Comments on: UC looks at ending admissions guarantee

By: Annalise Petriello

Annalise Petriello — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 06:06:56 +0000

I wasn’t aware that this was going on, because I was fairly sure that the gaurantee they described was that given to the top 4% of California (ELC). I thought that currently the given guidelines were simply necessary for eligibility, not gauranteed admission. If that truly is the case (gauranteed admission), then they should remove this. It’s no wonder that state universities have such budget issues, if they’re letting in everyone that can pass a few classes. i think the gaurantee should definitely be removed or turned into eligibility instead.

By: Brenda-West

Brenda-West — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 05:01:48 +0000

A guaranteed admission is an effective way of encouraging students to attend a UC school. It allows students to have ONE guaranteed admission, which is a relieving pressure. That’s a students’ worst nightmare, not getting accepted to at least one college. This program allows students to feel advantaged and relieved about the entire stressing application process. I worked hard throughout my high school career and qualified for the ELC (Eligibility in the Local Context) Program. This allows me to have guaranteed admission at least ONE UC school. I got automatic acceptance to two schools, which both are good for my major. Having this ELC, it also gives me a more of a chance to get accepted to UC schools. I think this program is successful and should continue existing. I think it’s beneficial to the UC schools that not many apply to like Merced and Riverside. The lower class UC schools could use all the perks. I understand that all ELC applicants are guaranteed to UC Merced. They don’t get many applicants, therefore, allowing more acceptances towards schools. I support the guaranteed admissions. It’ll help many potential students.

By: brenda cortez-WEST

brenda cortez-WEST — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 04:58:31 +0000

By: Abel C

Abel C — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 04:57:15 +0000

i had no idea they were using this kind of system. it kind of sucks because there are some people that are really smart but jsut cant hack it in school i guess personal problems and what not and mess up a little. this kind of new system would pretty much mess with their future. it really sucks if someone was looking over your apps for UC’s all the hard work u put into filling it out and writing essays, they take a glimpse see something they dont like and then toss it. that jsut doesnt fit good with me so i say stay with what has always been going on and look over everything

By: Christine

Christine — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 04:55:41 +0000

I would agree with keeping the UC guarantee system that gives students a chance to go to a UC. The system seems like a great way to give students a chance and pursue their goals. Right now it is very difficult to get into a UC because of all the requirements and amount of money that it cost to get in. However, with the guarantee system it makes it much more easier for students to gain acceptance. Right now I am applying to UC Riverside and their requirements are actually what I have and its great to know that I can most likely get accepted. Filling out college applications takes time and is very stressful and the guarantee system is definitely a great way to get into a UC. It sure enables a person with good grades and okay SAT scores to get into the University. Plus knowing that you have a spot into the University of your choice is a great reward.

By: Gabriela J

Gabriela J — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:57:47 +0000

I think this is a good idea, it really helps students recieve an equal oppotunity in getting in to a great UC school. The UC’s are a lot harder to get into than a CSU and it it gives more hope to students within a low quality school to try any way. Here at I-Poly i feel I suffer alot in the grade point area because most UC’s average freshman gpa is above a 4.0. We dont have AP classes to boost it so we have to sit at most a 4.0. I think giving students a garuntee spot in means that there are fewer spots for every one else who might not have a 4.0, it makes every one have a level playng field. Plus when they give out garuntees based soley on gpa and SAT scores the people who might not have the most stellar grades but have a lot of extra curriculars and might have over come adversity to even get the gpa they have would not get a garuntee. There are college essays for a reason, so they can allow people in not based soley on grades but on the all around good.

By: Briana Bowen

Briana Bowen — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 04:57:59 +0000

College applications are a long and stressful process for both parents and their children. There is different ways that both college and high school classes that we have taken can be coded according to the college. Sometimes there are essays to fill out for some college and not for others. By not creating a current guarantee to someone who is UC eligible for students will create even more stress for students. I believe the current given to UC eligible students should stay the same, since they are people who get the good grades and SAT scores. The only think I believe should be changed is taking out the requirement to take at least two subjects test.

College is a whole new experience for a student to tackle. Growing up we always wanted to attend one of the most prestigious schools like Yale or Stanford. As the years went by and we understood the college system more we became more realistic. By not giving UC eligible students a guarantee that a person will get accepted it is not fair to that person. That person could have worked extra hard in school to get those grades and then when they get to college and their application is screened like everyone else’s if they do not get into a college of their choice. This does not seam logical and even a little unfair for those students. Since it will become more difficult for that person if they are not accepted to the colleges of their choice and are not accepted to any. It would make the whole process from them even more complicated and hectic.

UC San Diego is thinking of getting rid of the guarantee claiming to help rural and inner city students who do not have access to honor courses and advisers to tell them what classes to take. However at our school we still manage to fulfill the requirement for UC School with no honor classes and a hard to reach counselor. Nonetheless, this may be a result of it being mandatory that we take those classes and not having the choice to choose our own classes. Still in actuality it can be done since we still manage to do it. So this argument to me is not a very good excuse to say is the reason that this decision is being brought up. Also I do not think it will be fair if people who took college classes or honor classes given less weight. When it is apparent that during those courses those people had to experience a more difficult curriculum.

Let’s say for example that a person applies to two different UC colleges. The person meets the UC eligibility in order to be guaranteed a place if they are not accepted into the UC of their choice. If there was no guarantee and did not get into any other colleges that person would probably not be able to attend college. If they did they probably would have to go to a community college.

Taking away the guarantee to a UC school would not be a wise choice. Since many students would suffer by not being able to attend college because they did not pick more UC schools. Also it would not be fair for students who have taken college level or honor classes to not be given a weighted grade on it. When it is oblivious that the classes were more challenging than regular classes.

By: Chelsea

Chelsea — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 22:33:40 +0000

I think that the UC admittance guarantee is not only beneficial for students, but also for the UC system. I received one of the ELC letters and it informed me that I was guaranteed admittance to one of the schools but that it would be smart of me to apply to as many schools as possible. It is a very reassuring to know that you will have a college to go to, but you still don’t know if you’ll get into one that you actually want to go to. Really, this system helps the UC’s in that it forces you to apply to as many schools as you possibly can, and that can get very expensive. It doesn’t seem like a huge amount of money for the individual, but when you take the top 4% of every high school in California the application costs definitely accumulate.
The guarantee is reassuring, but I’m still uneasy about the system. I think it should definitely continue, but perhaps they can give students a stronger reassurance- something like being able to get into one of your top three choices for schools.

By: Lily M.

Lily M. — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 04:26:59 +0000

College applications are stressful. I think we can all agree with that. But I think that keeping guaranteed admission would be comforting not only for the students, but for the parents as well. It gives deserving students a chance to feel appreciated and that all their hard work has not gone to waste.

However, there is a part of this standard that I disagree with. I don’t think it’s fair to turn away a student just because they’re missing one course or one SAT 2. If the potential student is missing five or something, then that is grounds to be suspicious. But I know that many seniors stress about getting all the required courses out of the way and under their belt. I also think that the SAT 2′s should be optional. We have enough stress as it is and missing one course doesn’t mean that we aren’t great students. I think that the UC should look at the all around application and if the student shows other potential, then let the one missing course or the one SAT 2 test slide.

But mostly, I think that the guaranteed admission should stay basically the way it is.

By: Irene-West

Irene-West — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 04:16:56 +0000

I say keep the guaranteed admission but change it, so that the student has some say. I am currently aware of the ELC (Eligibility in the Local Context) Program which guarantees the top four percent students of their graduating class a spot in a UC school. The downside to this program is that it doesn’t guarantee a spot of the student’s UC choice or admission to their first choice. A student who qualifies in the ELC program is guaranteed admission to one of the nine UC campuses. I think that the ELC’s purpose is to encourage students to attend the UC schools that are less popular. As an ELC student, I have got accepted into UC Riverside and UC Merced, universities that don’t even have my major, so it was pretty much pointless to be an ELC student. They even said in the letter they sent to me, “It has been my experience that many students are familiar with only one or two UC campuses, usually those nearest their home or mentioned most frequently in the news.” However, I say the program could be improved so that being an ELC student is something meaningful. I think they should let the student pick their top three UC schools and then the UC system could pick from that list. But, I can see why the UC system may not want to do this is because some UC schools are more favorable than others, like UCLA and Berkeley. Another idea could be that the ELC should recommend schools that best meet the student’s specific education goals with their major in mind.