<p>The question isn’t whether rabridevi can do without UCLA, but whether UCLA can do without rabridevi…</p>
<p>Don’t worry about not getting UCLA… it’s not all that cracked out to be. The engineering building is depressing, and I don’t even know if the bioengineering program at UCLA is even ranked or abet accredited (or whatever that official recognition thing is). I know for a fact that UCSD is rank 3 or something crazy like that in bioengineering AND you got in with regents. The person reading your application must’ve been on pcp, because those are some pretty sick stats. Regardless, you’ll do well wherever you go as long as you maintain that ambition and work ethic.</p>
<p>It seems that no one is truly safe with a 2200 SAT, 4.3+ GPA anymore. The reason for such a change in admissions policy is somewhat puzzling, but at the same time these rejections seem to reflect an attempt to make UCLA a more diverse campus. But of course one must take into consideration that UCLA gets one billion applications and unfortunately for the applicants, they are definitely not gonna take every well-qualified applicant.</p>
<p>I don’t mean to make you feel worse, but I got in with a 2040 SAT, 32 ACT, and 3.9 UW. I think it’s definitely the impacted major that ruled the fate of your application. I applied as Biz-Econ and although that major is slightly competitive, not as much as bioengineering, according to what I’ve read.</p>
<p>Looking at people like thenewgurl, now I know someone with better stats also did not get admitted. That says a lot about the system. I am at the wrong end of the holistic admissions policy or whatever it is called, so I would say it is not a good system but some one who got in because of other criteria might feel it is a good system. But as almost all of you have said, UCSD is a good school with a better BioEngg program so I cant and should not complain.</p>
<p>Fist of all @rabridevi - cant stop LOLing at your name! HAHA! Yes, Indian here
I think your stats are pretty amazing, and to be frank i am shocked you did not get in…
Unless you essays were positively terrible I dont see a reason why they did not accept you… which I dont think is the case…
I definitely think you should appeal… you’d have a good chance at getting accepted :)</p>
<p>All I can say is UCSD Bioengineering DESTROYS UCLA Bioengineering. And you have Regents at SD.</p>
<p>As for why you were rejected, the only thing I can think of is that they didn’t like your essay. That, or they somehow made a mistake.</p>
<p>Anyways, don’t feel bad about not making UCLA, and if you really want to go there, accept the waitlist. I personally would choose SD w/ Regents over LA, especially since bioeng at SD is supposed to be better than bioeng at LA (and just about every other school in the country).</p>
<p>Yes, decided not to accept wait list and go to UCSD. Most of the time, all of us in LA area think of UCLA as the college to go, with no specific reason. When we take a step back and look, there are so many good colleges around. My brother went to Cal poly Pomona (he was not happy at that time) and now doing Masters at a top Petroleum Engineering school, (UT Austin). I will go to UCSD happily</p>
<p>The BE major is not ABET accredited for one simple reason.</p>
<p>ABET does accreditation every 6 years. The last time the School of Engineering was reviewed was in 2006. The BE major was created in 2004, so they hadn’t even graduated a class yet in 2006. They weren’t eligible for ABET review yet (there wasn’t enough for them to be reviewed).</p>
<p>Now, six years later, ABET is coming by again to review UCLA Engineering. I’m sure the major will be ABET accredited this time next year. Plus, from students in the BE major I’ve talked to, it hasn’t hurt them one bit.</p>
