FALL 2016 UCLA OFFICIAL TRANSFER THREAD

Transfer Students UC Transfers
581

@uclafff So they are able to approximate how rigorous different CC’s are, generally? What about students who take different professors for the same class?

“Again, these are assumptions that are made by the adcoms, and are not nearly considered that much of a weight in an admissions decision. Adcoms believe that good students get good grades, so it doesn’t necessarily matter where the students takes courses, but adcoms are definitely interested in assessing school rigor across the board.”

That makes more sense. Are these assumptions used only to benefit certain students - i.e. give students the benefit of the doubt, as opposed to negatively evaluating students who attended a supposedly easy CC? If it’s the former, then that makes perfect sense, as it is aligned with holistic review. If the latter, then welp…

I mention Berkeley because both schools use holistic review in the admissions process, although perhaps Berkeley is more adamant about that. It would make sense if both UCB and UCLA had similar admission policies, considering they’re UC’s, similarly ranked, and use holistic review.

582

@goldencub

“So they are able to approximate how rigorous different CC’s are, generally? What about students who take different professors for the same class?”

The obvious answer to this question is that there is no way an adcom can tell what professor a student takes the course with, but out of thousands of applicants that apply year after year, a statistical inference can be made. Not all students applying are taking that one professor who may be the easiest or hardest in the department. Admissions is very sticky business, there is no correct answer to anything and there is no black and white or definitive answer to grade trends.

“Are these assumptions used only to benefit certain students - i.e. give students the benefit of the doubt, as opposed to negatively evaluating students who attended a supposedly easy CC? If it’s the former, then that makes perfect sense, as it is aligned with holistic review. If the latter, then welp…”

It goes both ways. If an adcom has to decide on two equally qualified applicants (and I hate using this scenario with people because it hardly ever happens) rigor can come into play. Also, keep in mind that the holistic review process is a benefit to everyone, and not just for people who may “need it more” than others (i.e. - a lacking GPA, no extracurriculars, etc.).

“I mention Berkeley because both schools use holistic review in the admissions process, although perhaps Berkeley is more adamant about that. It would make sense if both UCB and UCLA had similar admission policies, considering they’re UC’s, similarly ranked, and use holistic review.”

All UC’s use holistic review. However, some weigh certain aspects of an application more than others (For example UCSD heavily considers GPA, but they still use a holistic process). I cannot speak on UC Berkeley but I know that although they are similarly ranked and are both UC campuses, they are still different in respect to what they want in students. This is why many students can get denied to one school and accepted into the other because one may “fit” better into the other school or has the qualities the school is looking for.

I just want people to know that there are applicants who apply to UCLA with very high marks and get denied over applicants that have lower GPA’s and there are many factors that determine that such as personality, drive, and even school rigor.

583

@UCLAFFF “The obvious answer to this question is that there is no way an adcom can tell what professor a student takes the course with, but out of thousands of applicants that apply year after year, a statistical inference can be made. Not all students applying are taking that one professor who may be the easiest or hardest in the department.”

“It goes both ways. If an adcom has to decide on two equally qualified applicants (and I hate using this scenario with people because it hardly ever happens) rigor can come into play.”

I see numerous ways in which such statistical inferences can be awfully problematic if they are regularly used to judge students’ academic abilities, but I won’t beat a dead horse.

“All UC’s use holistic review.”

I’m aware. I should have worded it differently - among the UC’s that read the personal statement (not all do), Berkeley and LA seem to be rather comparable with how they review applications. Different yes, you’re absolutely right, but still pretty comparable IMO (judging from approximated acceptance trends).

“I just want people to know that there are applicants who apply to UCLA with very high marks and get denied over applicants that have lower GPA’s and there are many factors that determine that such as personality, drive, and even school rigor.”

If you were to approximate how much weight rigor plays in the process (negligible/very minor, minor, can make a huge difference, etc.), what do you think? It seems rather problematic for arbitrary trends to have a major affect on any individual’s application, such that one student may get rejected simply because they attended a supposedly easy CC, whereas another student attended a supposedly more rigorous CC. I understand that you say this is what occurs, but I still think it is wildly unfair, especially because it is impossible to take into account numerous factors that are entirely pertinent in the determination of rigor - grade trends can only provide part of what rigor entails.

584

@goldencub

A lot of things are unfair, though. Employers pick more “qualified” applicants because of the prestigiousness of a school they attended and admissions counselors take “unqualified” students who’s mommy and daddy donate a lot of money to the institution. With that being said, I would say that school rigor (my opinion only weighs so much, I am only able to post these comments on here solely based on conversations I have had with admissions officers) is considered. How much it is weighed is something I am unable to answer based off my qualifications.

585

@UCLAFFF
“A lot of things are unfair, though. Employers pick more “qualified” applicants because of the prestigiousness of a school they attended…”

You aren’t comparing UCLA’s arbitrary measure of rigor to highly regarded college rankings in general, right? The former only looks at the trends of a single variable (thus ignoring others), whereas the latter is, in a nutshell, much more thorough. It’s not unfair that a graduate of a prestigious college will be looked favorably upon by employers.

Unfair wasn’t the best word, I suppose. I think it’s a flawed measure altogether.

I understand rigor being considered for transfer apps (i.e. a 4.0 from Harvard bears more weight than a 4.0 from CC), but I cannot see it weighing much at all for CC’s - but this is only my opinion, and I am less knowledgeable regarding the nuances of UCLA’s admissions process than you are.

586

@goldencub

No, I am only speaking my opinion on what I find to be unfair in other aspects of college statistics. I apologize to anyone that I have shaken up over this ordeal of rigor being compared across the board. For what it is worth, I honestly do not believe it weighs that heavily in the scheme of admissions decisions.

587

well statistics do show UCLA and other UCs constantly recruit students from community colleges in wealthier areas when compared to the admit rate of students from schools like Long Beach City college, which is literally a few miles away. For the most part, students at schools like Santa Monica City College clearly are at an unspoken of advantage when compared to community college students at LBCC. Why? Who knows, maybe cause Santa Monica has more funding and can thus provide more resources such as counselors to students whereas students at LBCC have to wait way too long to see a transfer counselor. Or maybe because students at LBCC don’t have all the classes that Santa Monica offers. Idk. But I don’t think it’s a question of which CC is more rigorous, but more a question of what are schools like UCLA and other UCs doing to reach out to these students at community colleges that aren’t in privileged areas?
disclaimer: In no way am I trying to put down LBCC or SMCC. They’re both great colleges and can both offer a great education to anyone from any background. One of my closest friends is at LBCC and is one of the most brilliant individuals I’ve had the privilege to meet. She used to attend UCM but chose to attend LBCC for personal reasons after her first year at UCM and I completely support her decision. She is now an Ambassador at LBCC and is doing research and partaking in these conversations with staff and administration at LBCC. No one wants to discuss issues like privilege, but it’s an unfortunate reality that needs to be brought to light.

588

It seems highly unlike that the UCs favor certain community colleges over others.

First, students in wealthier districts perform better on average across all academic levels, but especially higher education. This is for the obvious reason that the the overwhelming major of the parents of these children can offer to shoulder the burden of their children’s education. Students from upper middle class backgrounds are less likely to work in college and can focus on their studies.

Second, public schools in wealthier districts have the funding to avoid having to spread their class offerings so thin. More classes means more flexibility.There are thousands of students at every college and university who do not receive their degree when they intended because they ended up a single course short. Additionally, the distribution of students to CC/4Y from wealthier districts tends to be more even. This means that colleges in those areas are often less overcrowded.

Finally, it comes down to efficiency. The Los Rios District is huge in the Sacramento region; however, the graduation rate is horrendous. The things that I have heard about the counselors there from dozens of classmates and family are insane. But that is a fact of life. There are colleges that will thoroughly set students up for success and colleges where the students have to fend for themselves to a degree.

Now, graduate schools are INCREDIBLY pretentious about the past institution of study. But at the CC level, I highly doubt that it is anything more than the fact that CC experience is far less universal than the 4 year experience. Colleges right next to each other can be night and day in terms of quality.

589

I’m very skeptical that any school evaluates the rigor of CC’s based the GPA’s of applicants from those CC’s. There are a lot of issues with that. The most obvious issue is that applicants from CC’s in poor areas (where students are generally less prepared for higher education) will have lower average gpas. If you’re evaluating the rigor of CC’s based on GPA, these schools would seem rigorous, despite in reality being less competitive and generally easier. I’m speaking from experience going to a poor urban CC. This issue applies to any condition that depresses GPAs, poverty is just the most obvious.

Sorry if I’m making a point someone else already made, I didn’t read every post before mine

590

I think Santa Monica college and Long Beach City College are both privileged rich suburban colleges. I have completed most of my pre-engineering courses at Los Angeles Southwest College. I have found out that you cannot wait for a counselor to figure out what courses you need. You have to look at assist.org and find the courses you need for your major. Also if you think Santa Monica College will give you a better chance then enroll at Santa Monica. Nobody forces anyone to enroll at LBCC.
If you want to succeed in transferring to a UC you need to get the highest possible GPA and complete all your major pre-reqs. This will require you to do your own research and possibly use multiple districts. I have found that LBCC and Santa Monica have the toughest Physics and Calculus teachers so I completed most of my courses at Los Angeles City College and Los Angeles Southwest which got me a 3.81 GPA. I took Physics for Engineers at LBCC and dropped after getting a D on the first test. I finished all three physics classes at Los Angeles Southwest and Los Angeles City College and got A’s in all three Physics for engineers classes. So I believe the opposite that I have an advantage by going to an underprivileged, college in the inner city I have given myself a better chance of getting into UCLA.

Sorry, LBCC and Santa Monica students, I found a glitch in the system, Going to the colleges in the rough neighborhoods could pay off. We will find out in April.

UCMtoUCBHopeful, LBCC is one of the richer colleges in the area. The poorer schools are LASC, LATTC, Compton, and Harbor. I think you have been misinformed.

591

FWIW, in my opinion, it makes perfect sense that UCLA would try to determine which CCs are more rigorous than others - but I still cannot see them using grade trends, a fundamentally lacking measure of rigor, in the admissions process; or, at least, if it is used at all, I cannot see it having much weight at all.

TLDR; IMO, it seems very likely that UCLA tries to determine which CCs are more rigorous than others, solely for their own benefit.

Thanks for posting, by the way, @UCLAFFF - it’s always good to hear things from an inside perspective.

592

@eFlynn yes, you’re right LBCC is actually in one of the wealthier suburbs in Long Beach.
I wasn’t aware that LBCC was divided into two campuses though!

But i still don’t think it’s a question of which CC is more rigorous rather its a question of what UCLA and other 4yr schools are doing in terms of reaching out to CC students that aren’t in schools in the wealthier neighborhoods

593

I just looked at the UCLA admission numbers Santa Monica had a 34% admit rate and Long Beach City had a 32% admit rate. So from those stats I do not see how Santa Monica students have an unfair advantage.

UCMtoUCBHopeful, from this information how has UCLA discriminated against LBCC in favor of Santa Monica?

I just realized you stated “well statistics do show UCLA and other UCs constantly recruit students from community colleges in wealthier areas when compared to the admit rate of students from schools like Long Beach City college”

The admit rates are almost identical, so what statistics were you talking about. And don’t forget to tell your friend LBCC is a college in one of the wealthier areas.

I still recommend Los Angeles Southwest College.

594

LBCC is divided into two campuses. Lakewood Village, the wealthier suburban one, and the Pacific Coast Highway campus, which is right in the heart of East Side Long Beach (considered the hood)

UCLA doesn’t do the same to reach out to colleges in less than wealthy areas, and LBCC and SMCC is a perfect example. Although LBCC is in a suburban like neighborhood, SMCC still blows LBCC out of the water in terms of resources and all considering its surrounded by Beverley Hills and other rich cities!
@eFlynn

595

You guys have way too much time on your hands.

596

UCLA reached out to 32% of the applicants from LBCC and accepted their admission for the fall of 2015 while reaching out to accept 34% of the applicants from SMCC. It does not seem like a perfect example of whatever you are trying to explain.

597

Anyways, has anyone gotten an email regarding campus life at UCLA? that’s a generic email sent to every applicant, right?

598

I got one, it seems pretty generic, plus im missing a prereq for my major and didnt relize that ucla doesnt look at alt majors, so i probably wont be getting in, so i doubt its any type of indication of anything.

599

I got one as well. @Rey22David any emails other than the acceptance don’t indicate anything.

600

Los Rios is horrible. I bailed for Sierra and never looked back.