<p>Which would be the wiser choice? Both have similar stats: around the same tuition, housing, location, study abroad program, research focus, class size .. but then there's the case that one is private and more selective, and the other is well, public. I honesly don't see any benefits in going to one versus the other -- so in that case the logical decision would be UCLA since its less selective, right? Thoughts??</p>
<p>Get into both and then decide. Also the difference in selectivity is about 2% between UCLA and USC. That’s not much at all</p>
<p>Well when I was at the UCLA meeting I felt like it would be a lot easier to get in (the prospect was friendly and really reassured me on some things). Where as USC seemed almost identical to UCLA in a lot of ways; but I didn’t get the same vibe from it.</p>
<p>For California residents, UCLA’s admit rate was 17.8%, which is nearly identical to USC’s. For non residents, their acceptance rate was about 21.3. Trust me, it’s far from easy to get into the school.This difference between their admits rates is probably largely due to USC being part of the commonapp while UCLA is not (and no, the UC app is not it’s own ‘common app’)</p>
<p>Point is, both universities are vary competitive and being accepted at one no way implies being accepted at the other one. Generally, people in both situation would try to select for fit, and then make a decision if and when they’ve been accepted to both universities.</p>
<p>Agree with beyphy-there is no reason to make this choice at this point in the application process. It would be different if USC offered some form of early action or early decision, but since they still only have regular decision, you do not need to choose now.
Apply to both.</p>
<p>Apply to both…admissions at both schools can be a mystery.</p>
<p>I have one relative who was rejected by USC, but accepted by UCLA, and another relative with the reverse situation. </p>
<p>Absolutely no reason to decide now.</p>
<p>Have you visited? They may seem similar on paper, but really, there are BIG differences.</p>
<p>
I disagree. The UCs are terrible with financial aid for OOS and international students and tend to view them as cash cows. As an OOS student, the OP needs to evaluate his EFC…if (s)he needs a decent amount of financial aid, UCLA should be struck from the list without further ado.</p>
<p>A few things to consider:
[ul][<em>]In my field, UCLA stomps USC at the graduate level, but USC offers a lot more dedication and opportunities to its undergrads. I suspect this is a trend that extends across other departments. There are definitely departments in which UCLA matches or exceeds USC - a math major I know here at UCLA raved about the program, for example - but in general, I think USC is pouring more money into its undergrad experience than UCLA is.
[</em>]West LA (UCLA) is closer to the beach and upscale areas; east LA (USC) offers better public transit and access to things downtown.
[<em>]UCLA offers more economic diversity; USC offers more geographic diversity.
[</em>]UCLA has the quarter system; USC has the semester system. The semester system allows you to go more in depth with a subject, whereas the quarter system lets you take more courses. [/ul]</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agree with warblersrule here. UCLA in particular is focused on two things: maintaining its quality, and maintaining its economic diversity. A large portion (30% i think) of the money raised from OOS tuition is used to fund their Blue and Gold plan, which benefits their low-income in-state residents. Its best not to forget that the UC in UCLA stands for the University of California. They have the biggest commitment to their in-state residents, and also are trying to maintain an incredibly large socio-economically diverse student body even under budget cuts. Unfortunately, this has to come at the expense of someone, and it’s typically OOS students.</p>
<p>There are many stories of students taking tens of thousands of dollars in loans. My advice would be to avoid that if possible, especially if you don’t plan on living in California. UCLA will be viewed differently in NH than it would California; the same would probably be true of Dartmouth in the opposite situation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>USC’s area is in South LA, not East LA (which is about the distance from USC to UCLA in the opposite direction.)</p>
<p>Other things about the environment you should note is that USC is in a much worse area than UCLA is. (although it’s getting better/more gentrified.) Another thing you should note is that with the expo line litterally outside of USC, you’ll be able to the beach on it by 2016. That’ll definitely be something to keep your eye on.</p>
<p>Unless you have a really good excuse for that D+ average in Frosh year, both colleges are likely out of reach and probably not worth the app fee without a test scores in the range of 2200/32.</p>
<p>IMO, UC is a really bad value at OOS prices.</p>
<p>I have an excellent reason for the poor freshman grades actually! Also, UCLA only calculates GPA from sophomore and junior years – thats why I was saying it seemed easier than USC. They’re not even top choices tbh, I still have a list of 35 or so to go through!</p>
<p>Nike… are you instate for UCLA? If not, will your parents pay full freight to go there? (about $50k OOS)?</p>
<p>The UCs have tougher GPA req’ts for OOS students. </p>
<p>I don’t know if the UCs are “need aware” for OOS students. They do tend to give a little preference to INSTATE students from low-income families, but they may be able to do so because of Cal Grants…which you wouldn’t qualify for if you’re OOS. I’ve never heard that the UCs give any kind of preference to OOS students with lots of need.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Only partially correct. UC calculates grades for sophomore and junior years for the purposes of eligibility only. </p>
<p>UCLA is holistic in its review: the adcom will see all of your grades, including weighted, and unweighted, and Frosh year.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That too, is only partially correct. The higher gpa is only for admissions eligibility. The acceptance numbers are roughly similar for instate and OOS, once one adjusts for income level. Mostly only wealthy OOS’ers (and the wealthy tend to have higher test scores). </p>
<p>(Actually, I would suggest that the numbers have become lower for OOS, but still waiting for UC to update its reporting to see if I am correct.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One of the GPAs used is 10th-11th grade only. However, 9th grade courses with D grades do not count toward the minimum number of courses needed to fulfill the a-g requirements. Also, UC admissions readers will see all grades that you report.</p>
<p>This list from 2010 from a high school in the Los Angeles area may help:
<a href=“http://www.pvpusd.k12.ca.us/penhi/collegeacceptance/collegeacceptance2010.pdf[/url]”>http://www.pvpusd.k12.ca.us/penhi/collegeacceptance/collegeacceptance2010.pdf</a>
It does appear that UCLA is slightly more selective than USC.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The 3.4 UC admissions GPA needed for out-of-state UC eligibility is not really relevant at the more selective ones like UCLA, where students with a reasonable chance of admission have much higher GPAs.</p>
<p>So is it not worth looking in to if my parents can’t pay the 50-60k/year??</p>
<p>Correct. Because you won’t get FA at UCLA - it’s just not available for out of state students. Obviously that’s not the case with USC, but expect very stiff competition for significant FA.</p>
<p>Nike…can you please clarify…</p>
<p>Are you a US resident of Oregon?</p>
<p>How much will your family pay? </p>
<p>Do you have a non-custodial parent? </p>
<p>What are your test scores?</p>
<p>Yeah I’m in Oregon. Last time I took the SAT it was 2050 and the ACT was 31, but USC superscores so it may be higher. I’m unsure how much my mom will pay because she’s self employed…</p>
<p>Ask your mom how much she’ll pay each year…you need to know that. She may have no intention of paying OOS costs when you have good instate choices.</p>