How the hell does anyone in California get into college?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The UC's admit by high school. So a low performing high school in the ghetto will get as many acceptances as a high performing one.

The trick is to be in one of these school.

University High in Irvine is treated the same as Dominguez High in Compton. University High has 30 plus SAT NMSF, 100 Commended scholars. Dominguez High has zero.

Dominguez High sends the same amount of students to Berkeley and UCLA as does University High.

It’s how UC schools get around racial preference bans voted in.

This is going to sound crazy, but maybe it's because...the UC system is supposed to be serving the public and not just wealthy individuals. There's majority poor white and asian communities who get lifted by this admissions process too. It's literally a class-based admissions policy rather than racial one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Folsom High in Folsom CA is middle class, mostly white and Asian and has 637 seniors. 42% met or exceeded California's math standards. Grant High School is low income, mostly Black and Hispanic and has 410 seniors. 13% of the students met or exceeded California's math standards.

UCLA
Folsom:
119 applied, 9 admitted
Grant:
27 applied, 6 admitted

So, it sounds like 1.4% of the graduates in both schools were accepted to a UC. My read on that is that UCLA purposely tries to accept the top students from all schools, and this is irregardless of the school’s overall socioeconomic status. I’m not sure if there is anything surprising here, but is that the point you were trying to make?

And to correct, my post above. This seems to be the case for public schools. At least in DC’s case, the well-regarded privates gain acceptances at a much higher (~10 pct rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The UC's admit by high school. So a low performing high school in the ghetto will get as many acceptances as a high performing one.

The trick is to be in one of these school.

University High in Irvine is treated the same as Dominguez High in Compton. University High has 30 plus SAT NMSF, 100 Commended scholars. Dominguez High has zero.

Dominguez High sends the same amount of students to Berkeley and UCLA as does University High.

It’s how UC schools get around racial preference bans voted in.

This is going to sound crazy, but maybe it's because...the UC system is supposed to be serving the public and not just wealthy individuals. There's majority poor white and asian communities who get lifted by this admissions process too. It's literally a class-based admissions policy rather than racial one.

+1000

Tired of people hemming and hawing about not going to their state flagship being from UMC because the low income or rural kid gets in. Publics have the best social mobility for FGLI students.

[Anonymous]

I think we are largely saying the same thing. The top tier UCs have a quota by high school with the goal of admitting the best students irregardless of socioeconomic status. I personally agree with this approach — even if it might personally disadvantage DC. Our left leaning policies is one of the prime reasons that I live where I do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think we are largely saying the same thing. The top tier UCs have a quota by high school with the goal of admitting the best students irregardless of socioeconomic status. I personally agree with this approach — even if it might personally disadvantage DC. Our left leaning policies is one of the prime reasons that I live where I do.

Can you share a link where they say there’s a “quota?”

I have asked UCLA this and they said NO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are largely saying the same thing. The top tier UCs have a quota by high school with the goal of admitting the best students irregardless of socioeconomic status. I personally agree with this approach — even if it might personally disadvantage DC. Our left leaning policies is one of the prime reasons that I live where I do.

Can you share a link where they say there’s a “quota?”

I have asked UCLA this and they said NO.

If you look at the historical admissions from each high school, you will see the quota. It is not necessarily a bad thing- admit by high school, not an entire applicant pool. The UC's know the high schools and know how many they will take from each, each year.

The number one rule for UC admission: You compete against your high school classmates, not against the broader applicant pool. Pre-covid this was seen in the SAT scores of the colleges. UC's had very average SAT scores, for example UCI's 25th percentile SAT score was below 1100. Even UCLA had 25% of its class in the 1200's.

I don't begrudge this policy choice even though much more accomplished students are rejected as compared to others.

[Anonymous]

^ This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are largely saying the same thing. The top tier UCs have a quota by high school with the goal of admitting the best students irregardless of socioeconomic status. I personally agree with this approach — even if it might personally disadvantage DC. Our left leaning policies is one of the prime reasons that I live where I do.

Can you share a link where they say there’s a “quota?”

I have asked UCLA this and they said NO.

If you look at the historical admissions from each high school, you will see the quota. It is not necessarily a bad thing- admit by high school, not an entire applicant pool. The UC's know the high schools and know how many they will take from each, each year.

The number one rule for UC admission: You compete against your high school classmates, not against the broader applicant pool. Pre-covid this was seen in the SAT scores of the colleges. UC's had very average SAT scores, for example UCI's 25th percentile SAT score was below 1100. Even UCLA had 25% of its class in the 1200's.

I don't begrudge this policy choice even though much more accomplished students are rejected as compared to others.

I understand what you’re saying and I’m familiar with the data, but I point blank asked a high level UCLA Admissions Director this and they said they DO NOT read or admit by school.

They could have been lying, it’s a clear possibility. But I just wanted to pass that along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are largely saying the same thing. The top tier UCs have a quota by high school with the goal of admitting the best students irregardless of socioeconomic status. I personally agree with this approach — even if it might personally disadvantage DC. Our left leaning policies is one of the prime reasons that I live where I do.

Can you share a link where they say there’s a “quota?”

I have asked UCLA this and they said NO.

If you look at the historical admissions from each high school, you will see the quota. It is not necessarily a bad thing- admit by high school, not an entire applicant pool. The UC's know the high schools and know how many they will take from each, each year.

The number one rule for UC admission: You compete against your high school classmates, not against the broader applicant pool. Pre-covid this was seen in the SAT scores of the colleges. UC's had very average SAT scores, for example UCI's 25th percentile SAT score was below 1100. Even UCLA had 25% of its class in the 1200's.

I don't begrudge this policy choice even though much more accomplished students are rejected as compared to others.

I understand what you’re saying and I’m familiar with the data, but I point blank asked a high level UCLA Admissions Director this and they said they DO NOT read or admit by school.

They could have been lying, it’s a clear possibility. But I just wanted to pass that along.

I believe you, but I’m not sure what else they could say without opening themselves up to legal questions…particularly from this administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are largely saying the same thing. The top tier UCs have a quota by high school with the goal of admitting the best students irregardless of socioeconomic status. I personally agree with this approach — even if it might personally disadvantage DC. Our left leaning policies is one of the prime reasons that I live where I do.

Can you share a link where they say there’s a “quota?”

I have asked UCLA this and they said NO.

If you look at the historical admissions from each high school, you will see the quota. It is not necessarily a bad thing- admit by high school, not an entire applicant pool. The UC's know the high schools and know how many they will take from each, each year.

The number one rule for UC admission: You compete against your high school classmates, not against the broader applicant pool. Pre-covid this was seen in the SAT scores of the colleges. UC's had very average SAT scores, for example UCI's 25th percentile SAT score was below 1100. Even UCLA had 25% of its class in the 1200's.

I don't begrudge this policy choice even though much more accomplished students are rejected as compared to others.

I understand what you’re saying and I’m familiar with the data, but I point blank asked a high level UCLA Admissions Director this and they said they DO NOT read or admit by school.

They could have been lying, it’s a clear possibility. But I just wanted to pass that along.

I believe you, but I’m not sure what else they could say without opening themselves up to legal questions…particularly from this administration.

Yeah, true. They’re very guarded and often give half-truths.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are largely saying the same thing. The top tier UCs have a quota by high school with the goal of admitting the best students irregardless of socioeconomic status. I personally agree with this approach — even if it might personally disadvantage DC. Our left leaning policies is one of the prime reasons that I live where I do.

Can you share a link where they say there’s a “quota?”

I have asked UCLA this and they said NO.

If you look at the historical admissions from each high school, you will see the quota. It is not necessarily a bad thing- admit by high school, not an entire applicant pool. The UC's know the high schools and know how many they will take from each, each year.

The number one rule for UC admission: You compete against your high school classmates, not against the broader applicant pool. Pre-covid this was seen in the SAT scores of the colleges. UC's had very average SAT scores, for example UCI's 25th percentile SAT score was below 1100. Even UCLA had 25% of its class in the 1200's.

I don't begrudge this policy choice even though much more accomplished students are rejected as compared to others.

I disagree in that the other major factor in UC admissions is first generation students or lower income students and this disproportionately impacts the odds of kids from wealthy and private schools even if they themselves aren’t wealthy. Now, for whatever reason some private schools (particularly Catholic ones) are feeder schools (it may be the number of athletes) and do well but most don’t. Take a school like Harvard Westlake where they have dozens going to HYPMS and something like 40% to a top 10-15 school, 97 admits for UCs and 191 applicants. Most or 171 applied to Cal and 33 got in. Now take Mission High in San Francisco (high concentration of first generation and underperforming school) 106 applied and a 101 got in. 78 applied to Cal and 28 got in. It’s not just your school peers. Not saying anything is wrong with this policy but there is definitely a focus on the underserved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The UC's admit by high school. So a low performing high school in the ghetto will get as many acceptances as a high performing one.

The trick is to be in one of these school.

University High in Irvine is treated the same as Dominguez High in Compton. University High has 30 plus SAT NMSF, 100 Commended scholars. Dominguez High has zero.

Dominguez High sends the same amount of students to Berkeley and UCLA as does University High.

It’s how UC schools get around racial preference bans voted in.

This is going to sound crazy, but maybe it's because...the UC system is supposed to be serving the public and not just wealthy individuals. There's majority poor white and asian communities who get lifted by this admissions process too. It's literally a class-based admissions policy rather than racial one.

I am all for it. The kids from the lower ranked schools help built community and inspire others. That’s a lot of work and resilience.

[Anonymous]

I disagree in that the other major factor in UC admissions is first generation students or lower income students and this disproportionately impacts the odds of kids from wealthy and private schools even if they themselves aren’t wealthy. Now, for whatever reason some private schools (particularly Catholic ones) are feeder schools (it may be the number of athletes) and do well but most don’t. Take a school like Harvard Westlake where they have dozens going to HYPMS and something like 40% to a top 10-15 school, 97 admits for UCs and 191 applicants. Most or 171 applied to Cal and 33 got in. Now take Mission High in San Francisco (high concentration of first generation and underperforming school) 106 applied and a 101 got in. 78 applied to Cal and 28 got in. It’s not just your school peers. Not saying anything is wrong with this policy but there is definitely a focus on the underserved.

I think your comparison (denominator) is wrong. What is the respective graduating class size at Mission High School? I don’t have time to calculate this right now myself, but I suspect that only ~2% of the TOTAL graduates were accepted to Cal. At HW down in LA, it is probably closer to ~10%. Elite privates in the Bay (Lick, University, Head Royce, College Prep, etc) get around 10% of their graduates accepted at for Cal/UCLA. They are aiming for the top of the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we are largely saying the same thing. The top tier UCs have a quota by high school with the goal of admitting the best students irregardless of socioeconomic status. I personally agree with this approach — even if it might personally disadvantage DC. Our left leaning policies is one of the prime reasons that I live where I do.

Can you share a link where they say there’s a “quota?”

I have asked UCLA this and they said NO.

If you look at the historical admissions from each high school, you will see the quota. It is not necessarily a bad thing- admit by high school, not an entire applicant pool. The UC's know the high schools and know how many they will take from each, each year.

The number one rule for UC admission: You compete against your high school classmates, not against the broader applicant pool. Pre-covid this was seen in the SAT scores of the colleges. UC's had very average SAT scores, for example UCI's 25th percentile SAT score was below 1100. Even UCLA had 25% of its class in the 1200's.

I don't begrudge this policy choice even though much more accomplished students are rejected as compared to others.

I disagree in that the other major factor in UC admissions is first generation students or lower income students and this disproportionately impacts the odds of kids from wealthy and private schools even if they themselves aren’t wealthy. Now, for whatever reason some private schools (particularly Catholic ones) are feeder schools (it may be the number of athletes) and do well but most don’t. Take a school like Harvard Westlake where they have dozens going to HYPMS and something like 40% to a top 10-15 school, 97 admits for UCs and 191 applicants. Most or 171 applied to Cal and 33 got in. Now take Mission High in San Francisco (high concentration of first generation and underperforming school) 106 applied and a 101 got in. 78 applied to Cal and 28 got in. It’s not just your school peers. Not saying anything is wrong with this policy but there is definitely a focus on the underserved.

I think your comparison (denominator) is wrong. What is the respective graduating class size at Mission High School? I don’t have time to calculate this right now myself, but I suspect that only ~2% of the TOTAL graduates were accepted to Cal. At HW down in LA, it is probably closer to ~10%. Elite privates in the Bay (Lick, University, Head Royce, College Prep, etc) get around 10% of their graduates accepted at for Cal/UCLA. They are aiming for the top of the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting into a UC not named UC Merced or Riverside is not that hard.

Generally don't suck and be in or near the top 10% of your class, participate in your school's community, show you are a decent human being and you'll get into one of them. Will it be Berkeley or UCLA? That's the crapshoot, but you will get into one of them.

Admission's statistics are available for every high school in the country. It isn't impossible or frankly even that hard because of all the UC's.

It really depends on your major, no guarantees for Engineering or CS.

Sorry but the stated 4.6 with 9 APs is in for any major at UCR unless they had something so egregious in their app that they are out everywhere.