<p>
</p>
<p>CHances of that are substantially lower. If u’re tap, u’re put in a different category from everyone else b/c guaranteed priority admission</p>
<p>
Tap does a lot more than help. It gives u priority admission. UCLA is fair, they know u go thru trouble taking harder classes that require more work. They reward u by making every possible effort to admitt u. Why do u think they let u pick an alternative major. THey really want u. Thats why if there is space they’ll take all the qualified applicants. and gabe u know what it means to be qualified for UCLA.</p>
<p>
UCLA would never call anything guaranteed that would give them a bad rep. But all evidence says that it’s pretty close</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I already addressed this.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The TAP program would be inherently unfair if it made TOO much of a difference on overall admissions because many california community colleges do not offer it.</p>
<p>guess what? it did. </p>
<p>U took that quote out of context. I was referring to the fact that tap classes are harder and thats why ucla rewards these students for doing them</p>
<p>I will end my involvement in this by posting the rest of that article from smc, which is by far #1 in ucla transfer. it’s credible source,.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s a biased source because it is advertising for the program; hopefully you realize that.</p>
<p>3.2 and tap certified? foothill college requires a 3.5 to be tap certified. i guess its diff. for diff schools… but w/ foothill’s tap its something like 90+% of applicants getting in to ucla</p>
<p>Yes, there is pressure on schools to raise the GPA required for TAP so that students won’t be misled by the 3.0 or 3.2 requirements. Those lower requirements usually come from the schools’ honors programs.</p>
<p>Gabe, say what you want, but a 3.2 GPA will give you the TAP certification. And thats the ticket to UCLA. The 2/94 might’ve lied or not fulfilled their requirements. </p>
<p>A 3.2 and TAP will at least give you your backup major. End of story. And gabe, you have no say agaisnt it, I’ve heard from the students themselves.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Frankly, you don’t present any evidence. You act like TAP is a guarantee; it’s not. If you choose a selective major and a selective backup major, there is a significant chance you will be rejected if you have a 3.2 TAP. That’s based on the transfer profile.</p>
<p>Gabe, how about some “evidence” for EVERY THING you said about TAP? your evidence would be the counselors from the TAP conference whereas mine would be the actual students that attend UCLA this year. I don’t need to provide you with evidence, my posts were for the topic starter. </p>
<p>I can’t undestand why you’re so bitter.</p>
<p>This is ridiculous; you must have missed the three core contentions I made above. I never rejected the idea that someone with a 3.2, TAP certified or not TAP certified, can get into UCLA (your “actual students that attend UCLA” evidence). Here are my points:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Unquestionably, you and anyone else who disagrees with these, needs to provide evidence. The burden of proof is on you to show that TAP is more important than GPA, for instance, or to show how TAP changes the process overall. Otherwise, the evidence from the transfer profile is sufficient; also, if you provided evidence, I would do the work to get the quotes from the counselor sources I have discussed.</p>
<p>"The Director of Undergraduate Admissions at UCLA addressed this idea at last years (2002) TAP Conference at UCLA. She said, A 3.0 grade point average may certify a student as a TAP student; it may not get a student in. In light of the increasing demand for admissions, the GPAs for many universities are steadily moving up the scale. The Director also stated that, UCLA simply could not accept students who were barely making the Honors Scholar Programs required 3.0 GPA.</p>
<p>Not about a 3.2, but about a TAP 3.0 student.</p>
<p>All this gabew guy does is argue and aruge and argue grow up homeboy. Make some friends, do something. Your endless baiting of people on this board is getting real old.</p>
<p>ok so… chances for me w/ TAP + 3.67 GPA - upward trend in gpa</p>
<p>first choice: math/econ joint major
only had grades to report for all econ requirements & up to math 1b… but will finish the rest (math 1c, math1d, math 2a, math 2b, cis 15a, math 22) by the end of spring (fingers crossed)
& 4.0 major gpa thusfar</p>
<p>second choice: econ
finished all courses / reported grades
something like 3.8 major gpa (1 course (engl1b) w/ a B grade)</p>
<p>no exciting ec’s. a couple clubs, part time work</p>
<p>i know you guys are prob really sick of these.
but i figured since some of you know some admits… maybe you can give me some inside info on these pretty competitive majors (well, atleast econ is)</p>
<p>BTW… anyone know anyone doing the ‘human complex systems’ minor. it looks fascinating but i wanna see if i can get some inside info on that, too.</p>
<p>ok thanks!</p>
<p>i donno if u guys care, but i know a guy who did TAP and had a 3.2 and got rejected to UCLA. He even applied as a Bio major and completed first semester of O Chem which is supposed to look good. i think the reason is that UCLA has to take into account other stuff… like ur essay/extra currics, etc. I highly doubt that they’d accept a kid with a 4.0 and TAP without any ECs and a horrible essay…</p>
<p>arch, bio is very impacted. Having done ochem is now a requirement starting next year. So, ur friend got rejected for a reason. We are talking about non impacted majors.</p>
<p>From the above SMC quote:
</p>
<p>lol, it does seem to bump the gpa by .2</p>
<p>oh… isn’t econ impacted tho? i thought u guys wer talkin about econ</p>
<p>luba, i think u hav a pretty good chance…</p>
<p>arch, i know one person who got into bizecon w/ a 3.54 w/ out calc sequence, although he took one in the summer. W/ tap of course. good work expirience too.</p>