<p>I'm just wondering if people who have gone from sophomore standing to junior standing have seen a noticeable improvement in the classes they get 1st and 2nd pass?</p>
<p>Nope. Cause everyone else tends to be about the same level. (Most everyone I’ve met at UCLA was at least sophomore standing or higher somewhere their first year.)The only time I saw a difference was when I was senior status, but only cause I was a second year at the time. (The following quarter, everything was back to “normal.”)</p>
<p>The only class I couldn’t get during first pass with Junior standing was PIC 10A. I haven’t had any problems getting classes during first pass with senior standing. You still have to choose your first pass classes carefully though, and if you want to take more than two really popular classes you might have problems. YMMV depending on the department.</p>
<p>A lot of people are overachievers (all pun intended to the OP) who usually start out at sophomore standing and have senior standing well before their fourth year. Both of my roommates had senior standing in our first year at UCLA and the school sent them reminders about graduation procedures.</p>
<p>Sadly, having a higher class standing won’t matter too much because chances are, there’s still going to be quite a number of people who have a better class sign up time than you do (e.g. regents, seniors close to graduating, etc.).</p>
<p>Um, still better than sophomore standing which is still better than freshman standing.</p>
<p>My good friends and I are all second years; they all have junior standing from APs and I have sophomore standing. They all got into their chemistry, physics, and LS classes, while I BARELY got into chem and I’m desperately waiting for physics to open.</p>
<p>Sure, MOST people seem to be at the same (or higher) levels, but you’re still beating a handful of people (like me) with sophomore standing.</p>