Whack LA Admissions

<p>Anyone know what LA was using to admit students, because a lot of underqualified asians beat out overqualified minorities my one FOB friend beat out my other friend who is a mix mexican/black and he is way more qualified than her. So any ideas?</p>

<p>ucla is unfair even though life is never fair ...
anyway i got rejected, i must have been overqualified
3.9 uw gpa
high 1300s
high 600s-low 700s sat iis
strong ecs, superb essay, 500 community service hours
junior + senior class vice president , e.t.c.</p>

<p>ucla doesnt even know anyones ethnicity...they probably can tell by your name though, but not all the time.</p>

<p>They don't even see the name...</p>

<p>There is a theory that Vu T. Tran favored his fellow asians when admitting to UCLA. Though some are arguing that UCLA actually accepted underqualified hispanics/blacks instead. Personally I have seen both. In my case, I am half asian and half hispanic but I put hispanic down as my race. I feel that I am pretty qualified but I got rejected....</p>

<p>4.4 unweighted
1380 SAT
32 ACT
700, 750, 680 SAT IIS
Good ECs and Essays I think</p>

<p>Yup. It broke my poor Spanish Mommy's heart.</p>

<p>OP: You can't subjectively compare two different people based on hypothetical situations ("a lot of underqualified asians" on what basis?), especially if you look at the posters on this forum- you have no way of knowing the validity of anyone's post other than the fact that they are "giving their word"- and there are a lot of bitter posters out there...</p>

<p>How UCLA admission works is that you're reviewed by 4 independent individuals all done separately and you must be approved by all 4 to get in. </p>

<p>uclover8: "ucla is unfair even though life is never fair ..." Doesn't the two situation support each other? </p>

<p>Plus UCLA, as well as all the other UC's, don't reject because they think you're "overqualified"- its against their very principles of offering admission to the top 10% (<-- Wrong number but around general ball park) of CA residents.</p>

<p>wow, i thought they saw our names, so how would they figure out our ethnicity?</p>

<p>My friends (Asian and Mexican/Black) were idential in every aspect except my mexican friend wrote a WAY better essay, had a higher GPA, higher SAT I, slightly lower SAT IIs nealy identical ECs with my mexican friend having more leadership positions and sticking with certain programs for his entire high school career</p>

<p>They don't because it is against the law for them to take it into account when considering admissions (Prop 209), unless you mention it in your essay of course (the only way they could know).</p>

<p>Slippy: How did you get a 4.4 unweighted gpa?</p>

<p>You're comparing a one on one situation and making some broad generalization about the process for a pool of 40,000+ applicants. If your situation was a real situation, then there was probably something about their backgrounds brought up in the application that made one more appealing than the other. But honestly, these one case scenarios hardly mean anything in the bigger scheme of the overall admission results.</p>

<p>well it has happened to several of my friends, many more qualified than made it in.</p>

<p>I think it depends a lot on the major u pick but I am not entirely sure. I'm guessing that once they meet a certain quota for a certain major, then they won't accept anymore?</p>

<p>Well anyways I know a lot of people who got in and had low-end SAT scores, while those who were smarter (GPA, ECC, Rank, etc), did not get in. It is kinda messed up. Anyways what you have to keep in mind is that whatever they say about "a panel of impartial judges" looking at your application, the judges themselves are humans and do make mistakes of doing biased judging. Remember, the outside world is not as ideal as we all would want to believe. OR they are all PMSing female?</p>

<p>Something my English Teacher shared with us a while ago for all us UCLA hopefuls:</p>

<p>~UCLA has a gazillion apps (a rough estimate) = cannot accept all higly qualified apps</p>

<p>~Divides them into roughly two tiers with people falling in between who are "middlings"</p>

<p>-Highly qualified = top tier - ELC's, Top SAT Scores
-Middlings = 2nd tier - great EC's and essays big help here
-So-called "unqualified" = third tier - basically low stats</p>

<p>~Acceptance rates go as follows
-1st - 70-90 accepted
-2nd - 30-50 accepted
-3rd - 10-20 accepted</p>

<p>~Of course, this is a rough estimate, but it helps to see how someone with a 1100 somehow beat out Suzie 1600 - They were never in competition to
begin with!!!</p>

<p>---UCs are therefore brutal and unpredictable - just the nature of a State school</p>

<p>~Plus Adcoms are a whole 'nother story</p>

<p>wow geminihop, if what you say is true then that's quite interesting. funny how tahts sorta like Affirmative action or w/e</p>

<p>how does your english teacher know this??</p>

<p>im in top 10%</p>

<p>lol, he has taught for 30+ years, AP grader, etc...</p>

<p>And a student of his was allllll set on going to UCLA a few years back - excellent Stats etc...and then she was rejected...another student at the same time had a 1150 and 2.75...got in...needless to say there were many debates about this...my teacher now does his spiel like every year just to foreshadow this life-altering event!!</p>

<p>~Also, remember that it is basically a perspective of the process, not an exact method which the UCs go by</p>

<p>Westow: Admissions are not based on your declared major for any of the UCs unless you choose a specialized major, like engineering, Theater, or Music.</p>

<p>Gemini: It's impossible for a student with a 2.75 gpa to get into any UC, the minimum required GPA is a 2.8 (and soon to be 3.0 in the future).</p>

<p>sorry about that jyancy - the idea is that said applicant was not as qualified as the other student</p>

<p>okay, first of all the director does not even have sole authority over who is admitted. and there is no affirmative action. at least there isn't supposed to be. we can't completely understand why some were chosen and some weren't if they are avg for ucla. something must have gotten to them. THIS FORUM DOES NOT CONTAIN ALL STATS. when i read about the whack ucla stuff, i believed it b/c the stats on this site proved it. but going to my school and now seeing stuff, everything is falling into place. gosh, ppl, this site does not have 9000 stats.</p>

<p>its against their very principles of offering admission to the top 10%</p>

<p>it is the University of California's policy as part of the CA master plan of education to guarantee admission to one of their campuses to the top students of CA high schools, not UCLA's.</p>