<p>Yes, but admissions officers are held accountable for their decisions with respect to the point system. An essay can naturally give a bad rub on people, but what can the admissions officer do? </p>
<p>If the student demonstrates leadership in a school, that’s 500 points, if the student demonstrates disadvantaged circumstances, that’s 300 points. How would the admissions officer justify cutting out a significant amount of points enough so that an overqualified student is rejected? </p>
<p>Even if one admissions officer has a bad impression, the application is read again by another one. They have to be as impartial as they can, and for all the people that come off as arrogant, there are obviously those that get in (@Vietsta and UCLA >_> I’m going to have a great 4 years eh?). </p>
<p>The prevailing theory remains is that UCSD rejects overqualified students because the chances are that these students will not matriculate anyways in favor of UCLA or Cal. Instead, UCSD will save this seat for a below average applicant. What you do in high school might determine how you perform in college, but it by no means guarantees it. I was a late bloomer in high school and probably barely awoke to the realities of college and stuff before it was too late. A lot of others are in the same boat, and UCSD is structured precisely so that these people are given the ability to thrive, regardless of their past. After all, college is a clean slate.</p>