<p>2012: 5400 were admitted, 72600 applied =7.43%admitted.</p>
<p>2011: 15689 were admitted, 61566 applied = 25.4% admitted.</p>
<p>2010: 13088 were admitted, 57678 applied = 22.7% admitted.</p>
<p>2005: 11361 were admitted, 42232 applied = 26.9% admitted.</p>
<p>2000: 10945 were admitted, 37794 applied = 28.96% admitted.</p>
<p>1998: 10830 were admitted, 32792 applied = 33.03% admitted.</p>
<p>These were the stats according to UCLA's profile of admitted freshmen for the fall quarter.
Anyone else surprised why such a small amount of students were admitted this year? I doubt this was a mistake but it might as well should be due to the percentage gaps. For the record, Harvard's acceptance rate is a little under 7%. </p>
<p>This is not considering the transfer stats.</p>
<p>Interesting… I calculated the 7% yesterday and was shocked… since i always thought UCLA was at 20 something percent. Budget cuts maybe? Maybe saving spots for waitlist since this is first year they’re doing it?</p>
<p>Well, I guess that you have the wrong information for 2012 acceptance rate. UCLA offers admissions for about 16000 students and is expecting for about 6000 students to enroll for Fall 2012. That’s also the reason why UCLA introduces its waitlists for the first time.</p>
<p>Omg people. A thread like this is posted every single year and all it does is confuse people and lead to false information.</p>
<p>NO, the acceptance rate is NOT 7%. The acceptance rate is more like 22-24%. The 5400 “admitted” most logically refers to how many students MATRICULATE.</p>
<p>In other words, UCLA probably accepted like 15,000 students, but only a fraction of those 12,000 students decide to SIR to UCLA. Other students decline attending UCLA to attend other universities. It’s only been a day since admissions were released. You can’t expect the website to have totally “exact” information at the moment.</p>
<p>Come on high school students. You’re suppose to be bright. You should know that UCLA isn’t going to have a 7% admissions rate. UCLA is a great school, but we’re not that great to accept only 7%.</p>
<p>Where the hell are these numbers coming from? Right off the bat I can tell that the 2012 stats are inaccurate because the letter for admitted students mentions that over 90k people applied.</p>
<p>The 90,000+ apps includes the transfer apps. 72k were freshmen. The OP’s stats look correct (other than the stat about only 5,400 being admitted)</p>
<p>I think OP’s confusing admits with matriculates. UCLA wouldn’t admit only 5400 student (especially since only a fraction of them enroll)</p>
<p>I didn’t know that UCLA wait listed this year though. It would definitely be interesting to see how many students were waitlisted though (wonder if it’s like 9k-10k :D)</p>
<p>@seresteiras, where did you get those stats? I cannot find them on UCLA’s website. I believe that it is possible that UCLA only “Accepted” 5,400 students, but waitlisted the rest, since those “Accepted” are more likely to file the SIR than at other UC’s, with the exception of Berkeley. If you click on the “Stats Profile” on the top of this page, you will see that virtually every student who was accepted has either already applied or intends to apply. So they are probably playing it safe to avoid over-enrollment. But I did find these stats on the following page:
[FAQ</a> - Denied Freshmen - UCLA Undergraduate Admissions](<a href=“http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/faq/FR_Not_Adm.htm]FAQ”>http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/faq/FR_Not_Adm.htm)
“For Fall Quarter 2012, UCLA received over 72,600 freshman applications for a class of just over 5,400 new freshmen. We had to deny almost 57,000 applicants.”
That equates to about 15,600 either accepted or waitlisted, or 21.67%.
Other stats show average UC GPA 4.38, UW GPA 3.88, SAT 2042, ACT 30.</p>
<p>Hi Sir;
You sound like an insider from UCLA that knows the school very well.
I just got admitted and quite surprise I made it! Although I am still awaiting couple more school decision next week, but UCLA indeed is a prestigous school with no question.
I’d say I am not the brightest kid in school, rank 3 in my class and that is all from my hard work. I actually told my parent I might choose UCSC because I am used to getting all A’s and I don’t know if I would get depressed if I start getting C’s at UCLA.
How is academic at UCLA for freshman? I’m not a party person, well-behaved and responsible on my work. Would I make it getting A’s and B’s being an average brainer and hard work?</p>
<p>I see you’re from Elk Grove -what school exactly? I ask this mainly because I go to Pleasant Grove where the rigor of the classes are crazy. I didn’t know this until my junior year otherwise I would’ve been okay with just taking easier APs and more college prep classes. </p>
<p>But I’ll assume that you are capable of the work at your school hence your acceptance. Of course, UCLA is a difficult school and with the general ed you’re going to take your freshmen year, it’ll all depend on your major and what classes you want to take. Really, it’s only challenging the way you make it to be. I myself am not a party person, but I’m not of natural talent either i.e. acing a test without studying.</p>