<p>If I worked in UCLA admissions, I’d admit you to the U. But I don’t and they obviously have a completely different idea behind admissions. </p>
<p>Excellent scores … well done. But you have to remember that UCLA discounts ACT and SATI scores. They do this to be ‘equitable’ towards those of disadvantaged background. So, though you have higher end scores, this may not give you a good foot forward towards your admission at the U. </p>
<p>Think of it this way: </p>
<p>The 25%-tile scores of the U are those of disadvantaged background who probably could only afford one take under the ‘guidance’ of a pretty lousy prep course. So naturally, if they prepped under a private tutor or took one of the better preps, they would probably ascend their scores by 200+ SAT or 6+ ACT points.</p>
<p>This is added to the idea that UCLA admits to these ideas: </p>
<p>1) Grades represent a longer term accomplishment over scores which are more ephemeral, more short term.</p>
<p>2) How the student best uses his/her high school’s resources to the best of his/her abilities. So in other words, if your hs is blessed with much resources, AP, great teachers, etc, much more would be expected of you, which should manifest itself in higher wgpa and higher scores. The equal footing would be uwgpa for those from great to not-so-great hss, so I think UCLA admissions probably weighs this the most. </p>
<p>Wrt gpa, you obviously know your uw gpa is low end. So let’s do some qualitative quick and simple math:</p>
<p>If 75-80% of UCLA students have 3.75 uw gpa or >, you would be < 25%-tile.</p>
<p>&…</p>
<p>Your scores are obviously > 75%-tile of the admitted class.</p>
<p>Because the weights towards admitting would be >> towards uwgpa, I would say just strictly by academics, you would have < 50% chance, maybe ~ 25% chance of being admitted. But this about what UCLA admits to wrt %'s.</p>