<p>In general yes. She is, like many others on here (myself included,) a booster of her school and that’s lead her to give advice which may be misinformed</p>
<p>But yes, overall I respect her posts and think it’s to the benefit of many high school seniors and undergraduates. (I disagree with her posts about UCs being worth OOS tuition, but that’s a personal belief.)</p>
<p>Don’t force me to look this up, ;). Seriously, it’s awful convenient to claim you didn’t say something I distinctly remember, which you may not have done so, but I personally stored it in my memory. You seem to say things to compile your laundry-list of evidences against UCLA and someone attending it:</p>
<p>1.) You mentioned and denigrated UCLA"s campus appearance many times, “candy-striping - ugh,” within its dance building in your argument with a person named sentiment, which is innocuous. </p>
<p>2a.) There are other nonsensical things you say about UCLA students having to travel across the country for interviews, whereas a Bama grad can just stay local for interviews to m. I understand Bama grads attending, say, UF m, but I don’t kow why UCLA’s have to travel to the eastern seaboard, or wherever you referenced. I still don’t understand this, so I won’t address it, save for its inclusion in your quote below.</p>
<p>2b.) What’s weird is that you claimed that UC didn’t accept oos m-students, which we, know is ludicrous, per my point 3 of the link a couple of posts down. Actually, on reflection, I can somewhat see where you perhaps received this notion. You looked at the applicant percentages of oos per the aamc.org website, and saw the matriculants %'s of oos students dropped considerably. This is easily explained because the UC’s have, as all med schools similarly have, low yields, and oos students probably consider UC m’s as fallbacks. But this doesn’t mean the UC m-schools don’t accept oos students.</p>
<p>Here’s the quote, which is part of this thread:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>3.) Your constant barrage of “remove UC from your lists, because you’re paying full price” is tiresome. There are many families across this nation, and certainly internationally, that are quite willing to pay full price, the vast majority of the time because they can afford it. You cannot claim that UCLA, whatever, isn’t worth it, just by automatic, repetitive response. You’ve must have stated such in at least 100+ posts, without inquiring about financial means of the OP.</p>
<p>I realize your 60K posts on this board, with probable numerous others under other names (momphysicsstudent?), gives you some self-importance. I actually respect you for taking the time to effectively live on these boards, but you’re obviously doing this to constantly promote Alabama. I do hope they are paying you well. But please, if you can try at least to inquire whether a student at least has the means to pay for a non-resident UC education.</p>
<p>Other unrelated things:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Perhaps you are correct wrt the admits to its engineering programs.</p>
<p>Let me reframe some of the references from my previous post. I only had ~ 15-20 minutes to search and reference things, and my message became jumbled, and entirely incoherent, without my being able to edit pre- and post-posting. </p>
<p>1.) Why the bellicose response of outrage? Why’s it your business how many oos students consider UC’s for premed? Re: third sentence, there are some graduates that do indeed go through 2-3 cycles. But where is the proof that it is worse off for UC grads? Where is any proof that ‘too many’ UC (assuming) grads take 2-3 cycles?</p>
<p>2.)Why the fabrication coupled with outrage? </p>
<p>3.)This is life at a research institution. This happens at Harvard, and many other elite institutions. </p>
<p>4.)Do Harvard and Yale graduates travel across the country for interviews during the academic year at UCSF, Stanford, UCLA? Sentence two, more fabrication.</p>
<p>5.)I’m not sure of the relevance, but this sounded like you were starting to calm down at least.</p>
<p>6.)If the parents have ability to pay, this wouldn’t be your call. If they don’t, I appreciate the advice to deter them from accepting a UC offer because there isn’t any good in anyone accumulating considerable debt at any point, especially before entering m-school.</p>
<p>7.)Re, lousy advising - I’ve seen bluebayou state this as well as you, but I don’t know if it’s necessarily true. I do know that the UC’s aren’t going to cull their graduates from top down, by discouraging the lower tiered grads in applying, so UC is definitely more about empowerment. This is why the unadorned %’s can appear lower ~ 55% for both Cal and UCLA, with all graduates who were surveyed were within their year of graduation when best %’s are probably achieved after waiting out a year … but this is how UC works. They won’t try to present higher acceptances by culling applicants because they aren’t trying to impress anyone . </p>
<p>If you want to address this on the UCLA board, out of respect for others who might have to step over this to get to the originating post’s true topics, I would be willing. I just mainly want to know why you put on airs of outrage, why you feel you have to fabricate things against UC, and why you feel it’s particularly your business to present robotic spiel like this over and over?</p>
<p>in response to the NJ resident who was deciding between an unaffordable UC (OOS) as a premed and his instate school TCNJ (not Alabama as drax implies)</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>For instance…If this student goes to TCNJ and gets an (equivalent on the new MCAT) MCAT 32 and GPAs around 3.8, and he has a reasonable app list, he will very likely have at least one MD acceptance. That cannot be said if he goes to a UC.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I also said some other things, including making the point that it will be harder for him to apply to med schools as an OOS student at a UC. His list would likely require much further travel than if he went to undergrad in NJ.</p>
<p>I did not say, as drax suggests that my (limited) exposure to UCLA was a visit with my son (however i have been on the campus 4-5 times with my kids and at least 50 times myself.</p>
<p>drax likes to say stuff like this to posters:</p>
<p>Different conversation. I explicitly remember, that you said you toured with your son UCLA specifically – I thought to myself, maybe she and her son were touring medical schools – and said it was something to the effect of “concrete cityscape.” You might indeed have been touring the life-sciences newer stuff, closer to Ronald Reagan, but the main campus itself is very lush and green, and certainly the buildings have a classical beaux-arts Roman inspiration.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There were a couple of conversations about UC’s and TCNJ, and this might have been the second. If you provide the link, we’ll know, but I’ll look a little further down the one I provided to check for this specific quote.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ll look for the thread later on, because what MYOS1634 stated was one of the most profoundly stupid remarks that I have ever heard on this board, if it is the one I’m thinking. I think it was in relation to a CSULB grad that was accepted to UCLA med school over a UCLA baccalaureate, relayed by Dr. Google, and MYOS stated something totally asinine about the UCLA grad was probably at a disadvantage in this case because he had larger classes. Never mind about the many more times grads of UCLA that have gained acceptances over those of CSULB, because the latter is not a premed factory. The UCLA grad was accepted to UCSD and Darmouth m’s and MYOS backed down, and said “oops.” Then again, I have had to say these words of admonishment to a few people because they have taken your spiel to heart, so I have to search to find out the context wrt your reference.</p>
<p>Perhaps @MYOS1634 didn’t deserve my first and second paragraph, but he/she was starting to take your tone, @mom2collegekids. And sorry, it was in regard to obtaining LOR’s as related to class size, not just the latter. By the way this is false; UCLA offers LOR’s but not Committee Letters.</p>
<p>Now your turn. If you don’t answer, I will bother you until you do. ;)</p>
<p>Somebody said that your stat can get you in at CalPoly SLO. It depends on your intended major. Eng’g (specially BME) and CS are very competitive (low teens acceptance rate). The school admit by major. It’s not unheard of kids being rejected from SLO and get admitted at UCLA.</p>
<p>There’s no point in universities admitting students that they have high confidence likely won’t be matriculating. Given that CPSLO’s admit rate is so low, it probably has (and loses) a ton of cross-admit battles with the UCs (both mid and upper tier.) And I’m sure it has detailed data on this.</p>
<p>And FWIW, while an admit rate in the low teens is impressive, all of UCLA’s non-L&S schools have transfer admit rates of less than 10%: Arts and architecture has the highest at 9.31% and Theater, Film, and Television has the lowest at 2.75%.</p>
<p>While this doesn’t say anything about freshman matriculation rates into these programs, I conjecture that they’re similarly low, or perhaps just a bit higher.</p>
<p>If we’re being honest, a school like CPSLO is lucky if it gets one grad into YLS or HBS a year. UCLA, on the other hand, gets several annually into both. This has to do with a number of factors like many UCLA alumni also being cross admitted to the Ivy’s, Stanford, Duke, Hopkins, etc. and can’t attend for whatever reason (be it financial, familial, or other.) Schools like CPSLO get some of these students too, but they’re less common.</p>
<p>Committee letters are a two edged sword. They can be an endorsement of a student by the undergraduate school in the medical school application process. But the lack of such can effectively be a disrecommendation if the undergraduate school normally supplies them. Some undergraduate schools may try to raise their medical school acceptance rates by refusing committee letters to students who are not already extremely likely to be admitted to a medical school.</p>
<p>However, many schools do not play the “level of applicant’s interest” game in admissions. They only care about yield in a sense of being able to predict the yield, so that they admit the correct number of students to fill the frosh class (and each major, if admitting by major). Presumably, they have plenty of recent past data to show that admitting a student with X.XX GPA, YYYY SAT score to ZZZ major with $$$ financial aid and scholarships will statistically result in 0.PP student matriculating.</p>
<p>Note that Washington CS is highly competitive for frosh admission, to the point that direct admission to the CS major cannot be considered a safety for anyone, and may be a reach for most or all applicants. Students entering Washington as non-CS majors face a highly competitive admission process to declare the CS major later.</p>
<p>I became a bit frustrated because I had a working link to another board in which I even previewed to make sure that all my links were working, which discussed this very topic related to CL’s. I finally came to the realization that College Confidential didn’t want me to link another board, which is entirely legitimate. So this is the reason for my ‘Alright…’ sentence. </p>
<p>Some of them referenced the pros and cons related to this topic, and listed some of the things you’re referenced here.</p>
<p>Bold1: This is obviously why UC wouldn’t supply them because it wants to empower all of its grads. A deeper unstated reason is the lower grads might be the ones UC is trying to help feel better about themselves. And certainly, there should be specialized admissions to m-school to accommodate these persons, usually of a disadvantaged background, and most m-schools do engage in this. (The idea of ‘Well, I want my doctor to be top in his/her class,’ doesn’t have a lot to do with bedside manner and effectively treating a patient.) </p>
<p>Bold2: Absolutely. And we know that UC would never try to cosmeticize its percentages in doing so. </p>
<p>So these are both at the fore of reasons why UC doesn’t have CL’s.</p>
<p>Note, including to you ucbalumnus. OP stated that U-Dub is at the fore of his/her options, and the California u’s, including the UC’s and the CP’s are probably out, at least for now.</p>
<p>I just wanted to join forces of Bold1 and Bold2 from above. UC has obviously weighed the importance of empowering its students, B-1, versus trying to promote itself as a great premed factory, B-2. B-1 outweighs the importance of B-2 in its ‘eyes,’ so the U doesn’t offer Committee Letters. I think I agree with this notion, especially since I would hate not to give a CL to someone who has greater potential of being an MD than someone who did receive one, just because the former didn’t supposedly manifest this at the point of graduation. </p>
<p>There’s a famous orthopedic surgeon in LA who was an ex-football player at UCLA, who I believe wasn’t a great student at the point of his obtaining his baccalaureate from the U, so I’ve read. I believe he bided his time in E grad school – I don’t effectively know his story enough to understand why he was accepted into grad school, and later he had the notion of attending m-school. I’m sure that some his lackadaisical qualifications had something to to with his devoting time to football. But some of this reflects a student maturing even after college, which we see all the time. </p>
<p>I realize that not receiving a CL means the student has to work harder in some grad program somewhere in public health or some life science if he/she has a strong desire to become an MD. But not receiving one could kill his/her drive at the same time. And I’m normally not necessarily a big proponent of the empowerment mindset in general society and its relation to the colleges. </p>
<p>You signed on fairly recently for the first time in awhile, and you were notified that there were some responses to threads in which you participated. Instead of replying using your notice, you went looking for the thread you thought where my response was situated, but you chose this one instead, which is apparently locked. But now since you participated in this one, I thought I would let you know … wrong thread, bro…</p>
<p>@drax12 my how you have an ax to grind…I think you also are confusing other posters with mom2ck from ‘memory’. You don’t have to be on attack mode with what she said on this thread.</p>
<p>It seems there is good information, then someone goes off on a tangent…</p>
<p>I think OP has questions answered. </p>
<p>My advice would be get undergrad degree most cost-effective and if wanting to stay in region, do so; if wanting to live in CA near beach, get job after UG then if wanting advanced degree, pursue in CA as a resident. Be sure to get accepted into CS in an affordable school - may mean out of region?</p>
<p>Not the first time I have heard someone being very specific about attending college in certain places w/o exploring great opportunities elsewhere. </p>
<p>I have lived in three states - WI, TX, and AL, so I am most knowledgeable about these states and college opportunities (having also received degrees in all three states), plus where my nieces/nephews attend college (which also includes IA and LSU). Both my kids are attending state colleges in AL, both on scholarship. Friend from CA has one kid at CP-SLO (ME) and another UCLA (molecular and cell biology).</p>
<p>Some states offer better options for staying in state than others. Good luck OP.</p>
But please, if you can try at least to inquire whether a student at least has the means to pay for a non-resident UC education.</p>
</p>