<p>namaste pretty much sums it up for me.</p>
<p>^ once again, RageKage’s sarcasm does not translate well in this forum =P</p>
<p>My observation of UCLAers, which hasn’t changed much over the years: smart to very smart, good-looking, not terribly political (unlike the Berkeley kids), some fashionistas, socially adept/normal (unlike some of the MIT/Cal Tech crowd–no offense), upper-middle class, gregarious.</p>
<p>I should add that I was in Westwood Village, this past weekend, having attended a close friend’s surgery at UCLA, and I got in conversations with 3 or 4 clusters of UCLA students, in two different yoghurt shops–overall impression: smart, poised, outgoing. I had a conversation with a No. Calif. girl, who attended UCLA, who was applying to law school and gave very measured and thoughtful reasons for choosing Boalt Hall (UC Berkeley) over Stanford law school, were she to get in to both. She was impressive.</p>
<p>^Well, she’s quite confident to think she’ll get into both! She must be at the top 1% of law school applicants to be so confident, I would think!</p>
<p>Also, your description is pretty much accurate too, just a little kinder than mine!</p>
<p>I’ve yet to meet more than a few (literally probably only 2 or 3) UCLA students who I would consider rude or arrogant in my 2+ years here. If you’ve met more, perhaps you should consider who you surround yourself with. There are 26,000 undergrads at this school; no excuses for not finding people you like. </p>
<p>Overall, I’d classify students as very intelligent, sociable, ACTIVE, spirited and very dedicated to one cause or another. It’s rare to find someone who isn’t involved in more than one extracurricular activity. </p>
<p>As for the person who so astutely noticed that, “it isn’t Harvard” - of course it’s not! We’re not trying to be Harvard, we have our own identity.</p>