Waitlisted at CAS, do I have a chance?

jwblue · April 17, 2005, 10:18pm

Browneyed: I think you’ve confused me for someone who actually cares about what you or anyone else thinks.

Inuendo: To put an end to this Caltech vs. MIT thing (this really isn’t the proper thread for it)…the proof of Caltech’s superior student body is in the very data you provided. As you stated, Caltech’s yield for Axline scholars is 36%…the rest are lost to other schools with Stanford and MIT taking the most (but not all). Its fair to say these Axline scholars are super qualified and can get in pretty much anywhere. MIT’s student body is 4X the size of Caltech’s yet it doesn’t have 4X as many of these academic superstars. PER CAPITA, Caltech students are better. Again, I implore you, start a thread on this. Some opinions might be subjective of course, but you’ll get more info at the very least.

You asked: “Can you please post some evidence of NYU enrolling 700 transfers each year?”

Sheesh…you people need to learn some googling. Anyhow, NYU gets about 4000+ transfer apps, accepts 30% of them and has a transfer admit yield thats a little over 50%.

<a href=“http://www.nyunews.com/news/campus/7228.html[/url]”>http://www.nyunews.com/news/campus/7228.html</a>

Crab: You’ve misunderstood so many things here. My UC Riverside example: it was an illustration to show how bad CA public schools are and how a top 10% class ranking there means…well…not too much. I don’t know who your Stuyvessant friends are, but they talk a big game for a school that thats looking less and less appealing to NYU by the year…btw my old high school: Lawrenceville>>>>>>>Sty. My Sty example was merely to show that more NYU students come from better high schools than Berkeley…so ranking doesnt mean much.

On SAT II’s: Higher SAT I scorers usually score higher on the SAT II as well. Almost all NYU admits have SAT II under their belts, and most have done quite well.

Also, I think you’ve misunderstood Quakerman’s point about law school and how the same type of admissions policy is used at the undergrad level. UCB will turn down an out of stater with a 1550 who gets into Harvard in favor of an in-stater with an 1100. Obviously UCB has to do this since its a state school (though it should be more like other state schools and do it less), but it is undeniable that it loses many great students for horrible ones. When you add in the CA budget problems, and the fact that UCB’s overall student body is 25% transfers, mostly from community colleges, this student body is far from impressive at the undergraduate level and I fail to see the appeal in this school for out of staters and for those CA residents whom money is not an issue.

BrownEyedGirl523 · April 17, 2005, 10:27pm

I couldn’t care less if you care what I think, I just find it very amusing that someone who graduated from such an “elite” school as NYU has nothing better to do with their time than spew out facts, some of which are incorrect, on a college website. How often do you have to post to get 883 posts? Seems quite time-consuming…

Also, the only reason why I posted my response was because you referred to me as “Einstein” in your other response to me, when all I was doing was asking a simple question. Don’t you have anything better to do with your time than harass inquiring college students?

crabluva_lt_3crabs · April 17, 2005, 11:16pm

“My UC Riverside example: it was an illustration to show how bad CA public schools are and how a top 10% class ranking there means…well…not too much.” - yea and the people who were top 10 percent at crappy public schools go to UCR because they aren’t cut out for UCLA/UCB/UCSD so your point’s moot.

“don’t know who your Stuyvessant friends are, but they talk a big game for a school that thats looking less and less appealing to NYU by the year…btw my old high school: Lawrenceville>>>>>>>Sty.” - what’s that? is that jealousy i smell? why do you even mention your school? what does it have to do with anything? and i’ve never heard of it, if that means anything. good for you though.

“My Sty example was merely to show that more NYU students come from better high schools than Berkeley…so ranking doesnt mean much.” - so you’re using the example of ONE PUBLIC SCHOOl that sends a lot of kids to NYU as proof that NYU kids come from better schools?

i think you’re ignoring some things: stuy is ten blocks from NYU, has 3000 students, and serves nyc. of course it will be heavily represented at NYU.

there are plenty of “smart kid science high” schools in CA that send kids to UCB…i’m sure there are at least 4 or 5 that are as good if not better than stuy.

and as a facebook search will reveal, NYU admits plenty of kids from “terrible instate schools” like mt. vernon and yonkers high, where the average SAT is around 900.

“On SAT II’s: Higher SAT I scorers usually score higher on the SAT II as well. Almost all NYU admits have SAT II under their belts, and most have done quite well.” - official numbers please and don’t use collegecon as a source.

“UCB will turn down an out of stater with a 1550 who gets into Harvard in favor of an in-stater with an 1100.” - probably not. proof?

" Obviously UCB has to do this since its a state school (though it should be more like other state schools and do it less), but it is undeniable that it loses many great students for horrible ones." - no horrible students get into berkeley. unless your definition of horrible is “went to community college”.

“this student body is far from impressive at the undergraduate level and I fail to see the appeal in this school for out of staters and for those CA residents” - it’s one of the most prestigous schools in the world, universally viewed as the best public school in the country, and is a top research uni?

and it teaches people how to use prepositions…
“whom money is not an issue.”

also your forgetting that NYU has an affirmative action policy, unlike UCB, so it too gets its share of students who aren’t qualified.

edit: <a href=“http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?page=content&id=15400&repository=0001_article[/url]”>http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?page=content&id=15400&repository=0001_article</a> heheheheheh

jwblue · April 18, 2005, 6:33pm

Browneyedgirl: Apparently you care enough to keep talking to me and even inquiring about me. I never meant to offend, its just my style.

Crab: Wow, you really must be running out of valid points to make if you’re going to attack my grammatical errors. I don’t care if you’re over-anal with grammar (I was too at age 12), but look, do me a favor, and refrain from attacking my prepositional usage if the VERY NEXT statement you make looks like this:

“also your forgetting that NYU has an affirmative action policy, unlike UCB, so it too gets its share of students who aren’t qualified.”

“YOUR forgetting…”???..I believe it ought to be YOU’RE forgetting. Oh well, I guess they still teach that at NYU.

Speaking of affirmative action, its all the more telling that NYU still has a better SAT avg. than Berkeley despite the fact that Berkeley is around 45% Asian (much more than NYU, even more than Stern). It would be quite interesting to see data for non-URMs at both schools.

Jealous of Sty?..a public school…umm, hardly. I had many friends who went there and consensus is that its overrated, and very quickly falling out of favor with NYU. Its not anywhere near the top preps (which you’ve probably never heard of).

crabluva_lt_3crabs · April 18, 2005, 7:25pm

“Speaking of affirmative action, its all the more telling that NYU still has a better SAT avg. than Berkeley despite the fact that Berkeley is around 45% Asian (much more than NYU, even more than Stern). It would be quite interesting to see data for non-URMs at both schools.” - i think i’ve well-established that NYU’s SAT stats are inflated because their admission and scholarship awards are heavily based on scores.

UCB DOES NOT use affirmative action so it does not have underqualified URMs dragging down its averages.

“Jealous of Sty?..a public school…umm, hardly. I had many friends who went there and consensus is that its overrated, and very quickly falling out of favor with NYU. Its not anywhere near the top preps (which you’ve probably never heard of).” - it’s free, has an SAT average of 1400, sends 30% of its students to ivy leagues, and “has the highest number of A.P. test takers in the world, and also the highest number of students reaching the mastery level.” (<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/26/education/26advanced.html?ex=1113969600&en=0d5b6e038d5a3210&ei=5070[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/26/education/26advanced.html?ex=1113969600&en=0d5b6e038d5a3210&ei=5070</a>)

seriously you come off as being a huge elitist. you dismiss a website that lists nothing but quotes (many of which are from presidents of prestigous colleges) and facts as being “left-wing trash” with no justification; dismiss what is probably the best public high school in the northeast with no justification; and bring up your prep school education when it has no relevance to the topic at hand whatsoever.

fact is, that basically every school in the country (including public ones like W&M – which rejected me despite my super-genius SAT score that according to you should be grounds for auto-admission anywhere) use GPA and class rank over the SAT. the SAT is rapidly falling out of favor with high school students, college faculty and admissions boards, and college board realizes this which is why the test changed.

you also didn’t respond to most of my previous post which i find a little troubling…

and it’s “it’s” when you’re using a contraction :)

mattistotle · April 18, 2005, 8:41pm

crabluva you’re missing his point

he was saying that even though NYUhas affirmative action, its its average sat score is still well above Berkley, and if you dont count the URM , the difference would be even greater. Hes saying even with the URMs NYU is well above berkeley sat wise.

and your thing about sat scores being skewed because of scholarships… after this long arguement id expect more logic than that… berkeley is a state school and still is cheaper than nyu even if someone gets a 25k scholarship from nyu ( highest merit they offer)

BrownEyedGirl523 · April 18, 2005, 8:57pm

jw…I was inquiring about you? If you are referring to my last “question,” that is a little something called sarcasm. You seem to still care as well since you’re still responding to me…

crabluva_lt_3crabs · April 18, 2005, 9:01pm

“he was saying that even though NYUhas affirmative action, its its average sat score is still well above Berkley, and if you dont count the URM , the difference would be even greater. Hes saying even with the URMs NYU is well above berkeley sat wise.” - ok no one has ever said that NYU’s average SAT is higher than berkeley’s. most of this thread was devoted to saying that berkeley doesn’t care that much about the SAT I and it isn’t that big a factor in their admissions.

“and your thing about sat scores being skewed because of scholarships… after this long arguement id expect more logic than that… berkeley is a state school and still is cheaper than nyu even if someone gets a 25k scholarship from nyu ( highest merit they offer)” - yea it isn’t that important but it is a factor.

and actually NYU is a little cheaper.
NYU tuition - 25,000 = 15k
berkeley instate tuition = 18k (<a href=“http://www.princetonreview.com%5B/url%5D”>www.princetonreview.com</a>)

though the scholarship thing isn’t nearly as big as:
the fact that (compared to similarly ranked unis) not many NYU students graduated in the top 10% of their class and yet NYU’s average SAT is very high it shows that they’ll except a less exemplarary applicant with a high SAT over a high ranked student who didn’t do well on his or her SAT.

jwblue · April 18, 2005, 10:11pm

Crab,

You’re great at grammar but your reading comprehension is another story. Matt was correct regarding my point on AA. Imagine what NYU’s SAT numbers would be if it, like Berkeley was 45% asian which it very well could be if it got rid of AA. For better or worse the policy is there (I disagree with it fyi).

“ok no one has ever said that NYU’s average SAT is higher than berkeley’s”

Actually I’ve been saying that from the very beginning. The only place you and I differ is that I submit a higher SAT equals a superior student body. Interesting how I get branded as an elitist when you’ve been talking up Berkeley’s “prestige” this whole time (I’ve only talked of student body quality at these schools). The fact, there is no credible evidence to show the SAT is biased, it might not be perfect but its the standard by which college applicants are judged, and will continue to be so despite recent changes.

You’re also a walking or should I say typing contradiction: you say SAT doesn’t mean much yet cite a SAT average to bolster your argument of Sty having a great student body. Interesting how you think a good SAT average makes one place superior but means nothing somewhere else.

So what if SAT scores are skewed because of scholarships…shouldn’t the students with the highest scores get the best available to be lured to a school, or WAIT–let me guess, I’m an elitist for thinking someone’s good performance should be rewarded? Merit awards are given by the vast majority of schools, and neither is NYU the only school that bases such on test scores.

“the fact that (compared to similarly ranked unis) not many NYU students graduated in the top 10% of their class and yet NYU’s average SAT is very high it shows that they’ll except a less exemplarary applicant with a high SAT over a high ranked student who didn’t do well on his or her SAT.”

This statement can easily be reversed and applied to Berkeley: Compared to similar universities, Berkeley has lower SAT averages and yet the number of students in the top 10% of HS class is very high. This shows Berkeley admits a good number of students from crappy CA public high schools.

English tip of the day: A college ACCEPTS applicants, it does not except them.

mattistotle · April 18, 2005, 11:25pm

nyu costs 45-46k this year, so it comes out to a little more than berkely, not important really though.

crabluva_lt_3crabs · April 19, 2005, 4:16pm

“ok no one has ever said that NYU’s average SAT is higher than berkeley’s” - this was a typo, sorry. i meant that no one has said that berkeley’s average sat score is higher than nyu’s. i usually write these posts while watching tv or something so i tend to get my words minced around.

“Actually I’ve been saying that from the very beginning. The only place you and I differ is that I submit a higher SAT equals a superior student body.” - you’re in a very small minority when you say this. tulane’s (party school in NOLA) SAT average is very high – mid-1300s – but its student body is nothing stellar.

look what the PRESIDENT OF THE PRINCETONREVIEW says about the test: "I couldn’t agree more with their findings. The SAT is a bad test. It is biased. It measures nothing. And we should get rid of it. We do need a common yardstick. We do need a good test of some sort or several tests. The Princeton Review can prep kids for just about anything. We have kids working with us for the medical boards on a test of, like, anatomy. It’s a real serious content test. And we teach real serious content. I think we’re pretty good teachers. If you give us a really good test, I think we can be really good teachers for that test. The SAT will never be a really good test. It is a scam. " (<a href=“http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/interviews/katzman.html[/url]”>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/interviews/katzman.html</a>)

" Interesting how I get branded as an elitist when you’ve been talking up Berkeley’s “prestige” this whole time (I’ve only talked of student body quality at these schools). " - i only mention berkeley’s prestige because it’s well-deserved. look at the number of authors, inventions, research, and general knowledge that has come out berkeley – it’s pretty impressive for a state university that was founded within the past 150 years.

“The fact, there is no credible evidence to show the SAT is biased, it might not be perfect but its the standard by which college applicants are judged, and will continue to be so despite recent changes.” - according to whom? you? show me a quote from one first-tier uni admissions board or president, hell even princetonreview.com that shows the SAT having greater than equal importance to the high school transcript at that school.

“You’re also a walking or should I say typing contradiction: you say SAT doesn’t mean much yet cite a SAT average to bolster your argument of Sty having a great student body. Interesting how you think a good SAT average makes one place superior but means nothing somewhere else.” - i included that statistic because i thought that you’d care. :)

i could care less. ;)

anyway i was refuting your argument that stuy has nothing on the top prep schools…since you think higher SAT scores is evidence of a superior student body here is a link to the boarding schools with the highest SAT averages:
<a href=“http://www.boardingschoolreview.com/highest_sat_scores.php[/url]”>http://www.boardingschoolreview.com/highest_sat_scores.php</a>

as you can see, only SEVEN boarding schools have averages higher than 1350. i do remember seeing a site last year that listed exact average scores and none were higher than 1390. i’ll post it if i can find it.

i couldn’t find a listing for prep schools but i can’t imagine it being too different.

“This statement can easily be reversed and applied to Berkeley: Compared to similar universities, Berkeley has lower SAT averages and yet the number of students in the top 10% of HS class is very high. This shows Berkeley admits a good number of students from crappy CA public high schools.” - no it doesn’t because BERKELEY DOES NOT CARE ABOUT SAT Is AS MUCH AS SIMILARLY RANKED SCHOOLS GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL.

berkeley expects its students to back up their grades with SAT IIs and APs…if you got an A in the class and did very well (well enough to get into ucb which means you did pretty damn well) on your standardized tests then you know the material even if jwblue deems your school “crappy”.

“So what if SAT scores are skewed because of scholarships…shouldn’t the students with the highest scores get the best available to be lured to a school, or WAIT–let me guess, I’m an elitist for thinking someone’s good performance should be rewarded? Merit awards are given by the vast majority of schools, and neither is NYU the only school that bases such on test scores.” - nope, nyu places a lot more emphasis on them than other schools do though. point is that that SAT is probably not the best way of doing things.

“You’re great at grammar but your reading comprehension is another story.” - i got a perfect score on the SAT verbal…only a 730 on the SATII writing. says a lot about the test. ;)

another thing about my grammar is that i obviously know the difference between “you’re” and “your” as well as “accept” and “except” if you look through my previous posts. your grammatical errors are consistent though.

here’s some stuff i found while digging through wikipedia:
“Berkeley has graduated more students who would go on to earn doctorates than any other university in the United States.”
"Its enrollment of National Merit Scholars is third in the nation. " - no source for this though so number 1 could be NYU and and number 2 could be tulane. =

or was your list for national merit finalists and not real scholars?

"The University currently boasts 221 American Academy of Arts & Sciences Fellows, 3 Fields Medal holders, 83 Fulbright Scholars, 139 Guggenheim Fellows, 11 Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators, 16 MacArthur Fellows, 87 members of the National Academy of Engineering, 128 members of the National Academy of Sciences, 7 Nobel Prize winners, 3 Pulitzer Prize winners, 70 Sloan Fellows, and 7 Wolf Prize winners among a bevy of distinguished faculty.

According to the National Research Council, Berkeley ranks first nationally in the number of graduate programs in the top 10 in their fields (97 percent) and first nationally in the number of “distinguished” programs for the scholarship of the faculty (32 programs). Rankings performed in 2004 by the UK Times Higher Education Supplement named Berkeley the No. 2 university overall, No. 1 engineering and information technology university, and the No. 4 science university among the Top World Universities (The THES World rankings were based on peer-review reputation ratings, volume of citations per faculty member, faculty-to-student ratios, the percentage of overseas students, and the percentage of international faculty employed). Similar rankings performed in 2004 by the Institute of Higher Education in Shanghai placed Berkeley at No. 4 among the Top 500 World Universities.

Finally, with about 9.2 million volumes held in 18 campus libraries, UC Berkeley library holdings rank fourth in North America, after the Library of Congress, Harvard University, and Yale University." - its prestige is pretty well deserved imho.
(<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California%2C_Berkeley[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California%2C_Berkeley</a>)

mattistotle · April 19, 2005, 5:01pm

the SATs are often considered crappy and bias due to the so called racial bias…due to spanish and black people scoring on average much less than white people…since nyu does affirmative actions and berkeley doesnt… that just goes to further it even more that nyu is better student body wise. ( i know theres other reasons why the sats are said to suck such as he math being on an 8th grade level until recently, the racial thing is def a biggt)

crabluva_lt_3crabs · April 19, 2005, 6:24pm

matt, the split is HUGE. black people on average score 200 points lower than whites and asians. but there’s much more to the complaints against the SAT than “racial bias”.

also, AA at NYU really isn’t that big.

two black people applied from my class and both were rejected. one was horribly underqualified so it came as no suprise; the other had a 1270, ~3.5gpa, good ECs, legacy, and was the son of laurence fishburne (that’s right, morpheus).

nyu is only 4% black and 5% hispanic – compare this to berkeley’s 11% hispanic and 4% black population.

i completely reject the idea that higher SAT = better student body. better at taking the SAT maybe.

i probably would have done a lot worse on the new SAT than i did on the old one. does that mean i suddenly became a worse student?

ABirch_III · April 19, 2005, 7:43pm

The princeton review guy is wrong, it cannot prep for anything like he says, he’s just marketing his company. A class can raise a SAT I score only to a certain extent, but sooner or later, natural intelligence will take over. Also with the alleged racial bias of SAT I, it is a proven fact Asians score higher than whites, and also that low income whites and asians score higher than high income blacks and hispanics. This seems like a decently fair test to me.

quakerman · April 19, 2005, 7:48pm

Using the Crab kid’s horrendous argument(s), couldn’t one also argue that SAT IIs are equally biased considering they are based on knowledge taught in school and some may teach it more indepth than others, and people can also purchase the SAT II practice/prep exams, making it at least as biased as the SAT.

For example, if my school doesn’t offer AP History and someone else’s does, doesn’t that person have an inherent advantage over me on that SAT II exam. Looks like the Math and Writing SAT IIs are the least biased ones, and I wouldd like to see a comparison between NYU and Berkeley on that.

Like you said, a 4.0 gpa at a ghetto school is nothing to be proud of. Perhaps someone here can dig up info. on the average SAT I and II’s at the high schools from which enrolled Berkeley students attended, to see if these gpas were earned or just handed out.

ABirch_III · April 19, 2005, 8:06pm

I agree Quaker. This is the real problem not SAT bias. I have a 3.7 at really good school. My school is super competitive and it would be bogus to say that someone with a 4.0 from a ghetto high school where the mean SAT I is below a 1000 has a better academic record than I. Also, some schools have alot of grade inflation.

If the SAT I is biased, then so is every other test out there. You can cry bias at every test, what if my AP Bio teacher was horrible, then I too should be able to claim the test was biased against me. Since the SAT i is based mostly on stuff learned well before high school, it’s probably the most fair test, more than all the others.

crabluva_lt_3crabs · April 19, 2005, 8:10pm

“Using the Crab kid’s horrendous argument(s), couldn’t one also argue that SAT IIs are equally biased considering they are based on knowledge taught in school and some may teach it more indepth than others, and people can also purchase the SAT II practice/prep exams, making it at least as biased as the SAT.” - it’s a lot easier to study for the SAT IIs than it is for the SAT I. any public library (or school library) will have some books with a subject survey.

i hadn’t taken a full US History survey when i took the SAT II for it but i still got an 800 on it because i studied the two books i got (kaplan and barron’s) and i watch the history channel a lot.

i can sorta understand the “i don’t test well so i got a 1200 despite my 4.0” argument but the “i don’t test well so i got a 500 on the bio sat ii despite my A in the class” couldn’t pass anyone’s BS radar.

and yea, sometimes someone’s school or home situation can explain a poor score which is why i support AA but that’s a whole other can of worms so i really hope no one responds to this part of my post…

“For example, if my school doesn’t offer AP History and someone else’s does, doesn’t that person have an inherent advantage over me on that SAT II exam. Looks like the Math and Writing SAT IIs are the least biased ones, and I wouldd like to see a comparison between NYU and Berkeley on that.” - nyu doesn’t even require SAT IIs so i’m sure their ranges are lower.

“Like you said, a 4.0 gpa at a ghetto school is nothing to be proud of. Perhaps someone here can dig up info. on the average SAT I and II’s at the high schools from which enrolled Berkeley students attended, to see if these gpas were earned or just handed out.” - i really doubt too many berkeley students went to really" ghetto" schools…it’s 44% asian and 31% white.

“If the SAT I is biased, then so is every other test out there. You can cry bias at every test, what if my AP Bio teacher was horrible, then I too should be able to claim the test was biased against me. Since the SAT i is based mostly on stuff learned well before high school, it’s probably the most fair test, more than all the others.” - colleges shouldn’t care what you learned in middle school maybe. maybe they should have you solve a rubik’s cube or beat an adcom in chess as part of the admissions process too.

after all, those are innate logic skills that aren’t picked up in high school.

if your ap bio teacher was horrible then that’s just bad luck and i offer you my condolences. at least you were lucky enough to go to a school that offered AP classes and where you wouldn’t be ostracized for taking them. you might have bad professors in college too but grad schools won’t know that. a bad teacher doesn’t prevent you from reading the textbook and looking stuff up.

difference is is that the SAT IIs are way less biased than the SAT which is why there’s no outcry against them.

ABirch_III · April 19, 2005, 8:35pm

Crabluva: I totally agree with you that the SAT I is harder to study for than SAT II’s, and that is why it’s a better measure of natrual ability than the other tests–you either have it or you don’t. This is also why the Princeton Review guy is full of B.S. and just advertising, because after a while, IQ will take over, so a prep class can only do so much for the SAT I.

NYU may not require the SAT II’s, but I took 3 and did pretty good, and so did like everyone else I know who got into NYU. Princeton and WashU don’t require SAT II’s either, but I’m sure most who got in did well. It doesn’t matter that Berkeley is mostly white and asian, the California public schools are reputed to be the worst in the nation–that sentence rhymes, I might just be a rapper if this college thing doesn’t work.

crabluva_lt_3crabs · April 19, 2005, 9:11pm

abirch - yea i agree that natural intelligence will eventually take over but it’s not a measure of academic success which is why most colleges reject high SAT/low GPA kids.

“Princeton and WashU don’t require SAT II’s either, but I’m sure most who got in did well.” NYU is no princeton or washu, heh.

maybe all your friends lied about their SAT II scores. who knows. it’s irrelevant until we see some official numbers from nyu.

“It doesn’t matter that Berkeley is mostly white and asian, the California public schools are reputed to be the worst in the nation–that sentence rhymes, I might just be a rapper if this college thing doesn’t work.” BS and irrelevant. the worst public schools in the country are in the deep south states.

<a href=“http://detroit.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=detroit&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.morganquitno.com%2Fedrank04.htm[/url]”>http://detroit.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=detroit&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.morganquitno.com%2Fedrank04.htm</a> this list here puts cali at number 40 but w/e.

MA is #1 but i don’t see people clamoring to go to UMASS or the number two UCONN. unless you want to claim that those schools are better than UC system (or even better than #12 VA) ones in which case i’d be happy to tear you apart. :)

CA has ~50 million people so i’m sure there are plenty of very good public schools in the wealthy bay and socal areas. i hear they have private schools in CA too but i know that is just too crazy for a lot of you to comprehend.

ABirch_III · April 19, 2005, 9:54pm

Natural intelligence is way better than academic success. Why do you think Intel winners or people who ace the AIME can get in to every school regardless of their grades?

I took NYU over WashU, it is much better at econ. and math, my areas of study. The point is that many schools don’t require the SAT II’s, but most people who got in took them. Honestly, who with a 1350 or 1400 SAT I didn’t take do well on the SAT II’s or completely skipped them? Stop being ■■■■■■■■, my friends weren’t lying, since they applied and got into other schools besides NYU that did require the SAT II. Maybe the world is a lie to you.

Your link supports my argument, California is ranked 43 out of 50-pretty close to the deep south and damn near the bottom, it was beaten by Tenn, Oklahoma, and Georgia. Also, the illegals in California were not counted, that would even lower CA’s already dismal ranking. QED.

Waitlisted at CAS, do I have a chance?

CONNECT WITH US