<p>Yea, just as the title states. It's a thread designed to express all the pain and sorrow that you might have felt after getting rejected from this ridiculous college. I know some people are going to try to bash this thread down by calling me and others as losers and whiners. So in anticipation for such criticism, I'm just going to say that I don't give a rat's buttocks about it.</p>
<p>UCLA is losing out with its random holistic admissions process. It rejects the people that deserve to be admitted for their intelligence and instead decides to pick some average student that they "feel" will contribute to their campus because of their essay which might have been entirely false in the first place. Instead, UCLA should have chose students for their SAT and GPA, no extracurricular or hardship story. I wouldn't have gone to UCLA even if I did get accepted because it's way TOO crowded. Good luck to all the UCLA students in being recognized or even remembered by anybody of significance!</p>
<p>^prob the stupidest piece of writing i've ever given the time of day...have some class, show some respect, and get to work...maybe you could mow my lawn in a few years</p>
<p>^if you took the time to write your earlier ********, i'm guessing that you did have some sort of interest</p>
<p>last word</p>
<p>"prob the stupidest piece of writing i've ever given the time of day"
What the heck? You seriously have some issues in written expression. I don't understand you.
Um, from what I see, I think you'll be the one mowing my lawn in a few years. Ppl like dontcha should just relax and not take any of this stuff personally because it really doesn't pertain to them.</p>
<p>No, its just that I don't like the fact that I got rejected. It ****es me off when I see people with great SAT scores, GPA and even better extracurriculars getting rejected for really no solid reason.
Doncha: You seriously need to stop putting in the "^" because that is getting really annoying.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It rejects the people that deserve to be admitted for their intelligence and instead decides to pick some average student that they "feel" will contribute to their campus because of their essay which might have been entirely false in the false place.
[/quote]
********. look, you dont know that. you dont know where people are coming from ok? not everyone has the same opportunities as others - we're not just cogs in a machine and given rough or uneven indicators. so shut your trap because it aint true.
[quote]
no extracurricular or hardship story
[/quote]
it's unfortunate we're not as fortunate as yourself. believe it or not - people do struggle and have other obligations. just because YOU DIDNT and you could sit on your tail and get great numbers and nothing else - good for you , OK? </p>
<p>the whole thing helped me out cuz i had a really <strong><em>ed up HS experience. i still did well but my story helped me a lot and im glad it was considered . just the numbers and *</em></strong> and the aps - who gives if you dont know where im coming from or how much *** i had to go through when people at rich privileged schools are getting spoonfed. so have some consideration. people dont always have it easy . there arent too many horatio alger stories so **** off.</p>
<p>Good job on ur sat ii korean tho...too bad ur parents can't see u at ucra</p>
<p>and ya, ur sat is higher than mine...but i have something called TALENT</p>
<p>good night, and good luck</p>
<p>Oh..and ^ ur cool</p>
<p>jason, if you wouldn't have gone to UCLA even if you got accepted, why did you make this thread :rolleyes:</p>
<p>With your attitude and perspective on things, I'm glad you got rejected. There is much more to a student than GPA and SAT. If you can't see that (you don't), then too bad. </p>
<p>Grow the **** up and move on. Those "average students" will just fail out if thats the case. Stop judging people you've never met</p>
<p>chillax, mmelin. and stop trying to cuss as a way of venting your anger.</p>
<p>you cant determine EVERYTHING from someones scores in HS. look, i know a kid who went to a POS school in san diego. poor family and ****. "average" or "low scores" for ucla. and now he's balling and has a 3.8-3.9 and debating between phd and law programs. </p>
<p>oh how about this too - </p>
<p>he's black. :rolleyes: so shut the **** up everyone.</p>
<p>i cant help it if youre being a dumbass. grow up. people like you **** me off. talk about ignorance.</p>
<p>i love how you edited your thread. might as well just call you a fool so dont back off.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UCLA should have chose students for their SAT and GPA, no extracurricular or hardship story
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think you're being very unreasonable.
Standardized tests usually do not reflect a student's intelligence. Rather, it shows how well a student can take a 3.5 hour test.
GPA too, can be bloated, in the fact that one school's teachers may be harder than another school's teachers, and yadi yada.</p>
<p>On the other hand, a students' extracurricular involvement demonstrates how much leadership he/she has, which signifies to the college how much you'll give back to them. College education is a privilege, and the college is investing in you. If you're more involved in high school, chances are you'll be more involved in college, and then make top dollars and donate back to the school (hypothetically speaking). However, if you waste your life in high school and by luck, get into college A, chances are that you won't change your study habits in one summer (between high school senior year and college freshman year) and will just be eating up the college's money, effort, and time. Now what makes you think that a college will accept a student like that.</p>
<p>Also, regarding hardships, what if a student suffered from say... cancer, but due to his or her strong will, survived? Even if the student may have a 3.1 GPA, he/she shows determination, which WILL persist through college and for life. What if a student's parent died when he/she was a sophomore? If they had a grade-slip, but brought themselves back up to a 3.33 GPA, shouldn't he/she be acknowledged for trying? Because he/she will continue to try in college and later in life.</p>
<p>Think before you er.... type.</p>
<p>It's this sort of "randomness" in UCLA's admissions that I say those who consider it a safety are idiots. Nobody is in for sure at UCLA -- not USAMO winners, not people with 2350's on the SAT, not people with perfect GPAs. UCLA has reached a point in its admissions (nearly 1 in 5 acceptance) that while admissions can be predicted to an extent, it isn't safe enough to be considered a safety.</p>
<p>The OP is simply angry about this. Let him have his moment.</p>
<p>first you cry about people posting on your "official" acceptance thread.
and now you cry about being rejected from ucla.
you got into ucsd. be happy.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It ****es me off when I see people with great SAT scores, GPA and even better extracurriculars getting rejected for really no solid reason.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's because there is a better place for them. Sometimes you are rejected because there is another better college for the applicant, and sometimes because you are not a match for what UCLA expects from prospective students. For your argument, mostly the former.</p>
<p>You don't have to bash UCLA admissions; just examine the case of another university. For example, look at the small pool of each incoming class. Why is it so small? Because you have to be well rounded, flexible, resilient, as well as display academe excellence to be admitted. This is what the society seeks after you graduate - how you can contribute in all fields, not just intelligence. Don't be narrow minded .</p>
<p>You will understand that where you'll end up is where you're the best match (or else robots will be part of the admission committee). Psychologically, part of your argument is just reflecting on your pride and arrogance. If you feel that UCLA is too good for you, then .. good for you. You don't have to bash those who are unprivileged and get admitted. It's a different story when you hear and experience from their perspective. </p>
<p>On another note, at where else do you deciding between?</p>
<p>lawl at the awkwardness of the title of this thread. :p</p>
<p>i don't think all this hostility is going to make ucla regret rejecting anyone on this thread...</p>
<p>dude....come on</p>
<p>I'm still waiting to see how the OP is going to make UCLA regret the fact they rejected him.</p>
<p>@mme-lin: I don't see how you can assume that I have no "hardships" or how I am impervious to these things known as "obstacles" in this journey called life. I went through a lot, and you shouldn't act like other people haven't gone through anything. I work hard, and I try my best (obviously, not enough for UCLA). I don't see how your situation in life should be a deciding factor in a college admission. Just think about it: sad things can happen to any of us. Just because you're a cancer survivor does that make you more deserving than a kid who worked his ass off? And you're right about how you can't determine everything from stats in high school. BUT... what can we determine admission by? An essay showing how life has crapped on you multiple times? Solid SAT scores show a solid understanding of math and English. With these scores, those who grant and deny admissions must follow the assumption that good SAT scores mean a good scholar. Sad as it may sound... this is the world we live in.</p>
<p>@dontcha: I would like to know the cause of your hostility towards me. </p>
<p>@idno: "think before you... errr.. type" <--- ULTRA RUDE ^_^</p>
<p>@Everyone: I wrote (somewhat in an angry tone) about my experiences with the whole UCLA admissions process. Seeing people who've had crappy SAT scores and even crappier work habits get into UCLA does not make me happy. Nothing wrong with quiet, peaceful dissent, right? It seems that people don't like to question UCLA's system or any college admission system for that matter :) try to take it from other people's perspective...</p>