<p>No applicant to Tulane would be admitted with an SAT score of 1070. However, 25% of the population of UCI has a score that low.</p>
<p>First of all, the UCs don’t super-score, so that can be meaningless when comparing with schools that do. </p>
<p>Secondly, the UCs have a lot of minority students who may not speak English in their homes and/or English isn’t their first language. When I look at the CR vs M scores, these kids have better Math SAT scores, but lowish CR scores (only 11% have a M score below 500…maybe athletes, int’ls, or students with higher CR scores?). …and UCI feels that it can work with that. (I think UCI is about 80% minority)</p>
<p>Thirdly, (again), the UCs count GPA more than SAT (unlike Tulane), because if they didn’t, few of the kids from the weaker K-12 systems (often inner-cities) or non-native speakers would get admitted. </p>
<p>The above policy is typical of state schools. They know that there are pockets within their states that have lousy K-12 systems. If these state schools weighted SATs more heavily, those kids would never gain admittance with their lowish test scores. The mission is to take the best of those kids, provide them an opportunity. Don’t you think a state school should have such a mission?</p>