<p>ucla rejects '09.... :(</p>
<p>man.. this sucks.. so many of you guys so deserved to get into ucla... theres quite a few people that i know of at my school who worked really hard for 4 years that got rejected.. all who had steller stats and essays too.. feeling bad for them. i was just ranting to a friend of mine about how unfair it seems, glad i withdrew my app to ucla..</p>
<p>jesus so many freaking smart people got rejected.....i really dont feel bad at all anymore...its such a coin toss. i dont think any of us should feel bad. sadly, i realized this after a few boxes of kleenex and a bucket of chocolate ice cream, but honestly, were better than them! yeah! FU(la for life! (usc's slogan is awesome...)</p>
<p>Wow i think starman should have gotten in. So far the people i know who got accepted really deserved it. However, there were a few other people i know who deserved to get in more, but didnt.</p>
<p>1540,800/780/710, 3.88
oh well</p>
<p>Don't worry - you've always got USC to fall back on... :rolleyes:</p>
<p>It's possible that the people who had good stats and were rejected had specified a major where there were a ton of applicants with the same or better stats. But who the heck knows.</p>
<p>eh, just an overcrowded poor place, not enough room for very smart kids</p>
<p>i thought i read somewhere that ucla doesnt base admissions on major? oh well im still hoping on ucb because they accepted people with less stellar stats than me last year from my school and i heard they care more about essays and my essays were good</p>
<p>me:
4.1
1360 sat i
780/680/670</p>
<p>friend last year- cal acceptee:
caucasian, 2nd generation college student who wrote about involvement in clubs, he let me read his essays and really they were anything but spectacular- nothing out of the ordinary about his essays or even the club and what he did for it
4.2 // 1240// 720//680//610</p>
<p>and besides him there was this one lazy mofo girl that i know had at least one c her junior year who got into cal so i still have my fingers crossed... if not i guess ill stay close to home and go to uci</p>
<p>rejected,,I expected it but it's still kinda sad..lol</p>
<p>UC gpa: 4.17
SAT: 1320
SAT2: 800/720/570</p>
<p>waiting for UCSD and UCI..</p>
<p>THANKS FOR REJECTING ME UCLA!!! I got accepted to NYU so my mom can't push me to go to LA anymore, woohoo</p>
<p>Thanks awakenedream and Lyrical for posting your letters. Best wishes to those who were accepted, and, with much respect, STAY STRONG to those who must now pursue another dream!</p>
<p>Wow, I really can't believe all this. UCLA has rejected so many terrific instate ELC applicants this year; it makes me worried about the schools I'm hearing back from in a few weeks (none of them UCs). For those who got denied, you guys are all terrific and I'm sure you'll prosper whereever you end up.</p>
<p>For some of you who were not accepted, I wonder if application reviewers think that, with your great stats, you'll probably get accepted at UCB or elsewhere, so they won't bother to accept you at UCLA?</p>
<p>Gap, I've answered this question. I'm not an admissions officer, but I've spoken to a members of the Adcom.</p>
<p>"Arguably, UCLA rejects stellar students because they know such students are more likely to reject UCLA when the tables turn."</p>
<p>"For some of you who were not accepted, I wonder if application reviewers think that, with your great stats, you'll probably get accepted at UCB or elsewhere, so they won't bother to accept you at UCLA?"</p>
<p>That is the most absurd comment I've seen. Accepting students wont at all hurt UCLA, in fact, it helps them in two ways
1)Leaves the good applicants in good terms with the University, if they aren't gonna attend.
2)How do they know that the stellar student wont attend? </p>
<p>The only positive is that it will help UCLA raise matriculation rates for a PR stunt, which UCLA is known to do. Mr Tran, the admissions director has already made the UCLA admissions committee a joke. In a way like you, he argued that the falling applicant pool has to do with UCLA's selectivity.</p>
<p>I'm sorry, but I dont think a click and an extra 40 dollars will stop anyone from applying to something that might drastically alter their lives. And it's increasing selective should make it more satifying to get into UCLA, so more people might apply. It's like saying that you aren't going to spend 40 dollars to play a lottery that you have a 5-10% chance of winning 100,000 dollars.</p>
<p>Way to go in this stupidity!</p>
<p>rejected..... but it was a reach anyways.</p>
<p>I'm just going to assume that I didn't get into Berkeley either because I really don't want to go through this again.</p>
<p>Does UCLA have a % of California residents that it has to admit, as mandated by the state? Some State schools like UNC have 82%, but if UCLA does not, then maybe they are able to seek more geographical diversity.</p>
<p>It's not $40 anymore, it's $55 per school.</p>
<p>UCLA's gotten so picky. In twenty years I bet UCI will be as hard to get into as Berkeley, and UCLA and Berkeley will be as hard to get into as Harvard.</p>
<p>As for Harvard itself... <em>sweatdrop</em></p>
<p>Rejected...yay :(
4.1
31 ACT
1310 / 750 / 630 / 620</p>