<p>I obtained the info from one of my advisers, and it seems like UCSD continues to offer TAG for both Fall 2013 and 2014. I'm sorry if it's old news.</p>
<p>Here's the link: <a href="http://admissions.ucsd.edu/TagBrochure.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://admissions.ucsd.edu/TagBrochure.pdf</a></p>
<p>Interesting that there’s no mention of a GPA requirement on the form. Perhaps that’s because they’re uncertain if they’ll once again raise the necessary GPA for TAG eligibility? Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised to see it at 3.6-3.7 with the recent rise in popularity of UCSD and how high they’ve climbed in many academic rankings.</p>
<p>It’s on the first page. They didn’t raise the minimum GPA requirement somehow.</p>
<p>GPA requirements:
• achieve cumulative 3.5 minimum UC GPA
by the end of Fall 2012
• maintain your 3.5 GPA through spring
2013</p>
<p>when they say they want 30 semester units done at a ccc, do they mean in progress? or do they mean 30 units need to be fulfilled before the TAG is submitted?</p>
<p>^^they want 30 uc-transferable units from cc only before you apply for their tag</p>
<p>I did TAG to UCSD with a 3.44 GPA with Anthro.
My friend who goes to the same community college as I do and applied the same day I did, already found out yesterday. She TAG’d to UCSD as well with a 3.6/3.7GPA. </p>
<p>I still have time to get notified right?
NERVOUASSSSSSSSSSSSSSS</p>
<p>No need to revive an old dead thread from two years ago.</p>
<p>You needed a 3.5 by the end of fall 2013, if you did not achieve this, your TAG is void…</p>
<p>@Charger76 - He/She is just probably really anxious and nervous, yeah they could’ve posted on a more recent thread but they didn’t and either way their TAG is void (a counselor should have spotted that) but they still might have a shot at UCSD with their GPA so @originalvcast please stick to threads from at least late 2013 til now and good luck on getting in!</p>
<p>Do some people really think that the original poster of a thread that is years old going are actually going to see this and reply? I don’t understand. </p>
<p>@smltk1505h - No the person who revived it just saw a thread I’m guessing that was related to their question and used it to ask a question they were asking recent posters.</p>
<p>But this thread was and should be dead he/she got their answer and that’s it</p>