[cestellej]

Hii. I have applied to UCL for this september (2012) for a MA in Artefact Studies. I am a student from California. I received an offer, stating that I would be taking an Archaeology Graduate Diploma course first for 2012, and then I would be accepted into the Artefact Studies Master's Program in 2013 granted I complete the Diploma with 65% or up.

In addition, my acceptance was under the condition that I complete my most recent studies with a GPA of 3.3 or higher. I had been taking chemistry courses and I finished with a letter grade of B which put my GPA at a 3.28. I emailed UCL stating my concerns and they said that I should send in my official transcripts to be "reassessed" and to see if they can "revise" my offer, being that they "normally" require a 3.3. Does this mean that my offer will be taken away?? I'm terrified!!! Could they really deny me because of the 0.02 point difference?

I know I had a pretty outstanding personal statement and my references were perfect. I have also been in contact with the head of admissions for a couple months now with questions and concerns, so they know that I am serious and this means a lot to me.

Do you think I could be declined??
Thanks.

[TenOfThem]

You could be declined

Offers are made so that people who start the course have met a certain standard

To UK students the offer for a degree course may be ABB if the student gets ABC or even AAC the university are under no obligation to accept the student (even if the C were 1 mark below a B)

However, it sounds from the response that you have had that they are willing to look at your transcripts and decide for themselves wether you meet their academic standards ... this is good news as they could simply have rejected you for missing the offer but it does not guarantee anything

[logiadoevus]

I would make the argument that 3.28 is 3.3, when rounded appropriately. Their fault that they didn't specify 3.30. I mean I see their point but I think technically you're fine, because they said 3.3 not 3.30.

[TenOfThem]

(Original post by logiadoevus)
I would make the argument that 3.28 is 3.3, when rounded appropriately. Their fault that they didn't specify 3.30. I mean I see their point but I think technically you're fine, because they said 3.3 not 3.30.

That is like saying that a C at 78% is a B because 78% rounds to B

The OP has not made the offer and needs to work with the university, not challenge them

[logiadoevus]

(Original post by TenOfThem)
That is like saying that a C at 78% is a B because 78% rounds to B

The OP has not made the offer and needs to work with the university, not challenge them

No, it's not like that at all. If they'd said 3.30, then you couldn't claim that 3.28 rounds to 3.30. I'm not being annoying or going into semantics, I'm stating a mathematical truth - if the OP had to fill in a form and there was space for one decimal place, you'd fill in 3.3, not 3.2. And I make that point because, if it came to it, one could legally challenge the statement that 3.28 is not a 3.3.

That said, of course the OP should work with university. However, they should also bear in mind that their case is very good either way.

[TheSownRose]

(Original post by logiadoevus)
I would make the argument that 3.28 is 3.3, when rounded appropriately. Their fault that they didn't specify 3.30. I mean I see their point but I think technically you're fine, because they said 3.3 not 3.30.

Semantics, but technically true...

However, I doubt UCL will agree and OP should perhaps not go in with the "Well, technically, you didn't consider the mathematics of your offer and 3.28 is the same as 3.3 to one decimal place..." argument.

[cestellej]

Still waiting for my transcripts so I can send them in and see what UCL decides. I'm seriously crossing my fingers, toes, eyes, arms, etc...And yeah they said a 3.3, not a 3.33 or a 3.30 or anything, so I personally don't think that a 0.02 point difference, especially when it would naturally be rounded up to 3.3 would matter. But we will see.

Thank you for all your responses.

[cestellej]

Also, in the US, a B is 80-89%. I'm not familiar with UK grading.

[oxymoronic]

(Original post by cestellej)
Still waiting for my transcripts so I can send them in and see what UCL decides. I'm seriously crossing my fingers, toes, eyes, arms, etc...And yeah they said a 3.3, not a 3.33 or a 3.30 or anything, so I personally don't think that a 0.02 point difference, especially when it would naturally be rounded up to 3.3 would matter. But we will see.

Thank you for all your responses.

Well it does make a difference as a line has to be drawn somewhere. They can't just let everyone in who narrowly misses their offer because otherwise they may as well change the entry requirements to fully accept that 2.28 is their minimum entry requirements, in which case you'd have the people who get 2.26 saying that they feel they should be let in because it's practically the same and so on.

If a university says we want 80% (for example) then they can easily say no even if you get 79.9% because regardless of how you look at it, you failed to meet their offer. However, the things which will work in your favour are that you are international and applying for a postgraduate course where it's much more about self funding (especially for internationals) rather than specific places set by the government. If you were a UK student applying for an undergraduate course then the story would be entirely different as there are a set number of government funded places allocated to UCL for each course and they are fined if they take on more students than their quota meaning even students who miss their offer by the smallest of margins (eg: they get 479/600 rather than 480/600) can not be given a place. As it is, they will be interested in your money so they may well decide that 2.28 is good enough for them.

[cestellej]

Just posting to give hope to those who worry about these things. I got accepted after all!!