UC berkerly

all168

Senior member
May 16, 2001
500
0
0
News copy from KFWB:

BERKELEY, Calif. (AP) 10.7.03, 8:54a -- The University of California will review admissions procedures at all eight undergraduate campuses after a report found that UC Berkeley admitted hundreds of students in 2002 with SAT scores far below those of applicants who were denied admission.

UC President Robert Dynes agreed to the comprehensive analysis on Monday at the request of Board of Regents Chairman John Moores, said UC spokesman Michael Reese.

Moores was the main author of the preliminary analysis of UC Berkeley's admissions process. His confidential report to fellow Board of Regents members, obtained by the Los Angeles Times, revealed that nearly 400 undergraduate students were admitted to UC Berkeley in 2002 with SAT scores falling between 600 and 1,000, well below the 1,337 average for last year's total admitted class.

Nearly 2,600 applicants with scores from 1400 to 1500 were not admitted and 600 would-be Cal students with SAT scores above 1500 were also rejected.

Berkeley administrators said the report contained largely accurate data but may have misinterpreted aspects of the admissions process. They noted that many of those who scored high on the SAT but were not admitted had low grade-point averages or withdrew their applications early. Others applied for an extremely competitive major or were residents of other states, for whom standards are higher.

Berkeley administrators also noted that the SAT test is only but one factor in judge a student's academic record.
 

LivinLaVivaPollo

Senior member
Dec 29, 2000
954
0
0
Blah! I knew it. A friend of mine that very year got in with an 1180. Female in Chemical Engineering, go figure.
 

Danman

Lifer
Nov 9, 1999
13,134
0
0
Originally posted by: LivinLaVivaPollo
Blah! I knew it. A friend of mine that very year got in with an 1180. Female in Chemical Engineering, go figure.

Yep, it's very sad. :(


*shakes fist at Berkerly*
 

all168

Senior member
May 16, 2001
500
0
0
They really should investigate before their rating drop or average students GPA drop.
 

dfi

Golden Member
Apr 20, 2001
1,213
0
0
I've known this for years. How the hell someone with no activities, no honor classes, a low 3.0 GPA, with a SAT of 1090 beat out ASB president, all AP course, 1350 SATs is beyond me. When I was there I met someone who had to take remedial math the summer before starting at UCB. How does that work?

dfi
 

Chuck1234

Member
Feb 28, 2003
45
0
0
Originally posted by: LivinLaVivaPollo
Blah! I knew it. A friend of mine that very year got in with an 1180. Female in Chemical Engineering, go figure.


But would she survive in engineering at Berkeley? I heard it is pretty tough to study at Cal.
 

Imdmn04

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2002
2,566
6
81
i dont care if one has a 4.0 gpa, if you scored an 800 on your SAT, you are not going to Berkeley, this just proves that your 4.0 from your ghetto high school is worth nothing.

i rather take anybody with a 1500 sat score and 3.0 gpa than a 800 sat score and 4.0 gpa.
sat is standarized, gpa is not.
 

PoPPeR

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2002
6,993
0
0
yeah, the problem is GPA is weighted above all when admissions starts. The colleges get so many applications, if you dont' have a high enough GPA to start with, your SAT scores wont even get looked at. My 1280 SAT score was not even considered for San Diego State or Cal Poly because everyone that applied had 3.5-3.8's, while I was at a 3.0. Meanwhile, those 3.5-3.8's averaged like a 1150 on their SAT's.

Anyways, yeah it's freakin tough to study at Berkeley. My freshman friend had to read a 500 page book or something in 4 nights, and it's worth a whopping 1% of his grade. My sisters boyfriend recently graduated from Berkeley's pre-med program, getting perfect grades. but he did nothing but study, study, and study.
 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
3
81
Originally posted by: Imdmn04
i dont care if one has a 4.0 gpa, if you scored an 800 on your SAT, you are not going to Berkeley, this just proves that your 4.0 from your ghetto high school is worth nothing.

i rather take anybody with a 1500 sat score and 3.0 gpa than a 800 sat score and 4.0 gpa.
sat is standarized, gpa is not.

I'd rather have a person of average intelligence who is willing to work their butts off to succeed than a brilliant person who is lazy as hell and doesn't feel like turning in their homework. Obviously you want smart people, but you also want people who will work hard to get things done, get them done right, and get them done on time. I think that is generally more important to the majority of employers as well. Unless you are going to be a nuclear physicist, hard work and determination will be more valuable to a company than sheer genius.
 

gopunk

Lifer
Jul 7, 2001
29,239
2
0
Originally posted by: Shanti
Originally posted by: Imdmn04
i dont care if one has a 4.0 gpa, if you scored an 800 on your SAT, you are not going to Berkeley, this just proves that your 4.0 from your ghetto high school is worth nothing.

i rather take anybody with a 1500 sat score and 3.0 gpa than a 800 sat score and 4.0 gpa.
sat is standarized, gpa is not.

I'd rather have a person of average intelligence who is willing to work their butts off to succeed than a brilliant person who is lazy as hell and doesn't feel like turning in their homework. Obviously you want smart people, but you also want people who will work hard to get things done, get them done right, and get them done on time. I think that is generally more important to the majority of employers as well. Unless you are going to be a nuclear physicist, hard work and determination will be more valuable to a company than sheer genius.

i agree with your sentiment, but being a nuclear physicist requires hard work and determination too. sheer genius doesn't do jack by itself, unless the only goal is to pass high school.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: Shanti
Originally posted by: Imdmn04
i dont care if one has a 4.0 gpa, if you scored an 800 on your SAT, you are not going to Berkeley, this just proves that your 4.0 from your ghetto high school is worth nothing.

i rather take anybody with a 1500 sat score and 3.0 gpa than a 800 sat score and 4.0 gpa.
sat is standarized, gpa is not.

I'd rather have a person of average intelligence who is willing to work their butts off to succeed than a brilliant person who is lazy as hell and doesn't feel like turning in their homework. Obviously you want smart people, but you also want people who will work hard to get things done, get them done right, and get them done on time. I think that is generally more important to the majority of employers as well. Unless you are going to be a nuclear physicist, hard work and determination will be more valuable to a company than sheer genius.

i agree with your sentiment, but being a nuclear physicist requires hard work and determination too. sheer genius doesn't do jack by itself, unless the only goal is to pass high school.

That's only partially true. Being smart means you don't have to work as hard. Not to beat my own drum, but I didn't study at all as much as my peers in college, but when it came to tests I aced them. It was kidn of sad, since a lot of them went to office hours, worked their tails off, etc, and only did mediocre on exams. Of course if I was smart AND hardworking, I probably would have accomplished even more.
 

gopunk

Lifer
Jul 7, 2001
29,239
2
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: Shanti
Originally posted by: Imdmn04
i dont care if one has a 4.0 gpa, if you scored an 800 on your SAT, you are not going to Berkeley, this just proves that your 4.0 from your ghetto high school is worth nothing.

i rather take anybody with a 1500 sat score and 3.0 gpa than a 800 sat score and 4.0 gpa.
sat is standarized, gpa is not.

I'd rather have a person of average intelligence who is willing to work their butts off to succeed than a brilliant person who is lazy as hell and doesn't feel like turning in their homework. Obviously you want smart people, but you also want people who will work hard to get things done, get them done right, and get them done on time. I think that is generally more important to the majority of employers as well. Unless you are going to be a nuclear physicist, hard work and determination will be more valuable to a company than sheer genius.

i agree with your sentiment, but being a nuclear physicist requires hard work and determination too. sheer genius doesn't do jack by itself, unless the only goal is to pass high school.

That's only partially true. Being smart means you don't have to work as hard. Not to beat my own drum, but I didn't study at all as much as my peers in college, but when it came to tests I aced them. It was kidn of sad, since a lot of them went to office hours, worked their tails off, etc, and only did mediocre on exams. Of course if I was smart AND hardworking, I probably would have accomplished even more.

fine, college, whatever. point is, you're not a nuclear physicist :p and what i meant by "jack" was "do something other than just the status quo" . i'm sure there are lots of people that can breeze through college and land a job, but without hard work and dedication, that's about as far as they'll get.
 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
3
81
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: Shanti
Originally posted by: Imdmn04
i dont care if one has a 4.0 gpa, if you scored an 800 on your SAT, you are not going to Berkeley, this just proves that your 4.0 from your ghetto high school is worth nothing.

i rather take anybody with a 1500 sat score and 3.0 gpa than a 800 sat score and 4.0 gpa.
sat is standarized, gpa is not.

I'd rather have a person of average intelligence who is willing to work their butts off to succeed than a brilliant person who is lazy as hell and doesn't feel like turning in their homework. Obviously you want smart people, but you also want people who will work hard to get things done, get them done right, and get them done on time. I think that is generally more important to the majority of employers as well. Unless you are going to be a nuclear physicist, hard work and determination will be more valuable to a company than sheer genius.

i agree with your sentiment, but being a nuclear physicist requires hard work and determination too. sheer genius doesn't do jack by itself, unless the only goal is to pass high school.

That's only partially true. Being smart means you don't have to work as hard. Not to beat my own drum, but I didn't study at all as much as my peers in college, but when it came to tests I aced them. It was kidn of sad, since a lot of them went to office hours, worked their tails off, etc, and only did mediocre on exams. Of course if I was smart AND hardworking, I probably would have accomplished even more.

Yeah, but the example was of someone with a 1500 SAT and a 3.0 GPA. And anyone who can score 1500 but only has a B average is a lazy a$$.

I agree that even for jobs that rely on very high intelligence, hard work is important.
What I really meant was that 95% of the jobs out there don't require a genius. They simply require hard work. The other 5% require both.

 

paulney

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2003
6,909
1
0
Originally posted by: LivinLaVivaPollo
Blah! I knew it. A friend of mine that very year got in with an 1180. Female in Chemical Engineering, go figure.

I was accepted only by UCB and UCSC, while other UCs rejected me. Only because I was a transfer who did not have an English 1A completed... Berkeley accepted me under a condition I take English 1A in summer with a satisfactory grade. Which I did. I wonder if they ever looked at my TOEFL scores.

I remember I scored fairly poorly on SAT verbal, but did fine in Math and all my SAT II exams... But then, I applied to EECS, not English major :)

Go figure.
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
14
81
could be nepotism, too. look at ivy league schools and how many of those students get in simply because of who their daddy is.