Moosebear wrote: Filter Against Ignorance --- Yikes the Bias really comes out with comments like that.    

Moosebear wrote: Not True ---- the students to her high school would not be denied for their lack of belief or views on a subject matter.    They would be accepted and the teachers\establishment would not be threatened by their different perspective.   They would of course be in the minority at her high school.

High Acheivement is actually a sub pool ?   Wow !   Seems so backwards - as I would hope such a thing would be a differential.

Again, perhaps it is for the best.

Moosebear wrote: Filter Against Ignorance --- Yikes the Bias really comes out with comments like that.     Her success to date -  proves this filter to be unreliable at best.     She is doing quite well - in her studies and has been hand picked to participate in a medical research team - quite the feat for a freshman.

Regarding Football admins --- that is a totally different topic - and not related.   Different measurables.

At this point - I just have to choose to disagree and let my daughter's experience with UCLA's  Admin process stand as we experienced.    Wereas, from any logical measurement of acheivement she has demonstrated more than any other accepted examples (of which I  am aware).   My ranking based on GPA,  SAT and AP Test Scores, Community Service - Global Outreach -  overall work effort and resutls to-date.    Perhaps her application slipped through the cracks or she didn't win the lottery.    Perhaps being middle class - I make too much money.   But, honestly, there is nothing more she could have done to demonstrate success - ability - potential- compassion and work effort than she has already.     There are only so many hours in the life of a 17 year old.     Perhaps she has too many strikes against her being that she is Pre-Med Christian - Female and White to meet the holistic acceptance criteria.  

From our experience UCLA's filters are overly biased and did not work for my family .        Again, which in the end will probably be to her benefit as her education and experience so far -  I believe have been superior at her Private University.    So for us, we will have less savings dollars as a result - but hopefully that will be a good investment in her future.

At this point, my Son can make his own choice of schools to which he will apply in 4 years.    I suspect though that his acheivements\perspective\family history will be similar and he should probably plan a path that does note include UCLA.

Moosebear wrote: How would you define - Fine Job ?   How do you know this to be true ?    My daughter's experience shows a overwhelmingly Qualified individual not being accepted - while seemingly less (based on all substantive available measurements as well as my close knowledge of the indviduals backgrounds  - effort - results) qualified individuals are being accepted - each student had the  same major pusuit - from same high school (though difference race) - or different school (Public vs Christian Private) - same race.

While we may never know the rationale behind acceptance and non-acceptance -- the facts that I know - would tend to show a bias in the "distinguishment" between the candidates (be it Race or be it High School attendance).     Given the set of facts that I am aware of -   Should I say that the "distinguishment" process worked well for my family ?

Moosebear wrote: Jim - I don't recall asking for your help.    Were you under some illusion that I did - or that you could ?

You certainly gave the impression of both not understanding and wanting to understand your daughter's denial.  I suppose I could have chosen just to take it as an ill-informed slam against the minority who got it with lesser stats but I chose to think better of you.

I get perfectly well what you are trying to say.   Also, what classic parental mistake have I made ?    Raising a well rounded - high acheiving child and questioning the admitting process of a University is a classic mistake ?

Pssht.   Don't play games, it ill becomes you.  Your mistake is in seeing only your daughter's achievements and not having a handle on the achievements of others, both admitted and denied.   Hence, a lack of perspective.


I have pointed out two examples - with two obvious distinctions.   From that you base that I need help or reference parental error - or that I am scapegoating - being a martyr - claiming victim status.    Perhaps you have even my challenged my faith?      Odd approach you have with a stranger that has not posed any negative reflection toward you .   I would never challenge your faith.   I would strongly challenge any notion that a "science" class taught around religious principles should be on the list of accepted curriculum to UCLA.

If you do indeed work at UCLA admins --- I hope for the sake of others you do not take this approach to your work.  I do not work at UCLA admins [sic].   However, I probably have a better handle on the fabric of the admissions process than 99.99 percent of those who are not actual college admissions officers.   I can run rings around a lot of high school counselors, at least the ones in the public schools though some of the non-elite private schools can be pretty depressing too.

Good Luck Jim
And also to you.

Honestly was thinking worse of UCLA after my exchange with you.    Thinking - "Dang this guy takes this tone - and he is on the inside involved with this process.   Wow - that figures".    As you most assuredly do project the notion that You know EXACTLY how the holistic approach works and the make up of each pool.    Glad to find out - that you too are on the outside looking in.    Perhaps you could have said that up front -  I may have taken you less seriously.

Of Course you Know more than 99.99% of actual college admin officers and can run rings around high school counselors --- perhaps this is true -as I don't know you so I won't accuse you of making the classic mistake of the Fool that thinks he knows more than everybody else.   

Thanks for the clearing that up.        

Sincerely

Moosebear wrote:

Honestly was thinking worse of UCLA after my exchange with you.    Thinking - "Dang this guy takes this tone - and he is on the inside involved with this process.   Wow - that figures".    As you most assuredly do project the notion that You know EXACTLY how the holistic approach works and the make up of each pool.    Glad to find out - that you too are on the outside looking in.    Perhaps you could have said that up front -  I may have taken you less seriously.

Of Course you Know more than 99.99% of actual college admin officers and can run rings around high school counselors --- perhaps this is true -as I don't know you so I won't accuse you of making the classic mistake of the Fool that thinks he knows more than everybody else.   

Thanks for the clearing that up.        

Sincerely

A volunteer - giving free advice.   I was giving you the benefit of the doubt - thinking perhaps this guy is a professional.

You are making my Day

Moosebear wrote:

A volunteer - giving free advice.   I was giving you the benefit of the doubt - thinking perhaps this guy is a professional.

You are making my Day