<p>So, as we all know this is a competative year for our public schools.. UCLA recieved 75,000 applicants for approx. 2,500 spaces.</p>
<p>Even though I've been accepted to Harvey Mudd, which is arguably harder to get into and has a much better engineering program, I've been rejected to UCLA and waitlisted at UCSD. Just bizarre- I considered UCSD a safety. Do you think this year it's harder to get into UCLA and even UCSD than Harvey Mudd, or is this just weird?</p>
<p>Also, my friend got into UCLA and has lower stats than me. Just weird.</p>
<p>Has anyone else here been accepted to HMC but rejected from any UCs?</p>
<p>um the 2500 spaces/75000 applications is not really true b/c that would make their acceptance rate 3.33% which is not even close to the 22% acceptance rate from last year…the whole UC system might easily get 75000 apps but deff. not just UCLA</p>
<p>broncosfan: Keep in mind that 2500 <em>spaces</em> is not the same as 2500 <em>acceptances</em>. Lots of people get accepted but don’t end up going.</p>
<p>Blackroses: I wouldn’t worry about it too much. UCLA/UCSD and HMC are looking for different things, and as maruhan mentioned, applying ED and being female help you at HMC but not at UCs. UCs can be a bit random in admissions sometimes, probably because they receive apps from more than enough qualified people, but they can only admit a subset of those people. (Also, UCLA touts their “holistic” admissions process, so that could explain an acceptance with lower stats.) I won’t deny that it is weird for you to be rejected at LA/waitlisted at SD, but with the CA budget as it is, perhaps this won’t be so unusual in the coming years…</p>
<p>But hey, you’re coming to Mudd. No need to worry about UCs…IMHO, Mudd is way more awesome. :)</p>
<p>I got accepted to both UCLA and UCSD, which was surprising, but I am not feeling good about HMC at all… Why does this one have to take so long to release decisions? D:</p>
<p>threefifthsc: I know, but UCLA still has a retention rate of 40% which would mean they accept 6,250 students. 6250/75000 still gives them an acceptance rate of 8.33%, which is still not even close to last years 22%. Even if they had a huge surge in applications you are trying to tell me that UCLA will be more selective than Princeton?</p>
<p>I got into HMC and just got acceptance from UCLA yesterday. It did seem as if there were a lot more applicants than past years. Crazy… x_x I never thought it could be worse than previous years :p</p>
<p>So Mudd ED-accepted posters above… didn’t you have to rescind applications elsewhere? (This question is mostly to help future reader next year… rules vary from school to school, so it gets confusing. )</p>
<p>yeah, sorry guys… I guess I’m a bit dyslexic… and yeah, I’m not worried, since UCLA was my fourth choice, and UCSD was my third. HMC was obviously my first. I just found it odd.</p>
<p>@colorado_mom: Although you are suppose to pull out your applications to other schools, if its for financial issues, they arent going to make you do that… Imagine, if you get in to HMC bu then can’t afford it, you don’t want to have to end up at a community college… They’re aware that I plan to attend HMC, as long as all works out financially.</p>
<p>Blackroses - It’s good that HMC was willing to work with you. We’ve know other families that got painted into a corner with ED - you have to be really cautious. </p>
<p>I hope you stumbled into some good scholarships!</p>
<p>Blackroses216, Congrats on your acceptance to HMC. I wouldn’t worry about those UCs. Sometimes if your stats are too strong, they kind a know you would most likely not go to UCs and they would rather save that spot for those who are most likely to go. If you are from a private high school, that make it harder too. I would not pass HMC for any UCs. Good choice.</p>
<p>Another issue could be that you go to a relatively new school, so the UCs dont have a good calibration yet on the quality of your school’s students. This could make them accept students relatively conservatively.</p>
<p>Please forgive me for being blunt in the following paragraph, but I feel like this needs to be said:</p>
<p>Based on your qualifications, I would guess that had you been a male applying in the regular pool, you would have not been accepted. That is not to say you wouldnt be a positive force at Mudd; I believe you can and really hope you will be. However, you will need to work your ass off once you get here, just as I did, to make up any gap between you and the other students, just as I did. The easy part of a Mudd education is getting in, youve done that, but next year is where the real challenge begins. You may have been given the unique chance at a Mudd education because of your gender, but getting through will be a unisex feat, and will be the way to prove yourself, and the UCs, beyond any doubt that you could have gone anywhere and succeeded. Good luck and kick ass.</p>
<p>“Based on your qualifications, I would guess that had you been a male applying in the regular pool, you would have not been accepted. That is not to say you wouldnt be a positive force at Mudd; I believe you can and really hope you will be. However, you will need to work your ass off once you get here, just as I did, to make up any gap between you and the other students, just as I did. The easy part of a Mudd education is getting in, youve done that, but next year is where the real challenge begins. You may have been given the unique chance at a Mudd education because of your gender, but getting through will be a unisex feat, and will be the way to prove yourself, and the UCs, beyond any doubt that you could have gone anywhere and succeeded. Good luck and kick ass.”</p>
<p>Many of us who have actually gone through Mudd from start to finish have a problem with the way that Mudd tries to artificially balance the gender ratio. A good percentage of the alums feel that applicants should be put on equal ground and the best should only be admitted. If this means more boys, great. If this means more girls, great.</p>
<p>Mudd does NO ONE a favor by admitting unprepared students. Unfortunately, in this day and age this happens to manifest itself in a sizeable portion of the female population. By my estimates, 20% of female students drop out at Mudd. A lot of times it isn’t even that they can’t do the work or are getting really bad grades. They get tired of engineering/science and want to do something else… I think Mudd puts so much energy into getting girls to come that sometimes the girls are almost tricked into thinking that engineering is more glamorous and fun than it is. After their first year they are ready to do something else… especially when they don’t get A’s like they did in HS.</p>
<p>I actually haven’t looked at your stats, BlackRoses (except I do remember some SAT troubles awhile back). I would take this as a word of caution.</p>
<p>P.S… and of those who do make it through a good chunk of them want nothing to do with engineering/science.</p>
<p>You can call me sexist but I’m just telling you how it is.</p>
<p>Woah 1/5 females drop out of Mudd? I dont believe it. In fact Im fairly certain despite everything, males have a higher dropout rate than females do. Women somehow seem to be able to work harder once they get to college.</p>
<p>“Woah 1/5 females drop out of Mudd? I dont believe it. In fact Im fairly certain despite everything, males have a higher dropout rate than females do. Women somehow seem to be able to work harder once they get to college.”</p>
<p>Yes. Class of 2009 had terrible retention but the women were hit particularly hard. I will try to find you sources to back up my claims. However, they aren’t exactly things that people would proudly publish…</p>
<p>I think your year may have been an outlier. I know of at least 2 (maybe 3) women who either took a year off or went on for an 11th semester. When a year is 25% female, I guess that could already cause a large enough blip.</p>