<br>
<br>
<p>Uh, that was my point. The UCs don’t use a true holistic method. That’s why the White & Asian enrollment numbers do not reflect the Calif population. The UCs use mostly an objective admissions formula …with a little bit of some subjective influence. If the UCs were to stray off the objective admissions formula, then residents would be filing anti-AA lawsuits against them because qualified students were being rejected to make room for other students admitted using methods that were too “holistic” (subjective). </p>
<p>By heavily using GPA to determine admittance, it guarantees that at least the top few % at all high schools (even the crummiest ones) will get admitted to at least a low-tier UC. </p>
<p>If the UCs weighted GPA and test scores the same (or gave more weight to test scores), the 3.9 UC GPA student with the ACT 21 wouldn’t get admitted to a UC unless he was an athlete. </p>
<p>For example, 52% of students at (low tier) UC-R have an ACT 23 or below. It also has a high URM enrollment…45%. While at (mid-tier) UC-I, there are only 26% URMs…even though UC-I is not that far away from UC-R. </p>
<p>Holistic methods can’t really be quantified, have a lot of wiggle room, so they don’t work well for publics. Privates can do whatever they want because they don’t have to explain their policies to any court. If they end up with 90% OOS students, that’s totally ok.</p>