Hi ya’ll. I’m currently a california community college student who’s majoring in history and is aspiring to attend Ucla. Before I didn’t really care where I went for in terms of a school but I started to take my future seriously and have found that la is excellent for the undergrad in history as well as grad school. I am doing my cc’s tap program which I’ve heard allows enhanced admission prospects into getting into a UC but I’m still wondering whether it’s possible if I could get in. I’ve messed up alot in my academic career early on since I was slacking but have thrived in my history courses. My overall gpa at this moment is a 3.0 and I think it’s realistic to get it up to a 3.2. So my main question is do I have a chance to get in ? Along with being tap certified by that time, I’ve worked three jobs so far, 2 in food service and currently this one in retail and have even interned for a congressman over the summer. I’m not too bummed if I don’t get in, but given la’s reputation for it’s grad department it would be awesome if I could be admitted at the undergrad and make connections. Thanks for taking the time to read this. Cheers.
Talk to your transfer advisor. They have much more information than you can find here on specifics for transferring to UCLA.
Holistic admisisons means they take whomever they like. Simple as that. They don’t use formulas.
@excanuck99: That’s not exactly correct. While holistics admission goes beyond formula-based use of nothing but “numbers” (GPA, standardized test scores, etc.), it’s hardly “taking whomever we like.” For example, admissions readers use agreed to evaluation metrics to score ECs (to illustrate, x points if you held a major leadership position, such as a team captaincy, but perhaps .2x – or less – for a couple years participation in the school’s band). My point is, rigor and consistency are applied, it’s not simply “taking those we like” and calling it “holistic.”
They look at more than just numbers.
In the end, it’s you who gets admitted, not your stats.
TopTier: they might use metrics, but they take many outliers. Harvard admits this. And none of the Ivies uses that formula you suggest. Indeed, it is impossible to do 10 ECs at any of the East Coast “feeder” boarding schools. I cannot see any top tier university being moved that you were in band, or sold cookies for Save the Children.
excanuck99: Please provide evidence of your statements.
I’ve talked to many admissions officers, and from what I’ve seen, each school evaluates differently. While I’ve no doubt that the metric system (so to speak) is very common, I don’t believe it’s a 100% consistently used practice, even across the “elite” schools. Then again, what do I know? (Nothing. The answer is nothing.)
it’s a well-known system: students are rated 1-9 academically, 1-9 for ECs (or 1-5, you get the idea).
However that’s not what the UCs use. For transfers, UCs use primarily course rigor and GPA.
Your GPA is too low - UCLA would want 3.75+.
You’re right that UCLA is excellent for graduate history: you can make it your goal. You should only have A’s in your history classes + English, philosophy, political science classes. Find a UC where you have a good shot - does your CC have a TAG with a university? Also UCSC would likely be your best choice - or a CSU - SDSU perhaps? Sonoma or Chico may work out for history, too. If a CSU, see if you can get into the Honors program (and try to get into your CC’s honors program, too).