<p>In talking to some current and future UCM students, there has been a general consensus that relatively underqualified students were let into more prestigious UCs while better qualified students were not admitted. Of course, qualification is in the eyes of the beholder, namely the admissions officer, but usually students, college-bound students that is, generally know what it takes to get into a UC of their choice. </p>
<p>At my school, I have witnessed many “underqualified” students get into some pretty decent schools, UCD, UCB, and Stanford being among them. After all, life isn’t fair is it? However, if life isn’t fair, at least the application process should be and it is advertised as being just that but how can a process be fair and still admit lesser qualified applicants?</p>
<p>All of my high school career, I was aiming to go to UC Davis. It may not be Berkeley or UCLA but it’s still a pretty damn good school. Having witnessed firsthand what it takes to enter the ranks at Davis from previous classes entering college from my high school, I felt relatively at ease with my application and was awaiting the acceptance letter. </p>
<p>Boy, I was in for a slap in the face when I “could not be offered” an education at Davis.</p>
<p>Just to add insult to injury, some of the “underqualified” kids, the ones that took relatively easy courses throughout high school, the ones that rarely did sports or community service if any at all, the ones that took easy courses so they can party, got in. I felt disgusted and decided to contact UCD personally. Below is the letter I wrote and sent to the office of admissions at UC Davis. If I receive a response, I will repost it here. </p>
<p>In case any of you were wondering, my stats are below as well.</p>
<p>GPA: 3.2 - 3.3</p>
<p>SAT I: 1900</p>
<p>SAT II: Biology E - 650<br>
Literature - 570<br>
U.S. History - 590</p>
<p>AP: World History - 2 <– in over my head sophomore year.
Lang - 3
US History - 4
Biology - 4
Government - Awaiting Results
Literature - Awaiting Results</p>
<p>E.C.: Mock Trial 2 years, World Affairs Challenge 2 years, Interact Club 4 years, Varsity Badminton 4 years.</p>
<p>NOTICE: I don’t need any ■■■■■■ here telling me how horrible I did. This post isn’t about how well I did but about how people could’ve achieved worse than me and still have gotten in. I take into consideration that results may not be typical at all high schools in California but this seems like the trend that has been going on for recent years at many schools. Egos should be left at your keyboards and only constructive thoughts please. Thanks.</p>
<p>For those entering college now, has this experience ever happened to you when you know the kid that got in shouldn’t have?</p>
<p>For those in college now, did you feel this way at all last year?</p>
<p>Any and all constructive thoughts welcome.</p>
<p>To whom it may concern:</p>
<p>Let me preface this by stating that although it may be inferred that I have a negative bias toward your institution due to my rejection for undergraduate studies, I can assure you that this statement was written objectively as possible and the words that are present here are not merely an emotional outcry but a calculated albeit human observation of admission trends that must be brought to light. As a patron of justice and equity (if there are such things in this world anymore), this was written solely in reaction to the apparent travesties that befell those who were qualified yet denied and in response to the gift of admission given to, forgive my tone, the most undeserving of pupils.</p>
<p>Now, on to the meat of my argument.</p>
<p>The maxim “life is not fair” is one that permeates through every facet of human society, be it from the trivial to the essential. As Darwin concluded and Spencer reaffirmed, the survival of the fittest is, and always will be, the driving force behind competition and ultimately extinction (although I won’t go that deep in this little piece of mine). Fairness and fitness are supposed to be measured in the application process and yet there is reason to believe otherwise.</p>
<p>Another belief shoved down the collective throat of the high school student populace is that if a student is qualified and there is vacancy at the institution, he or she will be admitted regardless of race (Tried to keep Bakke out did we? Tsk, tsk UCD), religion, ethnicity, or any other factor that would lead one to discriminate another against.</p>
<p>Viewing each student as a faceless, equal entity has its advantages and I dare not question the values that sheer anonymity may raise yet queries must be posed when some individuals who are far less qualified than others in specifications set by you (not you reading this but the “you” C system.), preached by you, and perceivably ignored by you are accepted while the better-suited yet rejected are left on the sidelines with only questions to show for their efforts.</p>
<p>These specifications mentioned earlier, this recipe that comprises each student and yet lumps them into a melting pot that is supposed to be equal and is supposed to separate the tasty morsels from the undesirable nasties, is made up of the cumulative grade point average (GPA), SAT I score, SAT II scores, and extracurricular activities such as sports and community involvement.</p>
<p>This rubric is supposed to act as a filter; an efficient filter to keep the toxins out and the minerals in so the fish of society can swim freely in a clean, pH balanced environment. My sincerest apologies but your filter is not functioning as well as it should.</p>
<p>May I remind you that this writing is not for my personal gain and I do not question my rejection. Go look me up, NAMEDELETED from Generic High School. My GPA was lackluster, my extracurricular was shaky and my course load could’ve been more difficult…and yet people who performed less that I did (yes, it is possible), were let into your institution. I have names, I have schools. Care to ask and look them up and possibly revise your decisions about their admittance for the sake of equity?</p>
<p>Let’s tackle this one part at a time, shall we? A high GPA can be attained through various means, of which are being smart or taking really easy classes. One can get an extremely high GPA by combining these two methods. Now, I assume that you assume that all schools in the nation teach at the same caliber and that students must be judged fairly based on this. Although this is an imperfect method of assessing students, I do not question it as, quite frankly, I do not have the power to alter it. </p>
<p>To separate ourselves from the pack of wandering, faceless academic beasts that compose the rest of our competition into higher education, students are told to enroll in more difficult courses such as Advanced Placement classes or International Baccalaureate classes to bolster our resumes. We are also rewarded for doing so, having an extra GPA point tacked on for every grade received in an AP class that is at or above a C. I cannot speak for IB classes as they are not offered at my school and I have no intimate knowledge of the program. </p>
<p>By taking these “higher level” courses, we are told the difficult course schedule would demonstrate incentive to work and a desire to be challenged. However, they also leave most of those who take them with a lower GPA as opposed to their counterparts who take the “normal” courses. </p>
<p>My basic observation is that those who took AP courses and received lower GPA’s than those who took easier, “college-prep” courses were left out while those who arguably took the easy route were let in. By wanting to achieve and following your word, we are left out to dry while the seemingly lazy are rewarded generously for their lack of effort. They know not the struggles in trying to achieve in an AP class. They know not the hardship and agony that these tests can place on students and their families. They know not the intensity of the workload and yet they do know what it feels like to be admitted, a taste that will never linger on my tongue, a tongue that has grown quite accustomed to the sour flavor of injustice. Am I making it up? Go check the admitted students from my school from last year (class of ’07) and this year. Tell me what you see. Again, I can name names. </p>
<p>I want a decent explanation as the one given during a UCD presentation at my school was insufficient and misleading. The presenter stated that course load would “be taken into consideration” yet the complete opposite has been proven at my school and many other schools across the state.</p>
<p>Also, test scores factor in heavily (or are supposed to) into the admittance decision. This is the only part of the argument where I can have some personal grudge in. I scored a 1900 on my SAT I which is not that great but can be considered above average. I took Kaplan courses three years in a row to get to that score and I took the SAT once. Fluke? Well, it would be if I didn’t pass all my AP exams last year (Lang - 3, Bio - 4, US Hist - 4), garnering an AP Scholar award in the process. I was under the impression that my unimpressive GPA would be counter-balanced by my higher than average testing capabilities. Apparently, I was under the wrong impression. I can name people from my school who scored considerably lower on their AP exams than I have and scored considerably lower on their SAT tests than I have whilst having a similar GPA to mine and still being admitted. I do not see any sense in your methods. </p>
<p>I would like a decent explanation if one could be produced. “Because we can” in the most polite form of syntax is still “because we can” and it will still be an insufficient explanation.</p>
<p>Ahh, and finally to extracurricular activities. The icing on the cake. The final touch to solidify our acceptance or, in my case, rejection.</p>
<p>There is no doubt that community service has a genuinely positive impact on society as well as on the student involved. I applaud your notion of using these out of school activities as a benchmark for admissibility…and yet those without any extracurricular services were let into your institution as opposed to others with arguably similar academic portfolios but with the addition of sports and clubs, at least at my school. </p>
<p>This observation of mine puzzles me. Was there an omission in your judgement or rather a fabrication on their applications? Perhaps a better system should be in place to verify such students did the deeds listed on their applications. Cost and time you ask? Well, what about the cost of a person losing their spot to someone else unfairly due to falsified achievements or the time it would take for someone to piece together their life again when all their hopes were riding on their admission?</p>
<p>If you need any proof, you need only look at the admittance of students from my school. My school is Generic School if you were wondering. </p>
<p>I will not touch upon the personal statement as it is supposed to hold little weight in deciding admittance…or does it? I do not know what to believe anymore.</p>
<p>The negative feelings that a single individual can harbor is nothing in comparison to the collective thought brewing among many students around California high schools this very second. Has justice been served? Is the integrity of the University of California system what it claims to be? Did the “right” people get in?</p>
<p>I do not know but it is time someone said something about it. One cannot forget that lives are molded and futures are shaped with your choice. It’s best to make the correct decision no matter the cost.</p>
<p>Thank you for your time and awaiting your response.</p>
<p>-FusioNaLL and the qualified rejects of the Class of ‘08</p>