<p>hey burp. im in much the same situation. i think its allllll about gpa. totally and completely discovered that this year. i was looking at this post from another thread and i think it cant be more true...</p>
<p>(the thread "how much does gpa matter, really)</p>
<p>however, i think this is most true for uc's...</p>
<p>humour me,</p>
<p>Some people simply should not be at UCLA. They are not academically or intellectually prepared to deal with the environment. On the other hand, there are many people who could succeed there who get rejected.</p>
<p>nyaghooti- it is true, this year UCLA and other UC's are going by GPA. It seems SAT scores dont factor in much as many poeple with high SATS and low gpas are getting rejected while peope wiht high GPA's and relatively low SATS are being accepted. </p>
<p>perhaps this is because we are the first year to take the new SAT and the weighting system has not yet been established. the schools dont have anything to compare it too, besides applicants scores. it sucks, but i think in the future they will revert back to heavily weighing the SAT score again, once more people have taken it.</p>
<p>Or maybe you guys just have lots of anecdotal evidence and really can't tell what the stats look like.</p>
<p>There's an ongoing thread in the UCLA forum about its new suspected GPA weighing:
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=156281%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=156281</a></p>
<p>I wouldn't think that colleges measure SATs less for a few reasons:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>My SAT scores were probably the only thing keeping me from getting into LA. (1950, 680, 600). My UCgpa is 4.2, my ECs are pretty good. I had all three of my essays proofread by two professors and someone who used to read college admissions essays and they all said it was great (subjective, but it couldn't have been that bad). After everything, I was still rejected.</p></li>
<li><p>It doesn't make much sense that colleges would weigh scores less just because it's the first year. They may not have previous years to compare it to. However, they do have other things to compare students to... like other students. haha. </p></li>
<li><p>even if SAT scores seemed "inflated" because of the new scoring method. Colleges still get to see the break down of each section, just like prevoius years. And the SATII writing, which was require, was taken out to be put into the SAT I. (someone correct me if I'm wrong).</p></li>
</ol>
<p>So everything is pretty much the same as before.</p>
<p>flopsy,</p>
<p>It's funny how people will see four other people in a thread about it and go, "There is a trend!" but then forget that only people with the same suspicions are likely to post.</p>
<p>Biased sampling, anyone?</p>
<p>hahahaha. That is too true. Political polls aren't conducted at single party conventions.</p>
<p>Wait... I'm not siding with the people who think UCLA is putting unfair emphasis on GPA this year, I just think nyaghooti should have provided a link along with the reference in his post so that people who don't visit the UCLA forum know what he was referring to. Although, yeah, I agree that the respondents on College Confidential don't provide an unbiased sample of the admit/reject pool.</p>
<p>flopsy,</p>
<p>I knew YOU wouldn't think that. I just think it's funny nonetheless.</p>
<p>FilmmakerJack...what major did you apply to UCLA for? Just wondering about TFT applicants. My stats were similar to yours, although my GPA is the max (all A's, max AP's) and I was rejected for Musical Theater. I think it's a convenient way for them to get rid of 1800 or so applicants by just putting it on the TFT department...</p>
<p>Hey pkamdp, my handle is actually quite misleading. I'm not a film student. I applied under business/economics. If you're a musical theater major, I'd imagine things would be more difficult for you. I have a few friends who were into the arts and not academically strong, yet got into LA. They later failed to get into the school, though, for their specific art (film, music, etc.). So you guys kind of have a double battle. But I'm not too certain with how the Musical Theater major works. I'd look into it. </p>
<p>The claim is that majors don't make a difference if they're all in the ltters and science (for initial acceptance). I find this hard to believe though since all my humanities friends got into LA with stats questionable for even riverside. (I know humanities majors always bust a fight when anything negative is said about them so I'm not saying humanities majors aren't capable. I'm just saying the major is not as highly demanded.) And also all my "natural resources" friends got accepted into Berkeley with ridiculously low stats. I feel like an idiot for applying to berk under Business, probably the most difficult major to get into berkeley for other than engineering. and I still have to reapply. bogus.</p>
<p>I talked to some people who know people in admissions for various schools and they said that what UCLA does is take all of the people who applied at one high school and essentially pit them against each other. So no high school is going to have like 15 students selected, especially the top 15, to get in. This explains why some had adequate stats and didn't get it. Also, this year they weighed GPA and essays really heavily. Your SAT score just had to be within a certain range. They also really wanted to see improvement over the years rather than a decline. So even someone with a seemingly lower GPA who got in probably improved a little, if not drastically, each semester.</p>
<p>Raw,</p>
<p>How funny. You said that this year, UCLA weighed GPA a lot. Yet, on another thread, I've heard it's all SATs.</p>
<p>Yet on another forum, the conspiracy is that it was all essays.</p>
<p>I love it.</p>
<p>
Like in the movie Battle Royale? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>flopsy,</p>
<p>Yes. Only with slightly fewer swords.</p>
<p>I know at least 8 people got into UCLA from my high school in california and we're a class of 100 seniors</p>
<p>i think the entire thing was just bogus lol....My friend whose stats were drastically lower than many people i know got in. His major was marine biology..im wondering if that had anything to do with it (i know they say it doesn't) I go to one of the top 5 high schools in the state, so 70+ people got in, and i really can't find any pattern. Some ELC kids (4.3+) got rejected, while my friend with a 3.8 weighted gets in. Beats me.</p>
<p>Am I the only one who stops reading after the first LOL? Anyone else?</p>
<p>aznviper,</p>
<p>Sometimes, applicants have things other than just numbers to show. Maybe your friend had more interesting essays or ECs. Too many overachieving robots, and a school gets boring.</p>
<p>I know he didn't have that many ECs. He's in the same english class as me, and i got to read his essays. They weren't written all that well, though one of them was about his parents arguing a lot during his junior year. It was pretty emotional, considering how my friend is in person. I guess that may be why</p>