Why are UC schools test blind vs test optional? Also, do UC schools have required % of in state students like uva/unc?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are evaluating students compared to others at their same high schools. So your kid goes to a high school in Silicon Valley with 50 national merit scholars it is going to be tough for you to get into ucla and Berkeley if your kid is a national merit scholar but 40th in the class.

The 40th top student might have 10 AP’s with 4’s and 5’s all A’s and maybe one or two B’s. And took bc Calc in 11th grade. The top 20 at a school like that might have taken calculus on 9th or 10th grade and has done well in competition math.

Not that UC’s factor in psat scores but looking at how many national merit scholars there are gives you an idea how competitive a school is.

ELC (excellence in local context) is what matters as the first cut, especially at competitive high schools. That is the top 9% of the school. If you are in the bay area and you aren't designated as ELC you're unlikely to get into UCLA or UCB.

If I remember correctly, the top 9% of the school guarantees UC admission, most likely UC Merced, Riverside or Santa Cruz. But it isn’t going to get a kid into Cal or UCLA that often. As I said upthread, at my son’s HS, they took out of the top 2%-3%, maybe one or two out of the top 5%.

How long ago did your son apply?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son’s urban CA high school was 3.8 uw and 4.2 w for the top 10%, so I’m not sure if grade inflation is as much an issue here as in VA and MD. As noted, UC has extensive knowledge of CA high schools and the historic performance of their kids.

UCs also consider AP scores if submitted and strong AP results enhance an application. It is similar to NYU which as a test optional school allows students to substitute specified types of AP scores for the SAT/ACT.

At my son’s HS, Cal and UCLA take from the top 2% with maybe some out to 5%, with nearly all from a special elite program that disproportionately serves middle and upper middle class white and Asian kids.

UCs are selective, just in their own way. UC Davis with a higher admission rate as a school away from the coast is the underrated one in terms of educational quality and student experience.

What program is that? COSMOS? SIP?

Agree that UC Davis is underrated. Great college town and nice campus. But it hard to get admitted from our high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The UC schools believe that standardized testing is racist. That’s why.

Not true. The UC's know that kids with income are more likely to take the test and have tutors, that kids with low incomes are not even going to take it.

The mandate for the UC is to educate graduates of PUBLIC SCHOOLS in California.

It is to align with this mandate and not discard many highly academic kids who are not able to afford to take the SAT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Title status my question. Just curious about rationale for test blind. So many apps, so much grade inflation...

UCs went test blind pursuant to a consent decree in a lawsuit about people with disabilities. This can be googled.

The controversy over whether to use standardized testing for UC admissions is long and complicated. Before the lawsuit, there was a task force report recommending use of standardized tests due to grade inflation https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/committees/sttf/sttf-report.pdf . There are two sides in this controversy, one in favor of testing, and one vehemently against using testing, among the powers-that-be governing the UC system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are evaluating students compared to others at their same high schools. So your kid goes to a high school in Silicon Valley with 50 national merit scholars it is going to be tough for you to get into ucla and Berkeley if your kid is a national merit scholar but 40th in the class.

The 40th top student might have 10 AP’s with 4’s and 5’s all A’s and maybe one or two B’s. And took bc Calc in 11th grade. The top 20 at a school like that might have taken calculus on 9th or 10th grade and has done well in competition math.

Not that UC’s factor in psat scores but looking at how many national merit scholars there are gives you an idea how competitive a school is.

ELC (excellence in local context) is what matters as the first cut, especially at competitive high schools. That is the top 9% of the school. If you are in the bay area and you aren't designated as ELC you're unlikely to get into UCLA or UCB.

If I remember correctly, the top 9% of the school guarantees UC admission, most likely UC Merced, Riverside or Santa Cruz. But it isn’t going to get a kid into Cal or UCLA that often. As I said upthread, at my son’s HS, they took out of the top 2%-3%, maybe one or two out of the top 5%.

How long ago did your son apply?

This year. Accepted at Davis and Santa Cruz, rejected at Cal. He was one of those 9% kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The UC schools believe that standardized testing is racist. That’s why.

This. They did extensive analysis of the standardized test and found it biased against certain races so they don’t use it.

Not true. They were being sued by a group over the SAT and test blind was part of the settlement. The recommendation was to keep tests but the Regents gave in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son’s urban CA high school was 3.8 uw and 4.2 w for the top 10%, so I’m not sure if grade inflation is as much an issue here as in VA and MD. As noted, UC has extensive knowledge of CA high schools and the historic performance of their kids.

UCs also consider AP scores if submitted and strong AP results enhance an application. It is similar to NYU which as a test optional school allows students to substitute specified types of AP scores for the SAT/ACT.

At my son’s HS, Cal and UCLA take from the top 2% with maybe some out to 5%, with nearly all from a special elite program that disproportionately serves middle and upper middle class white and Asian kids.

UCs are selective, just in their own way. UC Davis with a higher admission rate as a school away from the coast is the underrated one in terms of educational quality and student experience.

What program is that? COSMOS? SIP?

Agree that UC Davis is underrated. Great college town and nice campus. But it hard to get admitted from our high school.

The program is specific to the Sacramento City Unified School District, the History and International Studies Program. My guess is that other CA districts have similar programs that improve the chances of kids to get into a UC. A lot of district STEM kids go to Cal Poly SLO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are evaluating students compared to others at their same high schools. So your kid goes to a high school in Silicon Valley with 50 national merit scholars it is going to be tough for you to get into ucla and Berkeley if your kid is a national merit scholar but 40th in the class.

The 40th top student might have 10 AP’s with 4’s and 5’s all A’s and maybe one or two B’s. And took bc Calc in 11th grade. The top 20 at a school like that might have taken calculus on 9th or 10th grade and has done well in competition math.

Not that UC’s factor in psat scores but looking at how many national merit scholars there are gives you an idea how competitive a school is.

ELC (excellence in local context) is what matters as the first cut, especially at competitive high schools. That is the top 9% of the school. If you are in the bay area and you aren't designated as ELC you're unlikely to get into UCLA or UCB.

LOL the NMS kids at our school did not get into UCB and only 2 got into UCLA! Some of the admits were really bizarre this year.

Similar at our California school. Half of the UCLA admits made sense - bright, competitive students. The other half — wow, they completely got in through hooks or exaggerated resumes. The idea that some of these mediocre kids got into UCLA over more academically inclined students is upsetting.

Every parent in California knows it’s a lottery at the end of the day. There is no way to assess your chances like there is at UVA, for example. For as much transparency the UCs have, the process is also very opaque.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The UC schools believe that standardized testing is racist. That’s why.

Not true. The UC's know that kids with income are more likely to take the test and have tutors, that kids with low incomes are not even going to take it.

The mandate for the UC is to educate graduates of PUBLIC SCHOOLS in California.

It is to align with this mandate and not discard many highly academic kids who are not able to afford to take the SAT

How do you know if they’re “highly academic” if their schools are subpar and they don’t even take an SAT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are evaluating students compared to others at their same high schools. So your kid goes to a high school in Silicon Valley with 50 national merit scholars it is going to be tough for you to get into ucla and Berkeley if your kid is a national merit scholar but 40th in the class.

The 40th top student might have 10 AP’s with 4’s and 5’s all A’s and maybe one or two B’s. And took bc Calc in 11th grade. The top 20 at a school like that might have taken calculus on 9th or 10th grade and has done well in competition math.

Not that UC’s factor in psat scores but looking at how many national merit scholars there are gives you an idea how competitive a school is.

ELC (excellence in local context) is what matters as the first cut, especially at competitive high schools. That is the top 9% of the school. If you are in the bay area and you aren't designated as ELC you're unlikely to get into UCLA or UCB.

LOL the NMS kids at our school did not get into UCB and only 2 got into UCLA! Some of the admits were really bizarre this year.

If you aren’t ELC pretty much nothing else matters. And that is local ELC, not state so top 9% in your HS is a starting point and nothing else.

The UC system knows a lot about your school, the kids, yield, etc. and it all factors into admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are evaluating students compared to others at their same high schools. So your kid goes to a high school in Silicon Valley with 50 national merit scholars it is going to be tough for you to get into ucla and Berkeley if your kid is a national merit scholar but 40th in the class.

The 40th top student might have 10 AP’s with 4’s and 5’s all A’s and maybe one or two B’s. And took bc Calc in 11th grade. The top 20 at a school like that might have taken calculus on 9th or 10th grade and has done well in competition math.

Not that UC’s factor in psat scores but looking at how many national merit scholars there are gives you an idea how competitive a school is.

ELC (excellence in local context) is what matters as the first cut, especially at competitive high schools. That is the top 9% of the school. If you are in the bay area and you aren't designated as ELC you're unlikely to get into UCLA or UCB.

If I remember correctly, the top 9% of the school guarantees UC admission, most likely UC Merced, Riverside or Santa Cruz. But it isn’t going to get a kid into Cal or UCLA that often. As I said upthread, at my son’s HS, they took out of the top 2%-3%, maybe one or two out of the top 5%.

How long ago did your son apply?

This year. Accepted at Davis and Santa Cruz, rejected at Cal. He was one of those 9% kids.

The number actually dropped to top 8% this year. Both my kids at LA public high schools were updated this at the start of 12th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The UC schools believe that standardized testing is racist. That’s why.

Not true. The UC's know that kids with income are more likely to take the test and have tutors, that kids with low incomes are not even going to take it.

The mandate for the UC is to educate graduates of PUBLIC SCHOOLS in California.

It is to align with this mandate and not discard many highly academic kids who are not able to afford to take the SAT

How do you know if they’re “highly academic” if their schools are subpar and they don’t even take an SAT?

OMG do I have to explain GPA and class rigor to you, really?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The UC schools believe that standardized testing is racist. That’s why.

This. They did extensive analysis of the standardized test and found it biased against certain races so they don’t use it.

Actually they did an extensive analysis of standardized tests, said they were one of the best predictors of college performance across all racial and SES groups and recommended keeping standardized tests for admissions. The University of California system headed by Janet Napolitano decided to ignore this and go test blind.

[Anonymous]

URMs as a whole do not do well on standardized tests.

[Anonymous]

typical suburban middle class/umc high school of 2000 students with 500 per class will get around 20 students enrolled in berkeley or ucla. at some, you'll see around 30