TAP bashing, just kidding... or am I?

Transfer Students UC Transfers
121

<p>


</p>

<p>Yea, 3.8+ GPA is just numbers. Just like 3.4 is a number, which btw is smaller than 3.8 last time I checked. Sorry, TAP is easy as pie(I can't put that any more simpler, cut and dry). I believe you said it better.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I think it's been beaten to death that not all students are able to take TAP for any number of reasons including work schedule, military obligations, family obligations. In my case, I was not offered to take any honors classes until my 2nd year at my school. At that point, it was impossible to finish 6 honors classes that I needed to fulfill my educational plan. Also, I'd like to reiterate that I have no worries of a TAP candidate being more competitive than me. It is the American way to find loopholes and easier/guaranteed ways into programs. Cal is my #1 choice and I've received Regents invitation from UCLA.</p>

122

<p>I'm not going to get into the whole argument again. </p>

<p>What I was referring to was the personal attacks which certain people in this thread seem all too willing to throw around. You might find people taking you a bit more seriously if you attacked the argument instead of the person.</p>

123

<p>ahaha ninjastar209, i like your style</p>

124

<p>lol. This thread is entertaining.</p>

125

<p>No one ever said that 3.4 TAPers getting into UCLA did not exist, or that they don't deserve to get in, Lazyboy.</p>

<p>We were merely bewildered at the fact that the poster would reject the 3.8 nonTAPer because he thinks he/she is inferior to the 3.4 TAPer. It's that you guys think a 3.8 w/o is not as good enough as the 3.4 w/. In my opinion, I think a 3.8 is just as competitive, assuming that the two in question have the same background. And, also, you really do have to look into the factors before saying such a controversial statement as something like "I'd take the 3.4 TAPer over the 3.8 w/o any day!" (I don't know what he really said and do not care to go back for it). Like I said earlier, my friend has a 3.4 gpa but her gpa is not as high as a gpa of, let's say, 3.8 not because of the time she invested in her TAP classes, but because of her two language (5 units, and short-term so no other TAP classes were in interference) classes. And because of hearing about situations like this, I don't really pity TAPers with low GPAs. But anyway, if they don't get accepted to UCLA because they didn't have TAP, who cares, cause they will get accepted to Berkeley.</p>

<p>Frankly, you all sound like big-shots who think you are all that because you guys did TAP. Big deal. I'm sure a lot of you guys are just as worried because you guys have a lousy GPA with TAP and the 3.8-4.0's are your competition.</p>

<p>Just admit that the schools should take other students in consideration and schedule more honors classes in the night or get rid of TAP all together. You can't admit that the honors classes are scheduled in the daytime-- so, are favoring traditional students? That's all Karabear and Oorah were trying to get at. They weren't trying to attack TAP students. They were attacking the program, in that it is a little unfair and biased. They were just sharing their view.</p>

<p>You can't say that if they really wanted to get into UCLA, they would've quit their daytime job, get rid of all other priorities they had so they could get in. That's like saying --I'm sorry I can't think of a better analogy so please don't use this against me-- it's the woman's fault that she was sexually harassed in the first place. She should have not worked for a male boss, should have rearranged her life and her priorities even though she had a family to raise, bills to pay, and started her own business so she wouldn't have to deal with that kind of stuff, etc. etc.</p>

<p>You guys should just all stop arguing. OK you didn't do TAP, OK you did do TAP... whatever, it's in the past, and your future is now in their hands.</p>

<p>Good luck to everyone!!</p>

126

<p>What's with all these arguments about TAP or no TAP. We're all transfer students, it's *****ing EASY! Work or no work, we all had it easy when we were in HS and blew it. (btw, this doesn't apply to everyone under special circumstances)</p>

<p>I tip my hat for the high school students that are suffering. </p>

<p>Now that's something to argue about.</p>

127

<p>whats the avg gpa for UCB econ transfer? I know Haas is like 3.8</p>

128

<p>GPA is just numbers on a paper eh ninjastar?.... Really?..... I guess everyone on this board who is worried about acceptance as a result of low GPA's can rest at ease now. Please keep ridiculous comments like that to yourself. </p>

<p>Do you even realize how dramatic of a gap exists between 3.4 and 3.8? A 3.8 clearly demonstrates superior academic ability over a 3.4 with TAP and represents a more responsible, capable student. (After all, honors courses are, in your words, "pie" aren't they?) </p>

<p>You say that those who take advantage of the program should be accepted because they are "go getters" and clearly demonstrate that they want to attend UCLA.Hell, I'm sure even non-tap students WANT to attend UCLA but can't get certifications due to unavoidable circumstances. This exactly the standpoint from which I'm arguing from.</p>

<p>As for your strange, generalized comment about non-tap students taking easy online course to boost their GPA's. Can't TAP students take easy or gpa-boosting courses as well? I'm also inclined to believe that most, if not all, "normal versions" TAP courses cannot be taken online.</p>

<p>Forgive me for being "dense" ninjastar, but do you honestly believe that a 3.4 student who takes advantage of a system which is both flawed intrinsically (being "pie") and extrinsically (not being able to cater to non-traditional students) deserve to attend over a student with a 3.8, who probably worked his butt off to attain it?? (we're talking highly impacted majors here)</p>

<p>The only closed minded one here is you...</p>

129

<p>wishful one I like your analogy :).. made me chuckle</p>

130

<p>I think this is the perfect time for a mod to lock this thread...there's really nothing else to discuss.</p>

131

<p>answer my question before the lock! :}</p>

132

<p>I don't believe that Cal releases stats on GPA for specific majors like UCLA does. However, this is the closest thing you can get to it.</p>

<p><a href="http://statfinder.ucop.edu/library/table_20-2007.aspx%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://statfinder.ucop.edu/library/table_20-2007.aspx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

133

<p>they did release some for Haas, but i mean does any1 know of an est. avg just by recent years econ admits in comparison to Haas admits</p>

134

<p>this thread should not be closed. this is the closest to a flame war i've seen yet and thus must be sustained.</p>

135

<p>Thanks oorah87 haha</p>

<p>I knew I've always liked you ; )</p>

136

<p>Now your just trying to get this thread closed... sneaky you... ;)</p>

137

<p>


</p>

<p>I beg to differ...</p>

<p>


</p>

138

<p>


</p>

<p>wow, that really hurts my feelings</p>

<p>lol</p>

139

<p>Lackofsense couldnt be more right about transfering a few posts back (I would quote it but I'm a crazy awful blogger (?) and didn't feel like figuring out how to quote something in darker grey or whatever so my apologies). my high school gpa was like a 3.4 or something...no way could i have gotten into berkeley or an ivy. transfering is easy so stop complaining. I'm sure you've seen the obnoxious statistics for freshmen. That's who we should all be pitying now.</p>

<p>And on a side note: Lilxlazyxboi, you’re acting completely tragic. It really is an unbecoming characteristic to be so pompous.</p>

140

<p>for someone with a tag that includes "lil" "x" and "boi" you sure seem to think you're some genius. </p>

<p>and that wasn't an analogy</p>

<p>moron</p>