Effective Fall 2018, Sac State is changing their Selection Criteria for Admissions into the BSN program. I've created this thread for those folks that are planning on applying Fall 2018 to ask questions, share their thoughts, etc. I'm interested to know if the changes make it easier or harder to get accepted. I myself was planning on applying Fall 2018 but may decide to apply Spring 2018 if it's "easier" before the new changes are put into effect.
You're right. I have a 4.0 (non-adjusted) and 96.0 on the TEAS with 4 points optional criteria. That's 81 points total - one point above the preliminary cutoff. Even with my stats, I'm right on the border. Personally, I think they need to reevaluate the new selection criteria. I'm all for the optional criteria awarding extra points, but I feel like 20 of 100 points is quite a lot. And obviously, allowing grades to be omitted skewed the points. Why even look at GPA if you're essentially letting everyone report a 4.0 if they choose?
I agree! I busted my butt and got the 4.0 and a 95.3 on the TEAS. I barely made the cut off. I had to go get my CNA or I would have had no extra points. I was never wealthy by any means and I went to a decent high school MANY years ago. My parents never went to college but my mom went back in her 60's and got her AA just to do it. Yes, I probably got in, but I think the extra points are too much and not very fair.
I've been keeping my eye on this forum, as I won't be applying until Spring 2019 and wanted to see how the chips fell with the initial cutoff stats. I was one of the victims of the Spring 2018 spike, just barely missed cutoff and wasn't able to apply for Fall 2019.
Pending the release of comprehensive applicant data, I feel compelled to say that this new point system, for lack of a better term, seems straight whack. I'll be applying in the 81-85 point range for spring, but I have a 4.0 unadjusted gpa and a 93.3% TEAS. The fact that this would put me hovering around the cutoff point, scraping for optional criteria seems nuts.
I am totally in support of there being a healthy amount of optional criteria for economically disadvantaged students. But by allowing such a LARGE amount of optional criteria for low-income/ disadvantaged background/ first generation college degree (12 points total) folks while at the SAME TIME allowing all students to drop two full grades AND apply without completing any of the 4 corequisites, Sac State really seems to have created a system that is overtly punitive to folks who did well in their classes and TEAS. At the same time, by creating smaller margins between points in the TEAS scores, they have essentiallys allowed a student with, for example, a 3.6 gpa and TEAS scores in the 80's, to leap frog students with a 4.0 and TEAS scores in the 90's. What?
If they want to allow this much optional criteria, cool, but then don't allow students to drop ANY classes and require students to have completed 11 classes and have one pending upon application. It seems they are bending over backwards to not only give more optional criteria points to folks from low income background (again, cool) but they also TAKE AWAY the ability for students with high gpa's and high TEAS scores but who don't come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds to maintain their competitiveness by allowing all students to drop 2 grades when applying.
I don't know if the data will bare these points out, but from the initial looks of it and just from what common sense tells me with the structure they have set up, I feel like there's going to be a lot of pushback against this new criteria. And this is coming from someone who would have made the cut this time around.
I agree that there are many flaws with the new criteria. SAC State is notoriously known to have some of the best if not the best pass rates for a BSN program. If they are going to begin to prioritize and put people in the program based on economic status and disadvantaged background, then they can say goodbye to their pristine pass rates.
Students who put in the work to obtain a decent TEAS score and GPA will be replaced by students who got 8 points from Economical Disadvantage and Environmental Circumstances.
I've e-mailed Teri with feedback saying exactly this. Good thing that in the e-mail that they sent us yesterday, that they said they are going to review their criteria and possibly update/change it, making it more fair.
I agree. The criteria seems to be skewed and even though I did make the cut off point, I still don't think the criteria is fair. It is ridiculous that students with 4.0s and scored 90s in their Teas are barely making the cut off point. It's not fair that almost everybody can apply with a 4.0 now. I actually worked my butt off to get a 4.0 but now students can apply with a 4.0 even if they got 1 or 2 Bs. Maybe they should get rid of that, because I can almost guarantee that most of the applicants applied with 4.0(adjusted nursing gpa). I definitely think that the criteria needs to be reevaluated because I see alot of issues with it.
I agree that there are many flaws with the new criteria. SAC State is notoriously known to have some of the best if not the best pass rates for a BSN program. If they are going to begin to prioritize and put people in the program based on economic status and disadvantaged background, then they can say goodbye to their pristine pass rates.
Students who put in the work to obtain a decent TEAS score and GPA will be replaced by students who got 8 points from Economical Disadvantage and Environmental Circumstances.
I've e-mailed Teri with feedback saying exactly this. Good thing that in the e-mail that they sent us yesterday, that they said they are going to review their criteria and possibly update/change it, making it more fair.
Hello fellow applicant, did you basically say poor people are less intelligent? That's highly disrespectful and sterotypical of you.. I get the fact that the nursing program demands a lot of time and effort in order to pass, and in my experience, someone who grew up in a disadvantaged home is the one who will stop at NOTHING to achieve their goal. So making such drastic assumptions about NCLEX passing rates, which can't possibly be proven until you've seen results, is pretty immature.
People with your point of view is honestly what keeps disadvantaged people in their poor state. If you think about it in a larger perspective, giving disadvantaged people slight advantages every now and then is what can ultimately help bring poor status groups out of their disadvantaged state and make them less dependent on government help, and so on.. So tell me what can be so wrong with that..
And also, there are so many private nursing schools readily available to anybody willing and able to apply. The only problem with that, is the fact that a disadvantaged person literally has no means of paying the price that is asked of them.. while a person with parents, who have a large income, have a drastically easier time taking that route of education.
And believe me, I am saying all of this respectfully. Sometimes it helps to think from a different point of view to understand what others are going through.
Hey guys! I know the preliminary cutoff can be discouraging, but don't lose hope! Many things can happen between now and August when school starts.
The preliminary cutoff for spring 2018 was 86 and it dropped down to 84. There is much more time over the summer for adjustments to happen. Not saying anything is a guarantee, but hang in there! :)
I agree! I busted my butt and got the 4.0 and a 95.3 on the TEAS. I barely made the cut off. I had to go get my CNA or I would have had no extra points. I was never wealthy by any means and I went to a decent high school MANY years ago. My parents never went to college but my mom went back in her 60's and got her AA just to do it. Yes, I probably got in, but I think the extra points are too much and not very fair.
Don't get me wrong, I think the optional criteria is great. I grew up in a low income family and went straight to work after high school. It was financially impossible for me to work less hours and attend college because I was supporting myself on minimum wage jobs. Now, at 30, I have the support to be able to work less and attend school. I can only image how difficult and exhausting it is for those who work full time while completing their prerequisites. I worked hard for my GPA, but I also had all the time I needed to study. Giving those from disadvantaged backgrounds an boost makes sense, as it doesn't always mean they didn't work hard. Many just have a lot on their plate and cannot commit to spending as much time on their studies. Before applying, I emailed T. about the low income criteria and she told me they are very strict on who gets it (and only 6 students actually qualified for it last application cycle). I think 20 out of the 100 total points is a huge chunk, though.
I think the bigger issue is the adjusted GPA. When you're allowing grades to be omitted, it kind of devalues the GPA and makes the point margin much narrower. If almost everyone can apply with a 4.0, it really comes down to the 30 TEAS points and the 20 optional criteria. I think they realized it was not the best system and thats why they are reevaluating. I know it's frustrating for us, as we've all worked really hard to get to this point, but with over 500 applicants you have to kind of expect that the competition is going to be intense. :)
I agree that there are many flaws with the new criteria. SAC State is notoriously known to have some of the best if not the best pass rates for a BSN program. If they are going to begin to prioritize and put people in the program based on economic status and disadvantaged background, then they can say goodbye to their pristine pass rates.
Students who put in the work to obtain a decent TEAS score and GPA will be replaced by students who got 8 points from Economical Disadvantage and Environmental Circumstances.
I've e-mailed Teri with feedback saying exactly this. Good thing that in the e-mail that they sent us yesterday, that they said they are going to review their criteria and possibly update/change it, making it more fair.
I agree that the new point system may need to be reviewed and revised. I think that there are flaws that needs to be changed because it is not fair for others to have 4.0 gpa and a high TEAS score and barely made the cut off... Though, I respectfully think that your statement was inappropriate. It is a poor assumption and generalization to think that if a person grew up in a low-income family and went to a low performing high school, they are not smart enough to pass the NCLEX and Sac State's nursing program. There are many individuals who come from different backgrounds and economical status who are smart.
I agree that the optional points should be a lower because its "optional" not a requirement, but I do not think that the economical and environmental points were the main reason for the high cut off points.
Firstly, the email clearly stated that this semester there were over 500 applicants who paid the nursing application fee for Fall 2018..... Which pretty much means that this is way more applicants than any of the past semesters.
Second, when I went to the group advising we were told and emphasized that it is very hard to get the economical and environmental disadvantage points. Last semester, they only offered it to SIX students out of all the applicants who applied... six...They do not just give those points away.
I think that the new points criteria, huge amount of applicants, and the easier online application system played a large role on the high points cut off. I hope that they do review and revise the new point system based on this semester's data.
I agree that there are many flaws with the new criteria. SAC State is notoriously known to have some of the best if not the best pass rates for a BSN program. If they are going to begin to prioritize and put people in the program based on economic status and disadvantaged background, then they can say goodbye to their pristine pass rates.
Students who put in the work to obtain a decent TEAS score and GPA will be replaced by students who got 8 points from Economical Disadvantage and Environmental Circumstances.
I've e-mailed Teri with feedback saying exactly this. Good thing that in the e-mail that they sent us yesterday, that they said they are going to review their criteria and possibly update/change it, making it more fair.
Hi!
I had emailed T about the economical disadvantage, as I did grow up in a low income family. She said that they are pretty strict on approving those criteria and that only 6 applicants actually qualified for it in Fall 2017 (of 469 applicants, mind you). I know it is frustrating, but that boost in points in not given to many. If anything, I think more people are likely to claim the second language and/or medical experience. As I said in another post, just because those individuals qualify for those points, doesn't mean they didn't work hard or have the ability to do well in the program. Sometimes, there are other factors at play, such as family and financial responsibilities which take away from their studies. We also have to take a step back and realize that with over 500 applicants, and Sac States' shining reputation and pass rates, the competition was going to be fierce.
I agree that they whole system needs to be reevaluated, as it is not really "fair", but I don't think those two areas of optional criteria are where the problem is.
I agree that there are many flaws with the new criteria. SAC State is notoriously known to have some of the best if not the best pass rates for a BSN program. If they are going to begin to prioritize and put people in the program based on economic status and disadvantaged background, then they can say goodbye to their pristine pass rates.
Students who put in the work to obtain a decent TEAS score and GPA will be replaced by students who got 8 points from Economical Disadvantage and Environmental Circumstances.
I've e-mailed Teri with feedback saying exactly this. Good thing that in the e-mail that they sent us yesterday, that they said they are going to review their criteria and possibly update/change it, making it more fair.
I don't mean to be rude in any way but your comment came off very disrespectful and impolite. I agree that the nursing program at Sac State is one of the best known nursing programs due to pass rates but, just because they offer optional criteria points for being at a lower economic status or having a disadvantaged background does not mean the school will have to "say goodbye to their pristine pass rates". This basically comes off as you stating that those who qualify for those points will be a hindrance to their pass rate because they are less intelligent than someone who does not. Not being economically stable along with not having privileges to attend a good high school with other disadvantages does not make the applicant who qualified for those points less deserving. Yes your GPA and TEAS score are extremely crucial and are the main focus in terms of granting points for the 80 seats. But, I also strongly believe that offering those extra points will allow those who do not have enough funds or available resources to apply and potentially receive a spot in their program. Your comment implies that you are someone who did not qualify for those points but it is important to respect those who do have to deal with certain drawbacks.
chimichanga96, BSN
57 Posts
Does anyone know how the waitlist process goes?