Outright rejected from UCLA (Transfer) (degree, psychology, school, best)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I went out of my way to follow the vast majority of advice that my UCLA Representative had given to me before turning in my applications (mainly in making my essays - extremely, in my opinion - personal).
Before any of this, I asked her and many counselors about my chances and if there were still anything else missing. They all consistently assured me that I have a higher chance of being accepted rather than rejected based on my sheer dedication, improvement, and the picking of the advisable major. Keep in mind that they were using the common parlance.
A simulated example: a chance of 0.020% percent is 100 times larger than 0.0002%, but that is not considered as having a much higher chance of being accepted in comparison to being rejected, right? I did not think they were dishonest in the fashion shown above, especially the REPRESENTATIVE I had met for several sessions.
Now the rejection letter (in what appears to be the usual stunt) states that the application process has been extremely competitive and that preparation for my major has been looked at. I don't know why they have to be so densely repetitive while not addressing anything: my major is non-impacted and all the classes for my major has been more than completed per TAP.
I don't understand sociopaths very well. Guess I was just there to puff up their already lofty statistics. With the flagrant lack of ethics from such a flagship, I'm no longer sure if I am willing to accept the admissions of lesser (objectively speaking) universities within the fleet. My dedicated years will not be used to support some nefarious narratives. I know it's sad to reject a few scholarships, but I do not want to support evil.
It sounds like you got a form letter for your rejection. I don't know what to say about that; I don't know what the acceptance rate has been the last couple of years, for transfer students. All they can do is advise you; there's no guarantee.
Why not consider applying to other campuses, that are strong in your major? Davis, Irvine, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz?
I went out of my way to follow the vast majority of advice that my UCLA Representative had given to me before turning in my applications (mainly in making my essays - extremely, in my opinion - personal).
Before any of this, I asked her and many counselors about my chances and if there were still anything else missing. They all consistently assured me that I have a higher chance of being accepted rather than rejected based on my sheer dedication, improvement, and the picking of the advisable major. Keep in mind that they were using the common parlance.
A simulated example: a chance of 0.020% percent is 100 times larger than 0.0002%, but that is not considered as having a much higher chance of being accepted in comparison to being rejected, right? I did not think they were dishonest in the fashion shown above, especially the REPRESENTATIVE I had met for several sessions.
Now the rejection letter (in what appears to be the usual stunt) states that the application process has been extremely competitive and that preparation for my major has been looked at. I don't know why they have to be so densely repetitive while not addressing anything: my major is non-impacted and all the classes for my major has been more than completed per TAP.
I don't understand sociopaths very well. Guess I was just there to puff up their already lofty statistics. With the flagrant lack of ethics from such a flagship, I'm no longer sure if I am willing to accept the admissions of lesser (objectively speaking) universities within the fleet. My dedicated years will not be used to support some nefarious narratives. I know it's sad to reject a few scholarships, but I do not want to support evil.
People process rejection (not just from university admissions offices) in different ways. Some blame the messenger. Sad but telling that you jumped from understandable disappointment to accusations of sociopathic behavior. You're going to have a long miserable life with that attitude.
Sorry- that's really disappointing. Not sure how you jumped to evil sociopaths from there, though. I *really* hope your major is not psychology.
You got the best advice your advisor had to offer. Your advisor didn't know ahead of time what your competition was. You might have been a shoe-in a different year, competing with different people. This has nothing to do with a lack of ethics, that's just the roll of the dice. My son was accepted to several universities, but not his first choice.
They weren't necessarily being dishonest (I sincerely doubt they were, but of course I don't know them personally). You had a higher chance of getting in than getting rejected, but it didn't work in your favor. A high chance is no guarantee.
I hope you can get over this and finish out your degree. Hopefully in time you'll see that this most likely isn't the tragedy you seem to think it is.
My daughter would have been accepted into the "honors college" at our "Flagship university" for undergrad. She chose to go to a small liberal arts college in the East graduating with honors. When she applied for grad school, she was rejected. Granted, it was for a M.A. in English but still. I never have been a fan of the "Flagship university" and always cheer for the opposing team they are playing but that left a bad taste in my mouth. BTW, she did get a fellowship to a well-known East coast university which at $40 K a year was a blessing. She also chose to stay on the East Coast after completing the M.A. So, it worked out.
My daughter would have been accepted into the "honors college" at our "Flagship university" for undergrad. She chose to go to a small liberal arts college in the East graduating with honors. When she applied for grad school, she was rejected. Granted, it was for a M.A. in English but still. I never have been a fan of the "Flagship university" and always cheer for the opposing team they are playing but that left a bad taste in my mouth. BTW, she did get a fellowship to a well-known East coast university which at $40 K a year was a blessing. She also chose to stay on the East Coast after completing the M.A. So, it worked out.
I'm not quite following this story, perhaps you could clarify a point.
She applied to grad school where: the Eastern private college, or her Flagship U. back home? In any case, I"m glad it worked out. The fellowship is impressive. Congratulations to her and the proud parents.
I went out of my way to follow the vast majority of advice that my UCLA Representative had given to me before turning in my applications (mainly in making my essays - extremely, in my opinion - personal).
Before any of this, I asked her and many counselors about my chances and if there were still anything else missing. They all consistently assured me that I have a higher chance of being accepted rather than rejected based on my sheer dedication, improvement, and the picking of the advisable major. Keep in mind that they were using the common parlance.
A simulated example: a chance of 0.020% percent is 100 times larger than 0.0002%, but that is not considered as having a much higher chance of being accepted in comparison to being rejected, right? I did not think they were dishonest in the fashion shown above, especially the REPRESENTATIVE I had met for several sessions.
Now the rejection letter (in what appears to be the usual stunt) states that the application process has been extremely competitive and that preparation for my major has been looked at. I don't know why they have to be so densely repetitive while not addressing anything: my major is non-impacted and all the classes for my major has been more than completed per TAP.
I don't understand sociopaths very well. Guess I was just there to puff up their already lofty statistics. With the flagrant lack of ethics from such a flagship, I'm no longer sure if I am willing to accept the admissions of lesser (objectively speaking) universities within the fleet. My dedicated years will not be used to support some nefarious narratives. I know it's sad to reject a few scholarships, but I do not want to support evil.
I don't get why they are evil or sociopaths. They said you had better odds of getting accepted than not, but they have no way of knowing how many will apply that will have a better essay and better GPA. No one can guarantee anything, that's why you don't just apply to one. I had a 3.98 GPA when I transferred and I still applied to 4 different Universities, including having to take a train from Philly to Richmond, Va for an in-person interview, just in case I didn't get accepted by the one I wanted. What exactly do you think they did that was unethical??
UCLA is a very selective school and their acceptance rate is comparatively quite low. Many qualified applicants are outright rejected every year. Nothing evil or sociopathic about that. Was there an interview? Perhaps if you had this attitude then, that's why they rejected you? Where are you transferring from? They might have been overpromising. I think community colleges are currently promising kids they can transfer to prestigious universities when that is probably highly unlikely. But it gets more kids in the door...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
