UCLA Selective Majors + Requirement Completion

<p>I wanted to start this specific thread so we can figure out the exact facts about selective majors and major requirement completion. I consistently hear on this site that ALL major requirements must be filled in selective majors, even if the class is not articulated at your CCC. I do not know about STEM, but UCLA's Communication Studies is highly selective, with an avg admittance GPA of 3.92. My daughter was missing two required courses out of the seven listed, as they were not articulated, and yet she still got in, a feat this site seems to say is impossible. Because of my confusion on this subject, I contacted the Communications Studies department and they said they will let students in if the classes are not articulated. </p>

<p>So I think we are leading some people up the wrong path. I do not know STEM, but it would be good to know exactly which majors demand what, rather than a blanket, "if the major is selective you need to complete all requirements even if they are not at your CCC."</p>

<p>Even though I do not know much about STEM, the general problem I have with the assessment of needing every class even if it doesn't appear to exist anywhere is, that the UCs are making a concerted effort with a new task force set up this year to not hamper kids from lower tier CCCs who may not have access to all the courses that are available at places like SMC. It seems absolutely against this policy and their general inclusive attitude to refuse high-GPA students who through no fault of their own simply cannot find one particular class.</p>

<p>So, the question I am putting out here is to find out exactly what rules apply to which majors and not just run a blanket statement. Had my daughter heard what is being said she would not have applied to Communication Studies, and others may be changing their course based on these far-reaching statements that may not be relevant to their major. </p>

<p>And before someone tell me Comm Studies is not selective (as someone did once before), it is. No one is allowed to TAP it, and it is on the selective majors list. </p>

<p>I agree completely. UC representatives will just tell applicants that they’ll have to take the classes that aren’t available at their CCs at the UC to which they’re transferring, which is sensible.</p>

<p>Even if one can commute to another CC that offers these classes, the UCs don’t assume that students will do that, and really, they shouldn’t, because there may be many reasons why they aren’t going to another CC to take the necessary classes.</p>

<p>These are all the selective majors at UCLA in Letters & Science
<a href=“https://www.admissions.ucla.edu/prospect/adm_tr/lsmajors.htm”>https://www.admissions.ucla.edu/prospect/adm_tr/lsmajors.htm&lt;/a&gt; </p>

<p>Biochemistry [2, 3]
Biology [3]
Business Economics [1, 3]
Communication Studies [3]
Economics [1, 3]
English [3]
History [1, 3]
International Development Studies [1, 3]
life sciences majors [3]
Biology
Ecology, Behavior, and Evolution
Human Biology and Society (B.S.) [1]
Marine Biology
Microbiology, Immunology, and Molecular
Genetics [1]
Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology
Neuroscience
Physiological Science
Psychobiology [1]
Political Science [1, 3]
Psychology [1, 3]
Sociology [1, 3]</p>

<p>Thx for putting in one place @2016candles. And also majors in the Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science (HSSEAS), the School of Arts and Architecture (SOAA), the School of Nursing, and the School of Theater, Film and Television (TFT).</p>

<p>Who’s the blithering idiot that thinks comm isn’t a difficult major at UCLA? They need to get their eyes, ears, and butt cheeks checked because something about them isn’t right. Maybe they need to eat more fiber or some visine…</p>

<p>@burntcorpse They did the proverbial invisible eye roll when it was noted that Comm Studies was a selective major. </p>

<p>However, the topic was not the ease of courses. (It is Comm Studies for cripe’s sake. :-/ )</p>

<p>Engineering has a whooping 12.6% admit rate, with most majors being around 5%-10%. Apply at your own risk. If you really want to go to UCLA, I’d say pick a different major and apply as an engineer elsewhere. </p>

<p>Berkeley’s admit rate isn’t much better (14.7%), but this is brought because some of the unpopular majors under the engineering school have low acceptance rates for some reason (Engineering Physics has a 10% acceptance rate). </p>

<p>I think the best way to attack the uncertainty of what is and isn’t required is to hedge your applications. Apply to places with less stringent requirements like UCI, UCR and even UCSD. Although these are supposed to become less lenient about finishing prereqs, especially UCSD. </p>

<p>I have a question @CSB111‌. I just read about the extreme stress engineering students are put under with low grades for excessive amounts of work - and a high attrition rate because they end up switching out when they find out how much easier it is to get a high grade in the humanities. I just saw this article about the problem a few days ago. </p>

<p>Do you see a thinning out as students make their way through the program?</p>

<p>@lindyk8 I can’t say definitively if that is the case across the board, but I think you do have a lot of people getting into engineering that drop out of it (probably a pretty high rate), and then you have the ones that think it is the golden ticket and what to get into it.</p>

<p>The problem with engineering, is that people coming out of both HS and CC think it is the easy way to money and it is hyped up that STEM is the only way to go. My friend is an EE major at Cal Poly SLO who switched into the major, but he had managed to get As in the math and physics. He told me that for the most part, the people in his prereq classes don’t get good grades, struggle early on and don’t really continue. That’s why you see a lot of engineering graduating classes that are small, even at huge schools. </p>

<p>Everyone I know who has been successful at engineering has either been fairly smart or passionate about what they are doing, and I know plenty of people who started and switched to something else. The people from my HS that were insanely smart, graduating with 4.5+ GPAs, all seem to be doing fine at places like Berkeley, but the more average people don’t seem to be pursuing those fields anymore. </p>

<p>I think the rigor of it, at UCs especially, is made too ridiculous and most of the training you get is on the job. For me, as someone who might struggle, I didn’t think it is worth it to try. Like I’ve said before on here, departments like Electrical Engineering tend to have barely any students. UCSD is known for weeding most people out of the EE major with unreasonable lower division classes taught by foreign researchers. When things get theoretical that is when people start to fall off the boat. </p>

<p>You still need to graduate with a high GPA and a lot of experience to be successful and land a job. You are going to have a hard time regardless of major if you graduate with under a 3.0 unless you went to a top school or know people. A 2.7 from Cal State LA in Mechanical Engineering isn’t going to land you anything. </p>

<p>This article was saying the same thing. They need to change the way the subject is taught (currently: BORING!) and the grading needs to be better. They said America can never keep up the way it is currently going at the US universities. I’m going to try and find the article. </p>

<p>“Like I’ve said before on here, departments like Electrical Engineering tend to have barely any students”</p>

<p>I don’t know…EECS is really popular here at Cal with about 1,274 students as of last fall. </p>

<p>That is EECS. Doesn’t really count lol. Most people in EECS are not going down the EE route anyways, mostly CS focused. </p>