UCLA to Discuss Cost-Cutting in Admissions

Reader Comments
Back to blog

In general, those that got into UCLA as freshmen are much smarter and qualified. For instance, SAT averages for freshmen Biochem majors were 1400+ and 4.21 GPA (this was in year 2000 and 2001, so I don't know about now). This is even higher than most of the top private school averages, save for Harvard and Stanford. Come on, lets be realistic now. Many dumb people that major in something easy like sociology or French get into the Harvard's or the Stanford's also.
Well, during my third year classes, 20% of the classes were filled with transfer students, as they replaced those that got weeded out. However, I thought the classes were as competetive as before. But honestly, there are dumb people everywhere. I currently attend one of the better med school in the Northeast US, and I see some students that are worst than some transfer students that I had encountered. In short, don't under or overestimate anyone. Just my two cents.

Jay Cee of CA 1:32AM December 26, 2008

First of all, if you knew anything about what you're talking about you would know it is not "too easy" to transfer to UCLA. In fact, it is pretty difficult, their acceptance rate for transfers is still about %35.
Second, to the college, transfers are less of a liability, they have completed their first two years of coursework successfully without flunking out, which is more than anyone can say for the majority of first time freshman.
Lastly, the GPA for transfers is their 3/4th year GPA, the Community College GPA is not factored into their UCLA GPA upon graduation. So your "number that would be more telling" doesn't exist.

of CA 2:21PM December 09, 2008

Freshman are accepted at around 20%
Transfers are accepted at around 40%
Find somewhere in between, there are too many transfers and it is too easy to transfer (compared to getting in as a freshman). It is obviously a back-door.
And to anyone giving contention based on graduating GPA a much more interesting number would be 3/4th year GPA at UCLA for transfers vs 4 years. I'm sure that number would be a bit more telling.

of 5:13AM December 08, 2008

As stated above, the graduating GPA of transfer students was substantially higher than that of 4-year students. UCLA is not an "Elite" university, and therefore does not need to filter said "unqualified" students.
The stigma given to transfer students is completely undeserving and ignorant. I have met transfer students and I have met 4-year students, and I can confidently say that there are idiots in both groups. Moreover, academic material is academic material. The idea that a transfer student who learned calculus at a CC is less informed than a 4-year student who took calculus at UCLA is absurd.
You want your kids to go to schools that are elite? Tell them they should stop getting sub-par GPAs and SAT scores. After that, tell them to apply to a top 10 university. If that fails, tell them why you are an ignorant parent.
- 4-year UCLA grad 06'

of CA 10:06PM December 03, 2008

"I know from experience that there are many who do not deserve to be there and are only there because UCLA needed to admit a certain number of transfers."
UCLA has an overwhelming amount of very qualified transfer applicants, and they have to refuse many. I don't know when you attended UCLA, but I transferred in 2006 and graduated in 2008. In my year counselors at my cc were telling me that people were being rejected from UCLA, and ended up at Berkeley instead. I highly doubt your experience speaks of anything but personal opinions and hearsay, and I highly doubt that UCLA would accept under qualified students.

of CA 2:54PM December 03, 2008

Senior Parent you are one of many Californians who have no idea of what they are talking about. There are many students who attend community college for financial reasons or because they just want another shot at UCLA instead of going to UCSD or USC or wherever they got accepted to.
It is not EASY to transfer from a community college to popular majors such as Economics , Psychology , or any of the Life Sciences. Many of these transfer students have maintained 3.7+ GPAs at the CCs and there has been research showing that "transfer students averaged a 3.23 gpa by graduation whereas students who started as freshmen averaged a 3.15 gpa"
Also, if you want to send your child to an ELITE university, your looking at the wrong place. This school is good but Harvard defines ELITE.

of CA 3:56AM December 01, 2008

I don't care how big your state is. Having 94% of students from in-state is ridiculous. It's about time the Cal system allowed a higher percentage of OOS students.
I'm not saying it should be 50 - 50 by any means. Something more like 85 to 15.

of MD 4:49PM November 26, 2008

Does this alarm anyone? I don't want to send my child to a university consisting of 40% community college students. What is the point of an elite university if it will just let anyone and everyone in?

Concerned Senior Parent of CA 2:31AM November 23, 2008

Denying a state resident a seat in favor of an out-of-state or international student is a despicable plan. As long as qualified state residents apply, no non-residents should be admitted! These students and their families are paying the taxes that have supported the university over the years. The diversity issue often spouted by the academics as the reason to admit non-residents is of no concern to the resident student who is denied a place.
When will universities start "doing the right thing"? After forty plus years of watching academia in action, I am not holding my breath.

Cee of 3:00PM November 20, 2008

I Understand that the economy is in shambles, and it was inevitable for the education sector to not be affected by it. I do understand that the UC's and the CSU;s will most certainly haveto do some major curtailing in seats. The current criteria of the admissions are very accepable. The transfer students work a lot harder than the regular admitted ones, mostly because they cannot afford the tuition for the 1st two years, as housing in Cali is an expensive affair. But curtailing the transfer seats will definately hamper the scope for the transfer students, as they work 2 years on being admitted to a particular college, and now they will have to settle for another college.
But instead of cutting down on the seats because of the budget cuts, what the schools must do is raise the fees by a few bucks more likely like 10-15% so that the scope of the prospective students do not get affected.
Also i do not concur with the above statements that studnets who transfer to UCLA are not derserving, as UCLA itself requires a minimum GPA of 3.8 which most of the students studying in UCLA are unable to meet that.

Anonymous of CA 2:13PM November 20, 2008