<p>i noted that they stated they had over 15,000 transfer applicants for fall 08...and only 3,200 of them got accepted, this totally destroys the previous statistic of about 43% acceptance, it has practically dropped to a 20% rate for this year, thanks to the darn CC going overachieving high school class of 2006( which i am unfortunately a part of), man this stuff has seriously gotten me down, practically everyone in my bio class got accepted, this is a complete reversal from high school where we all laughed about getting rejected, i feel as if i just got rejected from riverside in high school.</p>
<p>wot chu mean?</p>
<p>There has got to be something wrong with that statistic, I don't think the admission rate dropped from 43% to 21.3%.</p>
<p>He is close. According to the CDS (Common Data Set) that UCLA submitted for the 2006-2007 academic year, 13137 transfers applied. Of that 13137, 5330 were admitted.
5330/13137 = 40.57%</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aim.ucla.edu/data/campus/general/CDS2006_2007.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.aim.ucla.edu/data/campus/general/CDS2006_2007.pdf</a> (Section D)</p>
<p>Wow so they accepted less people and more people applied. And budget cuts were not suppose to affect us? I want to see the data of admitted students at UCLA when they post it.</p>
<p>Wow, stop overanalyzing, 2007 had 40% acceptance despite what others tell you.
I read it in their booklet in the letter thing.</p>
<p>the statistic has tricky wording. There are 3200 spaces but more people were accepted because they accept more people than will commit to the school.</p>
<p>Yea I forgot that little trick, UCSD did that in there acceptance letter.</p>