UCLA?

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
jgulia45
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:03 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby jgulia45 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:29 am

They haven't rejected anybody yet, so I think they are only sending out stuff for the auto admit people. Everybody who has been admitted has had over a 170 LSAT. Unless they are really making a move, they'll have to admit people w/ LSAT's below that sooner or later.

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby 02082010 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:22 am

jgulia45 wrote:They haven't rejected anybody yet, so I think they are only sending out stuff for the auto admit people. Everybody who has been admitted has had over a 170 LSAT. Unless they are really making a move, they'll have to admit people w/ LSAT's below that sooner or later.


But I have a 172!!

User avatar
jgulia45
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:03 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby jgulia45 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:34 am

hopefulundergrad wrote:
jgulia45 wrote:They haven't rejected anybody yet, so I think they are only sending out stuff for the auto admit people. Everybody who has been admitted has had over a 170 LSAT. Unless they are really making a move, they'll have to admit people w/ LSAT's below that sooner or later.


But I have a 172!!



True but your GPA is well below their 25% so you wouldn't fall into the "auto-admit"....although aren't you a URM? I thought you said you were in a diff thread or perhaps this one. Oh well fingers crossed for you either way.

I went complete on 11/3 but I'm ED so I'm not expecting anything quite yet...they probably want to see what the entire applicant pool looks like for ED. Between this and the computer glitch at UT, my nerves are effing shot.

jayausi
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:46 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby jayausi » Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:44 am

jgulia45 wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:
jgulia45 wrote:They haven't rejected anybody yet, so I think they are only sending out stuff for the auto admit people. Everybody who has been admitted has had over a 170 LSAT. Unless they are really making a move, they'll have to admit people w/ LSAT's below that sooner or later.


But I have a 172!!



True but your GPA is well below their 25% so you wouldn't fall into the "auto-admit"....although aren't you a URM? I thought you said you were in a diff thread or perhaps this one. Oh well fingers crossed for you either way.

I went complete on 11/3 but I'm ED so I'm not expecting anything quite yet...they probably want to see what the entire applicant pool looks like for ED. Between this and the computer glitch at UT, my nerves are effing shot.

What exactly is meant by "auto-admit"? Are you referring to applicants who have both a GPA and LSAT above the 75th percentiles?

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby 02082010 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:45 am

jgulia45 wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:
jgulia45 wrote:They haven't rejected anybody yet, so I think they are only sending out stuff for the auto admit people. Everybody who has been admitted has had over a 170 LSAT. Unless they are really making a move, they'll have to admit people w/ LSAT's below that sooner or later.


But I have a 172!!



True but your GPA is well below their 25% so you wouldn't fall into the "auto-admit"....although aren't you a URM? I thought you said you were in a diff thread or perhaps this one. Oh well fingers crossed for you either way.

I went complete on 11/3 but I'm ED so I'm not expecting anything quite yet...they probably want to see what the entire applicant pool looks like for ED. Between this and the computer glitch at UT, my nerves are effing shot.


Yes to shitty GPA and URM status. Being a splitter I know most schools will take months to reach a decision on my file. I've just been spoiled by two great acceptances in the past week.

User avatar
jgulia45
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:03 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby jgulia45 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:05 am

jayausi wrote:
jgulia45 wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:
jgulia45 wrote:They haven't rejected anybody yet, so I think they are only sending out stuff for the auto admit people. Everybody who has been admitted has had over a 170 LSAT. Unless they are really making a move, they'll have to admit people w/ LSAT's below that sooner or later.


But I have a 172!!



True but your GPA is well below their 25% so you wouldn't fall into the "auto-admit"....although aren't you a URM? I thought you said you were in a diff thread or perhaps this one. Oh well fingers crossed for you either way.

I went complete on 11/3 but I'm ED so I'm not expecting anything quite yet...they probably want to see what the entire applicant pool looks like for ED. Between this and the computer glitch at UT, my nerves are effing shot.

What exactly is meant by "auto-admit"? Are you referring to applicants who have both a GPA and LSAT above the 75th percentiles?




Ya - I'd say barring that there isn't something glaringly wrong with their applications, those people can pretty much guarantee they've got a spot. On the flip side, UCLA knows that to entice them to come there they've got to give them some money which they've already started handing out.

User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby rondemarino » Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:05 pm

hopefulundergrad wrote:
jgulia45 wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:
jgulia45 wrote:They haven't rejected anybody yet, so I think they are only sending out stuff for the auto admit people. Everybody who has been admitted has had over a 170 LSAT. Unless they are really making a move, they'll have to admit people w/ LSAT's below that sooner or later.


But I have a 172!!



True but your GPA is well below their 25% so you wouldn't fall into the "auto-admit"....although aren't you a URM? I thought you said you were in a diff thread or perhaps this one. Oh well fingers crossed for you either way.

I went complete on 11/3 but I'm ED so I'm not expecting anything quite yet...they probably want to see what the entire applicant pool looks like for ED. Between this and the computer glitch at UT, my nerves are effing shot.


Yes to shitty GPA and URM status. Being a splitter I know most schools will take months to reach a decision on my file. I've just been spoiled by two great acceptances in the past week.


Congrats on UVA. I'm not sure how much URM status helps at UCLA. Take a look at UCLA's previous LSN graphs and that of other schools. Unlike other schools where you have a few green dots (admit) in the sea of red (reject), often times indicating URM admits, you don't see that as much with UCLA. Not trying to get you down. Actually go to LSN and tell me if that's what you see too. CA schools can't specifically take race into account when making decisions and its possible that it ties their hands. However, maybe all it takes is a DS.

People say the law school lacks diversity, at least by CA standards. Maybe this is why?

User avatar
kurama20
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:04 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby kurama20 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:17 pm

Congrats on UVA. I'm not sure how much URM status helps at UCLA. Take a look at UCLA's previous LSN graphs and that of other schools. Unlike other schools where you have a few green dots (admit) in the sea of red (reject), often times indicating URM admits, you don't see that as much with UCLA. Not trying to get you down. Actually go to LSN and tell me if that's what you see too. CA schools can't specifically take race into account when making decisions and its possible that it ties their hands. However, maybe all it takes is a DS.

People say the law school lacks diversity, at least by CA standards. Maybe this is why?


This is correct. UCLA essentially does not practice affirmative action except for those with a very high GPA and a low LSAT. This is a very likely reason why they don't have many AA's at all (if you are an AA with a high GPA and a mediocre LSAT you can probably get into Boalt or another school better than UCLA, leading those AA applicants to reject UCLA). However in hopeful's case I really would not care at all about UCLA with a UVA acceptance in hand.

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby 02082010 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:44 pm

rondemarino wrote:Congrats on UVA. I'm not sure how much URM status helps at UCLA. Take a look at UCLA's previous LSN graphs and that of other schools. Unlike other schools where you have a few green dots (admit) in the sea of red (reject), often times indicating URM admits, you don't see that as much with UCLA. Not trying to get you down. Actually go to LSN and tell me if that's what you see too. CA schools can't specifically take race into account when making decisions and its possible that it ties their hands. However, maybe all it takes is a DS.

People say the law school lacks diversity, at least by CA standards. Maybe this is why?


You know what, I actually saw that the other day. I was look at the c/o 2012 statistics and it was like 5.4% black and I was like really? at UCLA? I wrote a DS and I figured if Berkeley has found a way to work around that law, then UCLA must have as well. We'll see.

User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby rondemarino » Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:49 pm

hopefulundergrad wrote:
rondemarino wrote:Congrats on UVA. I'm not sure how much URM status helps at UCLA. Take a look at UCLA's previous LSN graphs and that of other schools. Unlike other schools where you have a few green dots (admit) in the sea of red (reject), often times indicating URM admits, you don't see that as much with UCLA. Not trying to get you down. Actually go to LSN and tell me if that's what you see too. CA schools can't specifically take race into account when making decisions and its possible that it ties their hands. However, maybe all it takes is a DS.

People say the law school lacks diversity, at least by CA standards. Maybe this is why?


You know what, I actually saw that the other day. I was look at the c/o 2012 statistics and it was like 5.4% black and I was like really? at UCLA? I wrote a DS and I figured if Berkeley has found a way to work around that law, then UCLA must have as well. We'll see.


Well, I think its more the Latino enrollment that lags state demographics. CA is 6% black.

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby 02082010 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:01 pm

rondemarino wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:
rondemarino wrote:Congrats on UVA. I'm not sure how much URM status helps at UCLA. Take a look at UCLA's previous LSN graphs and that of other schools. Unlike other schools where you have a few green dots (admit) in the sea of red (reject), often times indicating URM admits, you don't see that as much with UCLA. Not trying to get you down. Actually go to LSN and tell me if that's what you see too. CA schools can't specifically take race into account when making decisions and its possible that it ties their hands. However, maybe all it takes is a DS.

People say the law school lacks diversity, at least by CA standards. Maybe this is why?


You know what, I actually saw that the other day. I was look at the c/o 2012 statistics and it was like 5.4% black and I was like really? at UCLA? I wrote a DS and I figured if Berkeley has found a way to work around that law, then UCLA must have as well. We'll see.


Well, I think its more the Latino enrollment that lags state demographics. CA is 6% black.


:shock: I thought schools tried to mirror national demographics, which would be 12%

User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby rondemarino » Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:07 pm

hopefulundergrad wrote:
rondemarino wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:You know what, I actually saw that the other day. I was look at the c/o 2012 statistics and it was like 5.4% black and I was like really? at UCLA? I wrote a DS and I figured if Berkeley has found a way to work around that law, then UCLA must have as well. We'll see.


Well, I think its more the Latino enrollment that lags state demographics. CA is 6% black.


:shock: I thought schools tried to mirror national demographics, which would be 12%


Ah. I can't claim to know what they try to do with AA. Just figured a school with 60+% CA residents would expect the school to resemble CA

babin.6
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 12:29 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby babin.6 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:22 pm

asdkflk
Last edited by babin.6 on Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby 02082010 » Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:23 pm

rondemarino wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:
rondemarino wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:You know what, I actually saw that the other day. I was look at the c/o 2012 statistics and it was like 5.4% black and I was like really? at UCLA? I wrote a DS and I figured if Berkeley has found a way to work around that law, then UCLA must have as well. We'll see.


Well, I think its more the Latino enrollment that lags state demographics. CA is 6% black.


:shock: I thought schools tried to mirror national demographics, which would be 12%


Ah. I can't claim to know what they try to do with AA. Just figured a school with 60+% CA residents would expect the school to resemble CA


No, it makes sense, just surprising.

User avatar
tintin
Posts: 952
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:26 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby tintin » Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:40 pm

after the 3rd or so phonecall UCLA finally confirmed I am complete today. Jesssssus.

has anyone gotten a call from schwartz yet today? I had lunch with the guy last year, he is reallly nice. I hope he calls me soon....!

savesthedayajb
Posts: 528
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 8:21 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby savesthedayajb » Fri Nov 13, 2009 4:30 pm

CyLaw wrote:
savesthedayajb wrote:I'll just stop being lazy and call. thanks


If you do get a response from the office, please post it so it will be in the search if anyone else every has a similar question. Good luck with the UCLA ED


Received the following message from UCLA Admissions Office regarding hand-delivering my ED Agreement on the day it's due November 15:

Yes, you may drop it off at our office between 9 am and 5 pm. If we are closed, you may slide it under the door. It will be fine if we receive it on Monday the 16th.

User avatar
Laina
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 5:16 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Laina » Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:03 pm

tintin wrote:after the 3rd or so phonecall UCLA finally confirmed I am complete today. Jesssssus.

has anyone gotten a call from schwartz yet today? I had lunch with the guy last year, he is reallly nice. I hope he calls me soon....!


I just got off the phone with him--it was actually really awkward. I couldn't really hear him so I think my excitement sounded really fake. He did tell me my scholly info though (60,000 over three years, and he said I could apply for need-based as well). Really excited! UCLA is my top choice right now.

savesthedayajb
Posts: 528
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 8:21 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby savesthedayajb » Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:45 pm

Laina wrote:
tintin wrote:after the 3rd or so phonecall UCLA finally confirmed I am complete today. Jesssssus.

has anyone gotten a call from schwartz yet today? I had lunch with the guy last year, he is reallly nice. I hope he calls me soon....!


I just got off the phone with him--it was actually really awkward. I couldn't really hear him so I think my excitement sounded really fake. He did tell me my scholly info though (60,000 over three years, and he said I could apply for need-based as well). Really excited! UCLA is my top choice right now.


Wow, congratulations!

User avatar
jgulia45
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:03 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby jgulia45 » Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:11 pm

ED is officially over...here's to hoping some of us will be getting responses to it this week! Does anybody know of people on TLS that have been accepted w/ below a 170 LSAT so far? It seems that LSN shows nobody. UT has been handing out acceptances/rejections for a while now but UCLA is being pretty conservative this year.

finalaspects
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:21 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby finalaspects » Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:37 pm

jgulia45 wrote:ED is officially over...here's to hoping some of us will be getting responses to it this week! Does anybody know of people on TLS that have been accepted w/ below a 170 LSAT so far? It seems that LSN shows nobody. UT has been handing out acceptances/rejections for a while now but UCLA is being pretty conservative this year.


Seems like those who are obvious accept decsions (above 75% in both gpa/lsat) are the ones who are getting the responses. I heard that they are even willing to accept ED's by today the 16th if they are able to get it in on time.

At least they guarantee decisions by Christmas, although that may ruin my holidays. Good luck everyone!

hellogoodbye1
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:45 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby hellogoodbye1 » Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:42 pm

ahhh i'm applying ed and so nervous!

does anyone know when they start giving out decisions for ED applicants? do they call or snail mail?

ViP
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:53 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby ViP » Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:43 pm

finalaspects wrote:
jgulia45 wrote:ED is officially over...here's to hoping some of us will be getting responses to it this week! Does anybody know of people on TLS that have been accepted w/ below a 170 LSAT so far? It seems that LSN shows nobody. UT has been handing out acceptances/rejections for a while now but UCLA is being pretty conservative this year.


Seems like those who are obvious accept decsions (above 75% in both gpa/lsat) are the ones who are getting the responses. I heard that they are even willing to accept ED's by today the 16th if they are able to get it in on time.

At least they guarantee decisions by Christmas, although that may ruin my holidays. Good luck everyone!


Yeah, it's pretty clear that those who aren't auto-admits will be waiting a bit longer than others. Given the trend so far, it seems that even auto-rejects may have to wait until Christmas to hear back.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby crackberry » Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:50 pm

jgulia45 wrote:ED is officially over...here's to hoping some of us will be getting responses to it this week! Does anybody know of people on TLS that have been accepted w/ below a 170 LSAT so far? It seems that LSN shows nobody. UT has been handing out acceptances/rejections for a while now but UCLA is being pretty conservative this year.

Yes to this x2. PMed.

sfdreaming09
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby sfdreaming09 » Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:54 pm

I applied 09/30. Above both 75ths, strong softs and recs, in-state, and still havent heard back....

finalaspects
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:21 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby finalaspects » Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:00 pm

According to LSN in the 08/09 cycle, out of 17 people who applied ED, 3 were accepted, 4 were Waitlisted, and the rest were rejected. (This does not include self reported URMs)

Stats of those accepted: [168//3.53] [162//3.74] [169//3.69]

Stats of those Waitlisted: [161//3.41] [167//3.46] [167//3.61] [161//3.92]

Highest LSAT rejected: [167//3.52]

Highest GPA rejected: [162//3.7]




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