How did Berkeley go from a 6% acceptance rate to UCSF to 26% in one year?

[Penner]

https://career.berkeley.edu/MedStats/top20.stm

Apparently, Berkeley's acceptance rates for UCLA and UCSF are as follows:

Any explanation as to how their values more than tripled from 2 years before?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[pokemoniscool]

those stats aren't that accurate because it's all self-reported.

 

[NotAsking4Much]

Plus it doesn't even make sense when you take into account Berkeley has ~700 applicants a year. That means more that 175 applicants get into UCSF. UCSF's class is around 150 and it's yield is say...around 2. That means of the 300 acceptances that UCSF gives out, 175 are to UCB?

It's absolutely unrealistic and I know enough friends at UCSF to know the class demographics does not have 50% UCB grads.

 

[Penner]

those stats aren't that accurate because it's all self-reported.

Oh they're self-reported? Now it all makes sense...

Is that what they mean by "students... who released their AMCAS information to UCB?"

 

[DbDan]

Plus it doesn't even make sense when you take into account Berkeley has ~700 applicants a year. That means more that 175 applicants get into UCSF. UCSF's class is around 150 and it's yield is say...around 2. That means of the 300 acceptances that UCSF gives out, 175 are to UCB?

It's absolutely unrealistic and I know enough friends at UCSF to know the class demographics does not have 50% UCB grads.

Berkley has ~700 applicants but whose to say that every single one of them applied to UCSF? How do you know that only about 75 thought they were competitive there and applied, or even fewer?

Its possible, it is self-reported but it also could just mean that this year's class of applicants from Berkley were just more competitive or more realistic.

EDIT: In fact, I just looked, 107 applied, 26 accepted... 14 matriculated to UCSF

 

[still h0ping]

It seems like there's a similar trend for the acceptance rate to UCD, UCSD, and UCLA..

 

[LizzyM]

Maybe more are using their LizzyM scores and better targeting their applications.

 

[theWUbear]

Easy question. the answer is: small sample size.

 

[ThaliaNox]

These kind of biased statistics are why high school and transfer students should not be swayed by office acceptance statistics into attending undergrad over another. We have no real idea of how these statistics were gathered. Perhaps only some of the applicants reported. Were these the most or least competitive students for some reason? Perhaps the advising office only counts those students they consider part of their applying cohort. Those they allowed to interview with the committee, for example, so those they consider more competitive.

My own undergrad likes to tell visiting highschool students that they have a 90-95% acceptance rate into med school. Course, that means nothing to visting high school students because we start out with over 100 pre-meds and by junior year about 15 remain. BUT, nearly all of those 15 get in.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Easy question. the answer is: small sample size.

Agree. Small sample size looked at over a one year period leaves lots of room for variation.

 

[LizzyM]

Easy question. the answer is: small sample size.

Wrong. A chi-square analysis indicates that there is a statistically significant difference. It is significant at <0.001 level. It is really quite remarkable.

 

[Penner]

Easy question. the answer is: small sample size.

Agree. Small sample size looked at over a one year period leaves lots of room for variation.

You guys need to take stats lol. The sample size isn't even close to being small enough to account for the variation.

 

[476515678234896]

because people at berkeley are crazy

 

[RogueUnicorn]

perhaps with the economy people are more money conscious and are applying and going to state schools as opposed to higher priced private ones

 

[LizzyM]

perhaps with the economy people are more money conscious and are applying and going to state schools as opposed to higher priced private ones

That does not explain why UCSF took so many (such a large proportion) of applicants from UCB in that one year.

 

[ButImLETired]

Maybe it was a weak year for applicants from Stanford, UCSD, UCLA et al? Who knows.

 

[maddogmurphy]

UCSF sets aside about 20 spots for cal grads and 20 spots for Stanford grads. This is coming from someone I know on admissions there.

 

[LizzyM]

Well, from the stats they show, that's a new policy and even that was exceeded given the number of offers made to UCB students/alumni most recently.

 

[Penner]

Well, from the stats they show, that's a new policy and even that was exceeded given the number of offers made to UCB students/alumni most recently.

Actually, only 14 people matriculated to SF from Berkeley according to that site in 08...

But would they really allocate 25% of their class size to just Cal and Stanford grads?? 😕

What about every single other school in California? What about the entire Ivy league?

 

[LizzyM]

Offers are different than matriculation. The proportion of offers accepted is called "the yield". Every school wants to improve its yield, to have offers accepted. If UCB undergrad tend to accept offers from UCSF med school (eyeballing it I'd say between 50-70%) then UCSF may place more offers there in comparision with some other schools in order to improve its yield. The same goes for Stamford. Maybe all those Princeton student prefer Hopkins or Duke over UCSF, particularly if they are OOS.

 

[schrizto]

Maybe fewer out of staters applied to UCs because of the California budget crisis? Then all the UC med schools had to accept more applicants from California (many who attend UCs) to fill their classes. And because Berkeley has the strongest incoming freshman profile of all the UC schools, its med school applicants are likely to be the strongest out of the UCs also. Hence, overrepresentation of acceptances at UCSF from berkeley.

The three med schools with the most dramatic increase of Berkeley acceptees are UCSF, LA and SD, which are also the most popular UC med schools with OOSers.

 

[schrizto]

actually, I take my previous statement back since when I looked at the Berkeley stats for other schools such as Pitt and Michigan they also showed a huge % accepted increase.

 

[cookiedoh]

Oh they're self-reported? Now it all makes sense...

Is that what they mean by "students... who released their AMCAS information to UCB?"

Those stats aren't really "self-reported" in the sense that applicants themselves report to Berkeley where they got in. When you fill out AMCAS, there's an option to release information to your undergrad institution, so for those students who check that box, Berkeley will receive info about where they get in, matriculate, etc. directly from AMCAS

 

[Dianyla]

Maybe better premed advising at UCB, getting more premeds hooked up with the right kind of community service and clinical volunteering experiences?

 

[ThaliaNox]

Those stats aren't really "self-reported" in the sense that applicants themselves report to Berkeley where they got in. When you fill out AMCAS, there's an option to release information to your undergrad institution, so for those students who check that box, Berkeley will receive info about where they get in, matriculate, etc. directly from AMCAS

I don't remember this. Granted, its been a while, but while I know this option is on the MCAT, I don't remember it on the actual application.

 

[RoboChicken]

Maybe better premed advising at UCB, getting more premeds hooked up with the right kind of community service and clinical volunteering experiences?

As a Cal premed/applicant, I can tell you stellar advising is DEFINITELY not the case here. In fact currently, we have NO pre-med advisor/committee....

 

[Swagster]

Comparing percentages year to year isn't helpful without comparing sample size. Maybe the most recent year has the same number of acceptances as previous years, but fewer applicants. As LizzyM mentioned, maybe they critiqued their own applications more thoroughly and better self-selected.

That big of a percentage jump couldn't be attributed to a single factor and hints at some factor affecting the statistics. Besides faulty statistical analysis, there could be a few things affecting the increase.

1) With the economy the way it is, UCB students are applying to fewer schools (no more "might as well apply there, it's only $40). People who might have applied to UCSF on a whim in better economical times chose not to this cycle.

2) A change in the advising services at Berkeley that counseled students that might have blindly applied to UCSF not to apply.

3) An increase in MCAT scores for Berkeley students, making them stronger applicants. An increase in the UCB GPAs doesn't seem likely, because that would have required a schoolwide change in grading policy.

 

[LizzyM]

The number of applications was up in the most recent year reported: 117 compared with 98 applications in each of the two previous cycles. The number offered admission was up to 26 from 6 and 7 in the two previous cycles. The OP has the link to all the data. I'm telling you, this is not an issue of small numbers, the probability that this increase can be attributed to chance is exceedingly small (<0.001).

 

[chman]

Yep, that is odd. Looking at other schools, however, there seems to be the "odd year" for a few of them that just flat out doesn't follow the trends. Perhaps it is just a high year and we will see a regression towards the mean in future years. But yea, that does seem out of place.

 

[ColonelTigh]

Wait, let me get this straight: You guys honestly believe only 100 out of the 700 premeds in Berkeley applied to UCSF??? And only around 50 of those 700 applied to the top 10 schools? REALLY?? This is just an obvious case of which 100 guys are reporting this year, and with good luck, those 100 this year got lots in SF...

 

[chman]

Wait, let me get this straight: You guys honestly believe only 100 out of the 700 premeds in Berkeley applied to UCSF??? And only around 50 of those 700 applied to the top 10 schools? REALLY?? This is just an obvious case of which 100 guys are reporting this year, and with good luck, those 100 this year got lots in SF...

It is possible with the economic situation that students did not want to move anywhere and would rather just commute across the water.

 

[LizzyM]

Wait, let me get this straight: You guys honestly believe only 100 out of the 700 premeds in Berkeley applied to UCSF??? And only around 50 of those 700 applied to the top 10 schools? REALLY?? This is just an obvious case of which 100 guys are reporting this year, and with good luck, those 100 this year got lots in SF...

Do you believe that there were 700 premeds who completed the AMCAS in a given cycle?

Something is not exactly kosher with their stats but it doesn't look anything like 700 applicants in a given year.
https://career.berkeley.edu/MedStats/national.stm

 

[ColonelTigh]

Umm, I didn't pull the 700 premeds in Berkeley out of nowhere...

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table2-race.htm

 

[LizzyM]

Fascinating.

 

[Dianyla]

Fascinating.

 

[ThaliaNox]

Well, I trust AMCAS a lot more than Berkeley's info on how many applied! And according to AMCAS, over six times as many people turned in applications than Berkeley is admitting. Interesting. I'm definetely suspecting response bias!

 

[Dianyla]

Actually, I had another thought. The numbers on UCB's site may be limited to active or just-graduated students applying "on time". The AAMC numbers may reflect a larger glut of non-traditionals who are listing UCB as their alma mater. I think a lot of talented people are applying to medschool now because some of the more lucrative industries have been hurt by the economic downturn.

 

[ThaliaNox]

Actually, I had another thought. The numbers on UCB's site may be limited to active or just-graduated students applying "on time". The AAMC numbers may reflect a larger glut of non-traditionals who are listing UCB as their alma mater. I think a lot of talented people are applying to medschool now because some of the more lucrative industries have been hurt by the economic downturn.

I'm thinking that more than 1 out of 6-7 were traditional. Your idea may help explain some small percentage of the discrepancy, though.

 

[MossPoh]

LizzyM,

Quit trying to trick us with your logic and sound statistical analysis.

Cheers,
MossPoh

 

[CoolWhipp]

Maybe better premed advising at UCB, getting more premeds hooked up with the right kind of community service and clinical volunteering experiences?

This is about as likely as it would be for me to drive down the I-5 doped up on LSD and invent the next PCR.

 

[JokerMD]

asdf

 

[cookiedoh]

I don't remember this. Granted, its been a while, but while I know this option is on the MCAT, I don't remember it on the actual application.

http://www.aamc.org/students/amcas/amcas2010instructions080409.pdf
on page 30:

"Releasing Information to Advisors

If you wish to authorize AMCAS to release information about your application, including your MCAT scores, to the officials at this institution, indicate “Yes.” Releasing this information will help your health professions advisor counsel future applicants and evaluate programs. Advisors understand that any personal information provided is confidential and they should only release applicant data in the form of aggregate statistics. Additionally, checking this option allows AMCAS staff to discuss your application with your pre-health advisor at this school."

So not really "self-reported" in the sense that people can just randomly make up where they got accepted, etc. This is also probably why the Berkeley career center page only indicates there are <150 applicants/year, whereas the AMCAS page shows ~670, because not everyone checks the "Yes" box