UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
fatheranderson15
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:08 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby fatheranderson15 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 12:46 pm

darkforg wrote:Curve at UCLA law
25-29% As, 41-52% B/B+s, 18-22% B-s, and 5-8% Cs

Pretty hard to get sub 2.5 gpa considering that only 5-8% of the class get Cs (usually C+'s)
You can get 1/2 B-'s (2.7) and 1/2 C+'s (2.3) to maintain 2.5


Good to know. Anybody have any idea if UCLA has a reputation for section stacking?

User avatar
FlyingNorth
Posts: 408
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:25 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby FlyingNorth » Fri Feb 14, 2014 12:51 pm

cron1834 wrote:No, in-state has a lower base rate of tuition, so it's arguably not preferable for them. Unless they have a quota to fill like UT or UVA, in-state is not a boost. I'm not aware of any quotas, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, Holy Grail would be URM! Then you're cooking with gas! :D


UC's <3 California ties, and it looks like he is URM...

User avatar
cron1834
Posts: 1921
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:36 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby cron1834 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 2:57 pm

Do you have any actual data to support that, or are you just asserting it? B/c there are popular-press articles decrying the broke-ass UC system for increasing their preference for out of state, given the tuition incentives, at all levels of ed.attainment. I believe either position is possible, but in the absence of data I'm going to presume the financially incentivized one.

User avatar
SupCutie
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 3:27 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby SupCutie » Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:02 pm

cron1834 wrote:Do you have any actual data to support that, or are you just asserting it? B/c there are popular-press articles decrying the broke-ass UC system for increasing their preference for out of state, given the tuition incentives, at all levels of ed.attainment. I believe either position is possible, but in the absence of data I'm going to presume the financially incentivized one.


It's like a $5000 difference. Whereas at the undergraduate level (where there are a TON more students) it's around $22-25k difference.

User avatar
cron1834
Posts: 1921
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:36 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby cron1834 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:13 pm

Looks like $6,500 on law side, $22,000 ug side.

LOL @ rich people. $52k/yr to go to ug at UCLA? Wow.

User avatar
China Spy
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:10 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby China Spy » Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:16 pm

cron1834 wrote:Looks like $6,500 on law side, $22,000 ug side.

LOL @ rich people. $52k/yr to go to ug at UCLA? Wow.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3G1Gd0MSNms

#YOLO

User avatar
cron1834
Posts: 1921
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:36 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby cron1834 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:22 pm

Haha, the Childish is a nice touch. And including alcoholism-treatment success rates in the description.

User avatar
China Spy
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:10 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby China Spy » Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:35 pm

Also the 52k is for non-residents/international students. Residents pay roughly half of that.

User avatar
cron1834
Posts: 1921
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:36 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby cron1834 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:42 pm

China Spy wrote:Also the 52k is for non-residents/international students. Residents pay roughly half of that.


Hence the above discussion :wink:

Sorry to derail this. Let's move on! Good luck on schollies, etc, to all. I am happy with my offer; I hope ya'll are too.

User avatar
China Spy
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:10 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby China Spy » Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:45 pm

cron1834 wrote:
China Spy wrote:Also the 52k is for non-residents/international students. Residents pay roughly half of that.


Hence the above discussion :wink:

Sorry to derail this. Let's move on! Good luck on schollies, etc, to all. I am happy with my offer; I hope ya'll are too.


HAHA sorry about that. Congrats on your acceptance! I'll be seeing you in the class of page :wink:

User avatar
FlyingNorth
Posts: 408
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:25 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby FlyingNorth » Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:12 pm

cron1834 wrote:Do you have any actual data to support that, or are you just asserting it? B/c there are popular-press articles decrying the broke-ass UC system for increasing their preference for out of state, given the tuition incentives, at all levels of ed.attainment. I believe either position is possible, but in the absence of data I'm going to presume the financially incentivized one.


Looks like I was talking out of my ass.

"Q: Is preference given to California residents in the admission process?
A: Not at all. Although we receive the largest proportion of applications from California, we seek to admit and enroll a geographically diverse class each year. Admission decisions are not based on quotas, and the goal of the Admissions Committee is to admit the most compelling and talented candidates into the Law School."

Source: https://www.law.ucla.edu/prospective-st ... tions.aspx

User avatar
aboutmydaylight
Posts: 580
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:50 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby aboutmydaylight » Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:51 pm

FlyingNorth wrote:
cron1834 wrote:Do you have any actual data to support that, or are you just asserting it? B/c there are popular-press articles decrying the broke-ass UC system for increasing their preference for out of state, given the tuition incentives, at all levels of ed.attainment. I believe either position is possible, but in the absence of data I'm going to presume the financially incentivized one.


Looks like I was talking out of my ass.

"Q: Is preference given to California residents in the admission process?
A: Not at all. Although we receive the largest proportion of applications from California, we seek to admit and enroll a geographically diverse class each year. Admission decisions are not based on quotas, and the goal of the Admissions Committee is to admit the most compelling and talented candidates into the Law School."

Source: https://www.law.ucla.edu/prospective-st ... tions.aspx


Official stance =/= what actually happens. Only way to tell would be through detailed admissions data which as far as I know we don't have.

User avatar
Serett
Posts: 8874
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby Serett » Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:01 pm

And since the conversation was started by a reference to UCLA's Holy Grail, itself fittingly a relic known for not actually existing, I guess that's that :P

User avatar
cron1834
Posts: 1921
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:36 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby cron1834 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:04 pm

It would be cool data to have. You would have to compare selectivity mean and control for applicant quality. We can only wonder.

Either way, Serett: hopefully they keep handing out 6-figure fat stacks!

User avatar
Serett
Posts: 8874
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby Serett » Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:09 pm

cron1834 wrote:It would be cool data to have. You would have to compare selectivity mean and control for applicant quality. We can only wonder.

Either way, Serett: hopefully they keep handing out 6-figure fat stacks!


Hear, hear (even if mine was five digits, hahah)!

User avatar
Lebrarian_Booker
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:05 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby Lebrarian_Booker » Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:12 pm

aboutmydaylight wrote:
FlyingNorth wrote:
cron1834 wrote:Do you have any actual data to support that, or are you just asserting it? B/c there are popular-press articles decrying the broke-ass UC system for increasing their preference for out of state, given the tuition incentives, at all levels of ed.attainment. I believe either position is possible, but in the absence of data I'm going to presume the financially incentivized one.


Looks like I was talking out of my ass.

"Q: Is preference given to California residents in the admission process?
A: Not at all. Although we receive the largest proportion of applications from California, we seek to admit and enroll a geographically diverse class each year. Admission decisions are not based on quotas, and the goal of the Admissions Committee is to admit the most compelling and talented candidates into the Law School."

Source: https://www.law.ucla.edu/prospective-st ... tions.aspx


Official stance =/= what actually happens. Only way to tell would be through detailed admissions data which as far as I know we don't have.


Absolutely correct (that official stance=/=what actually happens)!

Source: I work in the industry and have such access, as well as knowledge of the strategic decision-making.

User avatar
Black_Swan
Posts: 238
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:47 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby Black_Swan » Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:41 pm

aboutmydaylight wrote:
FlyingNorth wrote:
cron1834 wrote:Do you have any actual data to support that, or are you just asserting it? B/c there are popular-press articles decrying the broke-ass UC system for increasing their preference for out of state, given the tuition incentives, at all levels of ed.attainment. I believe either position is possible, but in the absence of data I'm going to presume the financially incentivized one.


Looks like I was talking out of my ass.

"Q: Is preference given to California residents in the admission process?
A: Not at all. Although we receive the largest proportion of applications from California, we seek to admit and enroll a geographically diverse class each year. Admission decisions are not based on quotas, and the goal of the Admissions Committee is to admit the most compelling and talented candidates into the Law School."

Source: https://www.law.ucla.edu/prospective-st ... tions.aspx


Official stance =/= what actually happens. Only way to tell would be through detailed admissions data which as far as I know we don't have.


Credited.

sam71191
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 10:22 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby sam71191 » Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:37 pm

Hey guys, UCLA is my top choice, and I'd really like to go there. However, I didn't receive any merit scholarships off the bat. I really need some money if I'm gonna go there. My other problem is that I expect to get into quite a few other similarly/higher ranked schools but as of now I'm still waiting on hearing back. My questions is how do I go about asking UCLA for money at this point? I don't know the etiquette involved or what I give as the reason they should give me money. As of right now, the only other school I heard from was Loyola Law in California and they gave me a huge scholarship but I don't know that UCLA will particularly care considering that Loyola is a much lower-ranked school. Thanks!

User avatar
cron1834
Posts: 1921
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:36 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby cron1834 » Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:10 pm

The general consensus here seems to be that it's still early in the game re: money. If you expect to get into peer-or-higher schools, then you really need to wait until you have a competing offer. And you might. UCLA has no motivation to compete with Loyola. When March and April roll around, and lots of UCLA admits with offers have turned them down, they'll have more money to play with.

I'm far from an authority on this, but that seems to be the conventional wisdom around here.

User avatar
LyricsToLitigation
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 6:42 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby LyricsToLitigation » Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:06 pm

cron1834 wrote:The general consensus here seems to be that it's still early in the game re: money. If you expect to get into peer-or-higher schools, then you really need to wait until you have a competing offer. And you might. UCLA has no motivation to compete with Loyola. When March and April roll around, and lots of UCLA admits with offers have turned them down, they'll have more money to play with.

I'm far from an authority on this, but that seems to be the conventional wisdom around here.


+1 for basically all schools lol

User avatar
capt_slow
Posts: 286
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:08 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby capt_slow » Mon Feb 17, 2014 5:56 pm

UCLA, I miss you.... Give me a call.

csargean
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 5:20 pm

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby csargean » Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:41 pm

Sorry if this was previously discussed... but does anybody have any idea or guess as to the success wait coming off the waitlist. I was listed a week ago and would love to go to UCLA, but not sure if my chances are pretty slim of being called up.

Tburg
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 3:10 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby Tburg » Tue Feb 18, 2014 12:50 am

cron1834 wrote:The general consensus here seems to be that it's still early in the game re: money. If you expect to get into peer-or-higher schools, then you really need to wait until you have a competing offer. And you might. UCLA has no motivation to compete with Loyola. When March and April roll around, and lots of UCLA admits with offers have turned them down, they'll have more money to play with.

I'm far from an authority on this, but that seems to be the conventional wisdom around here.

I know someone who successfully negotiated a $25k scholarship from UCLA with a Loyola full-ride as leverage.

User avatar
Icecold62
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 2:40 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby Icecold62 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 1:22 am

Tburg wrote:
cron1834 wrote:The general consensus here seems to be that it's still early in the game re: money. If you expect to get into peer-or-higher schools, then you really need to wait until you have a competing offer. And you might. UCLA has no motivation to compete with Loyola. When March and April roll around, and lots of UCLA admits with offers have turned them down, they'll have more money to play with.

I'm far from an authority on this, but that seems to be the conventional wisdom around here.

I know someone who successfully negotiated a $25k scholarship from UCLA with a Loyola full-ride as leverage.


And a 4.0/178 but it was the Loyola scholly that really did it. Lol

Tburg
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 3:10 am

Re: UCLA c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014)

Postby Tburg » Tue Feb 18, 2014 1:45 pm

Icecold62 wrote:
Tburg wrote:
cron1834 wrote:The general consensus here seems to be that it's still early in the game re: money. If you expect to get into peer-or-higher schools, then you really need to wait until you have a competing offer. And you might. UCLA has no motivation to compete with Loyola. When March and April roll around, and lots of UCLA admits with offers have turned them down, they'll have more money to play with.

I'm far from an authority on this, but that seems to be the conventional wisdom around here.

I know someone who successfully negotiated a $25k scholarship from UCLA with a Loyola full-ride as leverage.


And a 4.0/178 but it was the Loyola scholly that really did it. Lol

3.5 and a 167




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: carlos_danger, Google Adsense [Bot], guybourdin, hopeful applicant, jbagelboy, lawschoolbound2017, mlp12, tww1999, VapidP and 29 guests