College Discussion - View Single Post - Getting into Cal and what to expect when you finally get there.

vicissitudes · 12-13-2007, 04:15 AM

I think something is definitely suspicious with those stats. There has to be a drop-off in the number of people who are reapplying after one year versus graduating seniors. If you look at the graduating seniors 2006, and take that to be the complete stats, 49/120 were rejected. So even if all of them were to reapply the following year, the "one year out" people would only amount to 49 compared to roughly 120 for the graduating seniors of 2007. Then consider that out of those 49, many are looking at grad school, getting a job, taking time off, and it's clear that only a small fraction of the 120 will apply next year (perhaps 20-30 out of 120). Of course, there will be some who were rejected and simply didn't report the data, but unless they outnumber those who did report 4:1 or 5:1, they're not going to outnumber the graduating seniors i.e. they're making up less than 50% of the applicants.

Second point, I simply find it almost impossible to reconcile the second link that lists 730 people. Let's make some rough assumptions. Let's say 1 out of 2 people who are rejected decide to apply again the next year, and let's say for every 1 of those, there are 2 people who are in the same boat, but didn't report that they were rejected. Okay, so we have 25 + 50 = 75 students who were rejected one year and decide to apply again the next year. Now just for fun, let's say that ALL those students fail to get in, and keep applying year after year. So for 2007, you have ~120 graduating seniors. To make up the other 600, you would need 75 students from 2006, 75 students from 2005, 75 students from 2004, 75 students from 2003. So to keep up that 730 figure, you would need all the rejects to keep applying and failing, for 5 years in a row. Come on, does that sound realistic at all?

What's the logical explanation? A combination of the following:

1. The 120 figure is severly underestimating the real figure because Berkeley's data isn't as complete (a lot of people probably don't want to put their GPA as public data).

2. A lot of people who are applying for the first time after a number of years are included.

What's the conclusion? Those students who apply over and over constitute only a small portion of the 730, certainly under 50%. That's the only thing that makes sense.

But all this aside, even if you are right and the "one year outs" are the strong majority, the data you provided shows that they get into med school at the same rate as graduating seniors, so it still doesn't help your argument.

12-13-2007, 04:15 AM	#189
vicissitudes Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 3,155	I think something is definitely suspicious with those stats. There has to be a drop-off in the number of people who are reapplying after one year versus graduating seniors. If you look at the graduating seniors 2006, and take that to be the complete stats, 49/120 were rejected. So even if all of them were to reapply the following year, the "one year out" people would only amount to 49 compared to roughly 120 for the graduating seniors of 2007. Then consider that out of those 49, many are looking at grad school, getting a job, taking time off, and it's clear that only a small fraction of the 120 will apply next year (perhaps 20-30 out of 120). Of course, there will be some who were rejected and simply didn't report the data, but unless they outnumber those who did report 4:1 or 5:1, they're not going to outnumber the graduating seniors i.e. they're making up less than 50% of the applicants. Second point, I simply find it almost impossible to reconcile the second link that lists 730 people. Let's make some rough assumptions. Let's say 1 out of 2 people who are rejected decide to apply again the next year, and let's say for every 1 of those, there are 2 people who are in the same boat, but didn't report that they were rejected. Okay, so we have 25 + 50 = 75 students who were rejected one year and decide to apply again the next year. Now just for fun, let's say that ALL those students fail to get in, and keep applying year after year. So for 2007, you have ~120 graduating seniors. To make up the other 600, you would need 75 students from 2006, 75 students from 2005, 75 students from 2004, 75 students from 2003. So to keep up that 730 figure, you would need all the rejects to keep applying and failing, for 5 years in a row. Come on, does that sound realistic at all? What's the logical explanation? A combination of the following: 1. The 120 figure is severly underestimating the real figure because Berkeley's data isn't as complete (a lot of people probably don't want to put their GPA as public data). 2. A lot of people who are applying for the first time after a number of years are included. What's the conclusion? Those students who apply over and over constitute only a small portion of the 730, certainly under 50%. That's the only thing that makes sense. But all this aside, even if you are right and the "one year outs" are the strong majority, the data you provided shows that they get into med school at the same rate as graduating seniors, so it still doesn't help your argument.