I’m coming to the conclusion that it is an impossible task to reason why an admissions officer would prefer one applicant over another, as it becomes very subjective once we move past stats. It could have been for another of reasons, but I was confident that my application was good enough, as it got me into every other UC I applied to and into their honors programs (along with 2 other ivy league schools I applied to and a number of privates).
UC Berkeley, for me, was very affordable (won’t go into debt), is #1 in my major, and I have seen the campus and like it. The only thing that held me back from going to UC Berkeley, instead of say Brown, UCLA, or Columbia, was that I’d have to come in the Spring. This really hurt my sense of pride. Of course I wanted to go to a prestigious school (as a cherry on top), but the idea of coming in the spring gave me a feeling of “2nd tier” when at other schools I’d be what they felt like was their first choice.
Then again, after taking the decision to matriculate at Berkeley, I started having doubts and fear that others would see me as not smart or not doing as well as others in high school, as some of you guys have said in the forum. I am confident my application (not in an arrogant way) was very good. I started to doubt my capabilities, wondering why UC Berkeley decided to make me wait.
I now know there are countless reasons why this could have happened (subjectivity of the admissions process, being paired with somebody who may have had something the A. officers valued more, fit, etc.)
I am grateful for being able to go to such an amazing institution, and I hope that I will not let my pride, which should not be hurt by the fact I was chosen to come in the spring. Thank you for your inputs, knowing that everyone has their own takes on things. I hope to be successful, and that I made the right choice to go to Berkeley.