evenly?

I remember when I was applying to UC's out of HS, a UC admissions counselor told me that they try to move students around between Cal and UCLA. More SoCal kids get into Cal and more NorCal kids get into UCLA.

CalBy7;735776 said:

---

My friends kid applied to Cal, MIT, and SLO. Got into MIT, and not Cal or SLO. Figure that out. I am sure every college is leaning towards out of state money. By the way, his parents are school teachers. That's a decision I would never want to have to make about my children. You want the best, great opportunity, but how the hell do you pay upwards of $58,000 a year to put your kid through school on the salary of two school teachers? And please don't say loans!

---

My sister was a grad and did worse in school than I did. I would have been shocked if I did not. That said, nothing in life is certain and I was glad when the letter came.


I had a friend at Cal who got into Cal EECS but not into SLO. Who knows how these processes really work?

I only applied to the UC system, Cal as my first choice then Davis and Santa Barbara. In the back of my mind I may have considered a JC route then getting into Cal in upper division. I also applied to the College of Engineering, mostly to avoid foreign languages, my academic Achille's Heel. Perhaps Engineers who scored high in math and verbal skills had a leg-up in admissions. I've run into some professional engineers who are almost illiterate. My dad was a Cal engineering grad so getting in was expected.

Since my grades were relatively mediocre in high school, I thanked my lucky stars I got into Cal, because I didn't have a Plan B. I'm not that old but I got in when it was (relatively) easier. There's no way in hell I could get in today.

This person whining about not getting in is ridiculous. But when we were in high school weren't we all this dumb about the world?

The admissions sticky wicket is grade inflation (as in Johnny/Suzie couldn't possibly have gotten a B in XYZ course) in high school. In 1959, I graduated #6 from one of the top rated public high schools in NorCal with a 3.9. There was no question that I was getting into Cal (top 12% then). No SATs were required. They knew how one school compared to the other. Boy has that all changed. We might have had one or maybe two 4.0 students.

How does an admissions officer differentiate between a bunch of 4.4 students? It is totally absurd now, and has been done by parents/students beating down weary teachers over the years over grades. Grade it on a curve, and hold to it, and let colleges know that your high school has integrity in that regard, and the whole situation would be a bit easier. Nothing is foolproof, but what we have now is ridiculous.

Also, could someone please explain to me how Cal and 'furd can take nearly equal student profiles, but a large percentage (large used to be 15-20%, don't know what it is today) of Cal's incoming class will flunk out and none of 'furds will? I know the philosophical differences in entrance, but c'mon.

CalBy7;735776 said:

---

My friends kid applied to Cal, MIT, and SLO. Got into MIT, and not Cal or SLO. Figure that out. I am sure every college is leaning towards out of state money. By the way, his parents are school teachers. That's a decision I would never want to have to make about my children. You want the best, great opportunity, but how the hell do you pay upwards of $58,000 a year to put your kid through school on the salary of two school teachers? And please don't say loans!

---

1. Loans
2. Work
3. Work and Loans
4. Stipper

I expected to get in, but I was stupid about such things. So glad I applied in 1975 and not 2005. My cap is off to all recent admits and my heart goes out to so many bright students who do not get in.

Cal's director of admission came to my high school after my junior year, looked at my transcript and said all I had to do was graduate from high school as i had fulfilled all of my requirements. High school was easy. When I got to Cal I looked around and thought this should be easy too. My fellow classmates did not look all that bright--wrong, wrong, they were brilliant and I learned to work much, much harder than I had ever done before.
Go Bears!

Definitely did. SAT wasn't mindblowing (1410) but my GPA at a fairly good public high school was ridiculous (I had one B in high school total at the time of admission... slacked off after I got in) and had good extracurriculars to back it up.

Also took a total of 14 AP and IB tests (boy what a waste of time... entered Cal with 70 units, of which the CoE let me use 8. bastards). Not sure that helped, certainly didn't help my personal life or my parent's wallet. This was in 2003. I wasn't aware of being 'automatically' in without the SAT or anything, but I never really worried about it.

KoreAmBear;735754 said:

---

Someone said her weighted GPA was 4.3. That's more like it, girl!

---

Have they standardized the weight system? Either on the UC end or the public school end? I had a 4.62 or 4.68 or some **** according to my high school :lol:

Why don't we have an lol emoticon? Its only the most oft-used 3 letters on the internet...

OdontoBear66;736040 said:

---

Also, could someone please explain to me how Cal and 'furd can take nearly equal student profiles, but a large percentage (large used to be 15-20%, don't know what it is today) of Cal's incoming class will flunk out and none of 'furds will? I know the philosophical differences in entrance, but c'mon.

---

My feelings on the matter is that Stanfurd students get their hands held, and the school won't let them fail (it'd reflect poorly on the school). In my experience this seems to be true of many top ranked private schools.

Cal, in contrast, doesn't give a crap if you fail. It's a double-edged sword, as it does cull out the weak and reduces the number of idiots who will embarrass a Cal degree, but at the same time you get a sense that the environment is viscous and not collegiate at all. Perhaps it's the whole "you're a big kid now, you can take care of yourself" mentality they try to foster, but I've never really seen the school go out of its way to help students who are struggling academically (other than for student-athletes).

SadbutTrue999;736112 said:

---

Have they standardized the weight system? Either on the UC end or the public school end? I had a 4.62 or 4.68 or some **** according to my high school :lol:

Why don't we have an lol emoticon? Its only the most oft-used 3 letters on the internet...

---

IIRC correctly, the UC GPA is calculated by the UCs themselves, not by your high school. There's a list of course for every single California high school, and whether or not they count as honors/AP. I remember scouring through that list to make sure my classes were on it; sometimes they make a mistake so you do have to call them and ask why such-and-such class is not counted. I remember I had to call them because the AP Psych class that was just offered that year was not reflected correctly on the list (yes, I was one of those grade-grubbing SAT-obsessing fools).

Cal was a lot easier to get in, as long as you maintained the right grade average in the "core" high school classes (shockingly, Cal actually looked at how well you did in core classes, and not BS elective classes). I went to another state school (not a JC) to play on the golf team, but then transferred into Cal as a soph, after suffering an injury. I knew I would get in because I did well enough on the core classes, and had a good (not great) SAT scores. That I had a 4.0 or played a sport at the other university didn't matter. Another thing back in the day, Cal failed out a lot of students, and then took a lot of transfers, including many from JCs. Now its very different. Only extremely good students with the highest GPAs are accepted, and the drop out rate is low. Not a lot of transfers. Cal also had more diversity in its student body when I attended in the late '70s. Today, I would never get in, except possibly as a transfer based on grades at another UC school. Somewhat ironic.

Back in the stone age (1966) -- Cal was the only school I applied to, because it was the only one I could afford (no tuition in those days) and was near my well-paying part time job as a teamster. Based on my grades and SAT's I knew I would get in.

Often wonder what the verdict would be today. I had a very high SAT and was a National Merit semi-finalist, but didn't completely apply myself in high school. (I wonder if anyone else can make my claim -- my Cal GPA was higher than my high school figure) No extracurricular activities to speak of, as I was working at least 20 hours a week.

In 1965 my high school counselor looked over my grades and SAT scores and "guaranteed" that Cal would accept me. Until I actually saw the acceptance letter, I was still a little nervous, but in the end he was right.

I got in in 1958 (!) with a 3.4..... I felt that in most of my classes my peers were much brighter than I. In later years I felt I should have gone to a State College.

Nevertheless, I was shocked at having to pay $60 per semester! Can someone put that into today's $$$?

pingpong2;736122 said:

---

My feelings on the matter is that Stanfurd students get their hands held, and the school won't let them fail (it'd reflect poorly on the school). In my experience this seems to be true of many top ranked private schools.

Cal, in contrast, doesn't give a crap if you fail. It's a double-edged sword, as it does cull out the weak and reduces the number of idiots who will embarrass a Cal degree, but at the same time you get a sense that the environment is viscous and not collegiate at all. Perhaps it's the whole "you're a big kid now, you can take care of yourself" mentality they try to foster, but I've never really seen the school go out of its way to help students who are struggling academically (other than for student-athletes).

---

To the contrary, all the UCs hope that some students fail or otherwise drop out to make room for community college transfers.

I had a 3.65 in high school and 1463 SAT in 1964. I was confident of getting into Cal.

pingpong2;735872 said:

---

Interestingly, my brother ... did get into Berkeley, but ultimately decided to bail out of the state to go to an Ivy, which kind of sucks since my parents and I had all gone to Cal. Sometimes admissions can be more mysterious than life itself.

---

You never answered my question whether "socio-economic" influences affect admissions.

SchadenBear;737246 said:

---

You never answered my question whether "socio-economic" influences affect admissions.

---

I don't think they do directly. I don't recall any direct consideration. They did give consideration to applicants from "rural" areas of the state. My sampling was from the 90's. Financial Aid and Scholarships are a different story.

is this chick kidding? my gpa was higher than hers. i never got a b in high school. she should apply to the other UC's too. some things arent meant to be

Didn't think I would, in fact I wasn't even going to apply until my Brother Bear yelled at me and told me to. I says, "It's going to be a waste of $50!" and he says, "I'll bet you $50 you'll make it."

WHERE'S MY MONEY BROTHER BEAR

calumnus;735866 said:

---

]Under the current admission system, your kids best chances of getting into Cal are by sending them to a large public school that is underachieving overall, but still offers a full contingent of AP classes that top students pretty much are all able to get into and support each other.

---

+1

CalBy7;735776 said:

---

My friends kid applied to Cal, MIT, and SLO. Got into MIT, and not Cal or SLO. Figure that out.

---

I got into Cal, UCLA, 4 other UCs, and I got waitlisted (but ultimately rejected) by Stanford. However, I got straight up rejected by SLO. If I hadn't gotten into Berkeley, I would have considered SLO strongly. Moreover, I didn't get my CSUEB acceptance package until after classes started at Berkeley.

calumnus;735866 said:

---

They don't limit the number from one school per se, but they do have a set aside for the top students from each and every California public school, which means that if you go to a school that has a lot of applicants for Cal you are probably going to end up competing in the state wide (and out of state) pool, which is more difficult.

My oldest daughter is African American, had a 3.8 gpa unweighted (4.2 gpa weighted), 2150 SAT (National Merit and Nation Achievement scholar), lots of extracurriculars--she won the Fremont Science Fair, her sculptures took second place at the Alameda County Fair, she was hired by the Stanford Education Department as a public speaker (with a letter of recommendation from the professor), she attended Columbia University Summer program and had the top score in her class with glowing letters of recommendation from two professors.... and she did not get into Cal, the only school she ever really wanted to attend since she was little, even on appeal.

A big part of it was probably class rank as her high school (Mission San Jose in Fremont) sends more kids to Cal than any other high school.

She got into UCSD on appeal where she was one of only 40 African Americans in her entering class.

Interestingly, she was offered full rides unsolicited from TAMU, Alabama (they can't find African Americans in Texas and Alabama that qualify for TAMU and Alabama?) and Utah and a sizable offer from Tufts, but it came too late for us to visit the campus and convince her it is a great school (none of her friends had heard of it, so it doesn't count).

Under the current admission system, your kids best chances of getting into Cal are by sending them to a large public school that is underachieving overall, but still offers a full contingent of AP classes that top students pretty much are all able to get into and support each other.

Either that, or apply from out of state and pay the higher tuition.

---

Wow. Unbelievable.

That's good to know. I'm familiar with that school district because my in-laws live just outside it. It's interesting because my wife and I have talked about what sort of school we want to send our kids to (when the time comes) and she doesn't want to send the to an overly competitive school (like mission San Jose). I, on the other hand, would rather try for the more competitive schools.

She went to an extremely competitive high school and I went to an average one so we probably just see the grass as being greener on the other side.

freshfunk;737490 said:

---

Wow. Unbelievable.

That's good to know. I'm familiar with that school district because my in-laws live just outside it. It's interesting because my wife and I have talked about what sort of school we want to send our kids to (when the time comes) and she doesn't want to send the to an overly competitive school (like mission San Jose). I, on the other hand, would rather try for the more competitive schools.

She went to an extremely competitive high school and I went to an average one so we probably just see the grass as being greener on the other side.

---

I had a similar experience; my younger brother went to MSJ, while I went to a mediocre high school. The right choice really depends on the student. If you know that you're child is lazy or an under-achieverer, yet is very competitive and prideful (which my brother was), sending him or her to a very competitive high performing school will usually prompt them to work harder. I'm not kidding when I say that your popularity ends up being tied to your academic performance at schools at MSJ; if you take a bunch of normal classes and/or have anything less than a 3.5 you get looked down on.

At my high school, the other students' expectations were B's and C's and if tried hard to get A's you were considered a loser, so if you're not focused or self-motivated you can easily lower your own standards and end up in a bad situation (I know a number of friends who did). I went through an interesting high school experience; my family initially lived in the MSJ area so I went to school with those type of kids, but while I was in Jr. High the school board redrew the boundaries so that my elementary school was diverted to a lower performing high school in the district. I can think of quite a few friends who had been honor students and were pretty smart though lazy, who then face-planted and ended up only getting into schools like SCU or CSUEB. Of course, I'm probably biased, but the message I took home was that a highly competitive environment is a strong motivator for lazy but smart students.

Another note; I ended up transferring to MSJ my senior year because my high school ran out of math and sciences classes for me to take, which I need 4 years of for MIT (moot point as I later got a fat rejection letter from them). At the end of it all, my transcript ended up showing a 3.5 GPA with a class rank of 250/400 and so-so SAT scores by MSJ standards, but I still got into Cal, UCLA, UCSD, and a handful of East Coast privates and lower tier Ivys, so I don't really feel class rank has a whole lot to do with it.

Something like 50 students in a class of 400 go to Cal, another 50 go to UCLA, 50 more go to UCSD, 15-20 more go to elite privates, etc. so it's not like it's very hard to get into a good college from a high school like MSJ, unless your SAT scores stink. I'm pretty sure the stats are similar at schools like Lynbrook, Saratoga, Cupertino, Gunn, Paly, etc. and if it really was a big issue, there probably wouldn't be that many people willing to buy million dollar shacks in those districts.

ETA: My brother secretly hated the people at MSJ and the school itself. While it appears to have been the right choice for him (he ended up getting into every school he applied to), he's convinced that it wasn't worth it and that he could have accomplished the same at any other school. In contrast, given his maturity level and how big of a slacker he was when he entered high school, there is no doubt in my mind that he did go to the right school. It's funny, part of the reason he actually tried so hard was to make sure he didn't have to go to Berkeley to get away from his peers who would ultimately go to Berkeley en masse (in his words, people that are shallow, can't think for themselves and subscribe to group-think, never questions anything an authority figure says, overly academically focused, disconnected from the real world, etc).

CalReason;737595 said:

---

If you get rejected and feel it necessary to contest and appeal that decision (as if there is some objective measure for admissions; there's not), such behavior is proof you don't belong at Cal.

---

I know many kids who get in via the appeal route, in fact if you appeal and let it be known that you are willing to start in the Spring Semester, your chances of success are higher.

IIRC, in some classes Cal does not receive the number of acceptances it was expecting and therefore will look to the "appeal" pool to fill vacancies in the class. In addition there are often a number of vacancies for the Spring Semester because most students prefer to start in the Fall.

But if you are accepted for the Spring Semester, you can still participate in student activities in the Fall. The only disadvantage is that student housing for the Spring Semester starters is "catch as catch can". [But even the dorms have openings as many Freshmen move to Fraternaties and Sorrorities in the Spring Semester.]