I applied to UCLA and UCB, today, i found out i was rejected by UCLA, i have a 1400 SAT I, and 780iic, 700writing and 630bio.
i don’t understand this. my it was my grades, they seem low (84%, however, i was sure that i mentioned i was top 1%-2% of my class.
When i applied, i didn’t fill out recommendations or send transcripts, did i get rejected for that lack of materials?
<p>hmmmm, i dont know anything about the UC's, but wouldnt they contact you if something was missing?</p>
<p>Newbyreborn --> you did not miss something at all. </p>
<p>I'm telling you that UCLA's admissions process was way random this year. I'm going to assume you're an in-state applicant. Two of my friends made it and their SATs were low compared to the past UCLA average. One was 1140 and the other was 1190. Their grades were very good, had well-rounded ECs and they're not just haphazard activities to look good for colleges; we're talking commitments lasting between 4-6 years. Though I didn't apply to UCLA, it's really becoming more apparent that maybe... just maybe... the meat of their admissions decisions lay on the essays. And then the extracurriculars.</p>
<p>This year just wasn't the year of the numbers, I suppose. UCLA and other UCs were looking for other factors that the formulated application did not cover and the only place they could really find that other stuff is in the essays. Had I known this, I would've tried out for UCLA instead of Merced. Grrrr... UCs <em>never</em> ask for recommendations; final transcripts are always requested and not the transcripts that you have during the application period. Your final transcript will be sent to the UC of your choice.</p>
<p>Overall, UCLA's admissions were just random this year. Our salutatorian didn't make it, either. Who knows what they were looking for? I'm sorry that you didn't make it into UCLA. :(</p>