<p>UCLAri, did you transfer as a junior?</p>
<p>UCLAri,</p>
<p>If you believe that a GPA is the sole makeup of one's stats, then yes you do have better stats then me. If you recognize however that an application features more than just one's cummulative gpa, then you will see that my stats are far above your own.</p>
<p>I guess I tend to bash the UC application pool so much because I got in as a freshmen (for financial reasons I did not attend). Most of the transfers however, had no chance applying as a freshmen. In my opinion, most of the transfers are significantly weaker than their UCLA or CAL counterparts who enter as freshmen. For one, most transfer canidates have not taken calculus (as you know, almost all who entered as freshmen did). Furthermore, the idea that a canidate with a low gpa, no extracurriculars or passions, but has a good shot at UCLA soley because of a TAP agreement--sickens me. If I were a student at UCLA, I'd be quite offended someone could get into such a great school with such poor qualifications. That is just my two cents.</p>
<p>nikkei325i,</p>
<p>Yes, I did.</p>
<p>IWannaIvy,</p>
<p>Well, you're an elitist, that's fine. But, in my experience, most transfers I knew did equally as well as their non-transfer counterparts, and many of them have gone on to do amazing things.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I guess I tend to bash the UC application pool so much because I got in as a freshmen (for financial reasons I did not attend).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, so did I. Wahoo, great for you. It doesn't make you a better human being. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Furthermore, the idea that a canidate with a low gpa, no extracurriculars or passions, but has a good shot at UCLA soley because of a TAP agreement--sickens me.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You'd be amazed how much this is like getting into grad school. A friend of mine got into med school without any real research experience. He just had a good GPA and an exceptional MCAT. Get over it. </p>
<p>
[quote]
For one, most transfer canidates have not taken calculus (as you know, almost all who entered as freshmen did).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Somehow, amongst the many "south campus" majors at UCLA, I doubt this. Care to provide data to back that up? Besides, if someone KNOWS that they want to be an English/language major, how is this limiting their academic goals?</p>
<p>
[quote]
If I were a student at UCLA, I'd be quite offended someone could get into such a great school with such poor qualifications.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, but then you actually meet some of these people and realize that most of them do actually deserve to be there and contribute quite a bit to the UCLA community.</p>
<p>UCLAri,</p>
<p>Why are you calling me the elitist? You're the one with two thousand posts on collegeconfidential. It is quite clear you only go on here to bully other CCers or try to prove your own arguments. Relax man! Sorry I'm not a cool senior member as yourself! hah. </p>
<p>I'm not going to respond to all your points. I will however say that, there is a down grade in quality from freshmen to transfer students (I hope you can admit to at least that). Secondly, for UCLA freshmen nearly all students have taken calculus whereas at the cc level, mostly the math and science majors do. Therefore, as a whole, transfer students are less well rounded then their freshmen counterparts.</p>
<p>Point for IWannaIvy!</p>
<p>Iwannaivy, </p>
<p>You just repeated the arguments that UclAri has already refuted! Your point about "a down grade in quality from freshmen to transfer students" is entirely wrong! All the quantitative and qualitative studies show that transfer students do just as well as students who entered as freshmen-sometimes better. I also qualified to go to UC in high school. I think just about all your contentions are either completely wrong or misleading--please go and read the actual information. There is a lot of information available on UCLA and Berkeley's websites as well as UCOP.edu.</p>
<p>And I don't think calculus is a measure of being well-rounded.</p>
<p>Does every thread on CC have to descend into pesky arguing? AND on MY Thread!!! J/P sall good. Everyone should try to be a little nicer on here though =]</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why are you calling me the elitist? You're the one with two thousand posts on collegeconfidential. It is quite clear you only go on here to bully other CCers or try to prove your own arguments. Relax man! Sorry I'm not a cool senior member as yourself! hah.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I come on to help students, and if the need arises, to refute BS. If you feel bullied, then well, I'm sorry but you're a little wuss.</p>
<p>And really, I'm usually the one on this board arguing for the quality of both transfers and freshman admits, and have done so in the face of much more prepared opponents than you (Sakky, for example.) However, your argument that your achievement somehow put you at the forefront of the applicant pool is absurd.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm not going to respond to all your points. I will however say that, there is a down grade in quality from freshmen to transfer students (I hope you can admit to at least that). Secondly, for UCLA freshmen nearly all students have taken calculus whereas at the cc level, mostly the math and science majors do. Therefore, as a whole, transfer students are less well rounded then their freshmen counterparts.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>IWannaIvy, you still haven't PROVEN, with DATA, that your point is true. I want you to show me actual statistical data that supports your argument. Otherwise, it's simple anecdotal evidence and can only be taken at face value. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Point for IWannaIvy!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Point rescinded by the Russians for being a wuss, and for not giving enough data during the double lutz.</p>
<p>LOL @ UCLAri's comment!!!</p>
<p>Haaah. I commend Uclari and everyone else on the board who is dedicated to keeping its quality. If this board became a bunch of nonsense without evidence (which it has on a few occassions) then it would be worthless. Luckily, thanks to people like UCLAri, this board stands as a great resource for transfer students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you recognize however that an application features more than just one's cummulative gpa, then you will see that my stats are far above your own.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I just spotted this, and I thought it was funny. And a big component of IWannaIvy's game. ASSuming that his achievements are above everyone else's. In fact, I bet that if I really cared to compare academic achievement wangs with him, mine would be AT LEAST as big as his. But in reality, mine controls the fabric of space-time, so his loses. QED.</p>
<p>Kids, just say NO to argumentum ad ignorantiam.</p>
<p>Post yours then.</p>
<p>Academic achievements mean nothing. What can you do. IWannaIvy thought Pepperdine was a Catholic school. He even spelled it "Peperdine". Your credentials are only a superficial representation. Albeit, you are probably a bright kid Ivy, and I know UCLAri is pretty smart. I, however, AM a demigod amongst mortal men, capable of more than both of your bickering little minds put together. Go ahead, try me.</p>
<p>"Academic achievements mean nothing. What can you do. IWannaIvy thought Pepperdine was a Catholic school. He even spelled it "Peperdine"."</p>
<p>Are you just a typical CCer with nothing better to do than nitpick at my spelling? </p>
<p>"Your credentials are only a superficial representation."</p>
<p>On the contrary, your credentials are a manifestation of your talents and intelligence. What else we would judge a person by? Potential?</p>
<p>No. Real-life ability. Credentials are acquired in a multitude of ways, the least of which involve talent and intelligence. Hell I can con my way through credentials, or buy them for that matter. Isn't that what your little Ivy league buddies do? So again I ask you: What can you do Ivy?</p>
<p>Put your credentials into action. Then maybe I'll talk to you. Until then, I'm done with ya!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Post yours then.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's not fair for me to post mine, because I've already got my degree. It's comparing apples to oranges.</p>
<p>I really don't want to interject myself in this argument because the arrogance is just suffocating. But I just have to say that I know that as a former transfer I should be pulling for all the '06 transfers to get in and join us and stuff...but seriously...</p>
<p>IWannaIvy- Don't go to UCLA. Please. </p>
<p>Seriously. You have a horrible, horrible attitude. I really wouldn't want someone like you representing my school and I certainly wouldn't want to call you one of my peers. </p>
<p>I suggest that, regardless of where you end up, you grow up a little bit and deflate the ego. It's unattractive and it really just makes people want to have nothing to do with you. In September, this conversation will mean nothing when you're trying to meet people and acclimate yourself to the university environment. I don't care how smart you are or how qualified, your stats will not gain you any friends. And I can certainly ascertain from this sparkling example of your personality that it won't be much help to you as things stand right now. So really- get over yourself, open yourself up the idea that other people are just as good as you are, and attempt to enjoy your two years at University. </p>
<p>College is about new experiences and new people and new ideas. Try it sometime. It's cool.</p>
<p>My best friend at UCLA, who is now a medical student, got in on appeal. He also happened to have an intellectual acumen that was only matched by his laziness.</p>
<p>Great comment Allie! I think Iwannaivy could make friends though because he is funny.</p>
<p>Funny in a "hah that dude's so crazy" kind of way.<br>
Headache inducing nonetheless.</p>